 All right. We're going to call tonight's meeting to order. Can we get a roll call vote, please? Or roll call. Not quite a vote yet. Councilmember Story. Here. Councilmember Brooks. Here. Councilmember Bator. Here. Councilmember Bertrand. Here. And Mayor Peterson. Here. Before we begin tonight's meeting and do our Pledge of Allegiance, I want to take a moment to acknowledge the passing of former Councilmember Ron Graves and to let the community know that there will be a gathering of friends at the Seymour Marine Discovery Center in Santa Cruz on January 12th this Sunday at 1 p.m. Ron passed away late last year in his home in Capitola with his family by his side. Ron served on Capitola City Council for nearly 31 years. I'm 33, so that's almost as long as I've been alive. And while he and I didn't always agree on everything, I always respected Ron for his passion for our community. And we met to discuss things on the agenda. And while we didn't always agree in our discussions, we always walked away with a handshake or a hug agreeing that we would speak again. Ron dedicated an amazing amount of time to the City of Capitola, and for that we are deeply thankful. And to his wife, Diane, for sharing him with all of us. With that, I would like to dedicate this meeting to the memory of Ron Graves and everything he did for this city. Now, if you'll please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. Tonight's meeting is Cablecast Live on Charter Communications Cable TV, Channel 8, and is being recorded to be rebroadcast on the following Wednesday at 8 a.m. and on Saturday following the first rebroadcast at 1 p.m. on Charter Channel 71 and Comcast Channel 25. Meetings can also be viewed live from our city website, cityofcapitola.org. Our technician tonight is Kingston Rivera. Thank you for being here. As a reminder, please turn off your cell phones. And when you come for public comment, if you would like your name to be spelled correctly in the record, please sign your name at the sheet at the podium. We're going to move on to item two, report on closed session. The Council held a closed session on three items, Conference with Labor Negotiator, Conference with Legal Counsel regarding anticipated litigation and liability claims, the claim of Stacey Austin. The latter of those three, the claim of Stacey Austin will be brought to the Council in open session this evening. The other two claims direction was given to staff. Thank you. Item three, any additional materials? We received no public comment. However, some of you eagle eyes caught a few items in the minutes. We now have accessible furniture listed as well as updated titles, so the corrected version is back there and it will be, is already changed for when they are approved. Thank you. Item four, is there any additions or deletions to tonight's agenda? Staff has no changes. Thank you. Now is the time for public comment. It's the time for any members of the public to address the City Council on any item, not on tonight's agenda. You'll have three minutes. Individuals can speak one time during oral communications and must address the entire City Council. All speakers as mentioned are requested to print their name in the sign-in sheet if you would like it spelled correctly in the minutes. Is there any member of the public that would like to address the Council? Yes, please. Welcome. And thank you, Council, for listening. Appreciate you all and your hard work. And we are the champions of preserving Capitola's unique cultural and historic character. The Capitola Mall redevelopment should reflect our charming town and be an extension of our delightful wharf, our beautiful beaches, and our quaint village. It has been proven that residential use for this site with the proposed 637 dwelling units does not fiscally benefit Capitola. Moving the bus station over by Macy's is a great idea, yet it certainly is not the solution to our existing well-known traffic problems. The 1100 cars that are planned for the new residents should instead be anticipated for visitors and locals who will gladly spend their money at the new and improved mall. How many of the proposed low-income and senior housing residents will regularly shop and dine in the mixed-use environment or buy a $5 cup of coffee every day? What can we do to create a vibrant mall with a compelling draw and has a positive economic output benefiting Capitola? I see a hotel on the mall property, a mall and a hotel fitting there perfectly. Transient tax 12% naturally. Retail come, housing go, the housing has to go. We'll build a mall where people want to go spend their dough. Self-contained mall and they will love it so spend their dough. Housing never, never, never, no, no, no, no, no, no. I see a pizzeria, other restaurants we will go. Selling of goods and services is what we need. Conceit agreed. So you think you can own us with Building Sky High? Want to build it and leave it so we can ask why? Oh, we shouldn't stop maybe. Street grid has got to get out. Housing has got to get right out of here. Something really matters. Build community. One thing really matters. Let's make Capitola some money. Now Sheree McCoy goes. Thank you. Thank you. Any other member of the public that would like to address the council this evening? Hi, welcome. Hi. Karen Hannah. And I won't sing. Couldn't follow that up. I just like to invite all of you and the viewing audience to attend our next sip and stroll which is February 8th in the village. The businesses in the village are very proud of the fact that all the profits from the sip and stroll go to non-profits here in the county. This event is going to generate $2,000 for the Capitola Foundation which goes to support the CPR training for residents in Capitola and $4,000 to the Capitola Parks and Recreation. And this money could be used for, you know, we're not saying it has to be used for anything in particular, but it could be used for scholarships for the children in Capitola to attend Camp Capitola in the summer. So if you want tickets, just go to eventbrite.com and search for Capitola, sip and stroll. And, you know, they're selling well. Every other event, sip and stroll event is sold out so we're really happy with that. All the events that the BIA put on that charge any kind of admission fee, the three sip and strolls, the cookie walk and the window decorating contest, they all generate funds for local non-profits. The total is between $18,000 and $20,000 a year. And none of the money goes to the BIA. The expenses get paid out of that money or out of our budget. In addition, of course, additional, the business has given additional, I don't know, thousands and thousands of dollars to schools, other non-profits, associations. So I'm just very proud of the fact that Capitola Village businesses are this generous in the county. Capitola, the city of Capitola has always been extremely generous to the social service agencies and things and the businesses are just following in that same manner. And I do see that there is on the agenda the review of the contributions received by the city. And the, I just wanted to point out that the $2,000 from the Capitola Foundation is the $2,000 we gave them last year for the CPR training. So we're going to make that an annual, an annual amount that we're going to do to support that CPR training. So I hope everybody gets their tickets and come. It's a great event, a lot of fun, always new, unique little wineries and we just appreciate the community support. Thank you. Thank you. Any other member of the public that would like to address the council? Seeing none, we will bring it back for city council and staff comments. Does anyone on the city council have any comments this evening? Yes, we'll start with Vice Mayor Brooks. Great, thank you. I received an invitation from the Santa Cruz County Office of Education that I would like to extend to my fellow council members and the public. They are hosting their COE five year strategic plan. They're having two events, one on January 21st at the Watsonville Civic Plaza and one on January 28th at the Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History between five and seven. There will be, it will be a COE resource fair, student performances, and updates from the superintendent and local leaders. So I have some more information here I can pass out. Thank you. Council member Story, you have comments? Yeah, thank you, Mayor. I just want to acknowledge that today, January the 9th is law enforcement appreciation day. So I wanted to take this opportunity to publicly appreciate the fine men and women who serve on the Capitol Police Department and keep us safe in our community. Their dedication I think is exemplary and I would just encourage everyone to take a moment and this day is maybe, well, it's gone in past, but maybe every day of the year we should take a moment to appreciate our law enforcement officers. So thank you and I just wanted to acknowledge that. Thank you. Yes. I did not know that the BIA was raising money during these events and it was great to find out. I found out a little while ago when you told me about the cookie and so I went downtown and watched a scurry of kids running around with their baskets getting cookies. They were so happy. I couldn't believe it. So that was a good thing. I like that kind of event. So I think we still have two surveys going, Nikki. I believe the survey for the library is still going, right? Not the library, the recreation. Okay, great. So go online and you can help out the recreation department and Nikki's effort to make the recreation department more relevant to current needs and fill out a survey. Also the RTC, I suppose the survey was ending on the third of this month, but I just checked it and the link is still active. So if you're interested in weighing in on the new study that's going on, trying to figure out how we're going to spend our money and what items are important for you in terms of transportation on how we won in other parts of the county. So look for that survey too. Thanks. Thank you. Council Member Bottorff. Thank you. I just want to share with the public I had a personal announcement to make. I had a recent medical diagnosis and because of that I'm going to be leaving tomorrow for Seattle for some treatment and I will be gone until March 26th. So won't see me at a few meetings for a while, but I plan to be back March 26th. So thank you. We look forward to your return. Thanks. All right. Well, Council Member Story beat me to it, but I was also going to thank our law enforcement officers here in Capitola and throughout our community and really nationwide for all the work that they do. We're going to move on to item seven, which is our consent calendar. The consent calendar is voted on in one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a member of the public or city council member would like to request that specific items be discussed for separate review. Items discussed or pulled from the agenda rather will be discussed following our general government agenda. So let's start with, is there any member of the council that would like to pull anything from the consent calendar? Hearing none. Is there any member of the public that would like to pull anything from the consent calendar? Seeing none. We will move forward and entertain motion on consent. Motion to adopt consent calendar. Second. All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. We're going to move on to general government and public hearings. Item 8A, item regarding lifeguard contracts. Do we have a staff report? It looks like we've got a... Yes we do. The joys of technology. Good evening Mayor Peterson, council members. The item before you is the lifeguard contracts for the 2020 season. So some of the background is that we're discussing two different contracts that would cover lifeguard services for the 2020 season. And to begin. So in 2012 the city began contracting with Santa Cruz Marine Safety Division to provide the beach lifeguard services at Capitola Beach. And since that time there have been extensions that were authorized up until last summer. Some years back the DSLSA recommended that the Capitola Junior Guard program should be trained by a lifeguard agency. And in order to address those recommendations the city worked with a couple of different models and last summer contracted with the Central Fire Protection District in order to provide that open water lifeguard training for our junior lifeguard instructors. This was a very successful model and we had been in conversation about a broader partnership with Central Fire but due to the merger with the Aptos La Selva station, Central was not able to offer beach lifeguard services for this 2020 season. So for this season coming, the 2020 season, lifeguard the Santa Cruz Marine Safety Division will is again willing to provide the lifeguard tower services as they have done for the past since 2012 and again Central Fire Protection District will conduct swim tests in order to determine junior guard applicant eligibility. They will also be providing the open water lifeguard training for the Capitola Junior Guard staff and that training does meet or exceed the USLA standard for open water lifeguard saving. The proposed contract from Santa Cruz Marine Safety Division is the $91,119. This is a $8,000 increase from the previous year's contract that includes an increase in hours as well as personal costs. The proposed Central contract of $12,085 this is an unchanged number from the prior year. So the recommendation for you is to authorize the city manager to sign a one-year contract with Santa Cruz Marine Safety Division for the lifeguard services as well as authorized city manager to sign a one-year contract with the Central Fire Protection District for the lifeguard testing and training services and I am available for questions at this time. Thank you. I'd like to understand the agencies that you're referring to. The CSLSA is the California Surf Lifeguarding Association so USLA which is the national lifeguard, CSLSA is the local branch of that and so they are the body that provide professional services and development to lifeguard agencies in California as well as organize the regional competitions or assist in regional competitions for this area as part of the national body of the USLA. So when our junior guards go to competitions, they're the ones that organize and run that? They support that. It's different lifeguard agencies ultimately organize all the competitions but the CSLSA is the one that provides kind of a professional development aspects to lifeguard agencies and the organization for the competitions. Okay. My second question, you know your presentation, the cost go up $8,000, right? And you mentioned there it's increased hours. Are we providing more services to the city of Capitola or junior guards? You said increased hours. So previously we had a few hours in the day from the 9 o'clock to 11 o'clock hour where we didn't have tower services because of a different staffing situation. So in addition to we had asked the city of Santa Cruz to provide that additional tower services so that way we're covered when our junior guard program because our junior guard program starts at the 830 time frame and so that we would have lifeguard services and have our junior guard staff being able to do programs. So that would be too separate. Okay. So our junior guard lifeguards were doing both but now we're having them more focused. Right. Okay. Thank you. Any additional questions? Seeing none, we will bring it to public comment. Is there any member of the public that would like to address the council on this item? Seeing none, we will bring it back to council for comment and deliberation. Yes, council member Bertrand. Thank you for keeping on top of this. Junior guard is very important to the city of Caffetola and I hear very good things about your involvement in this and keep it up. Definitely have my support. Any additional comments? No. I'll move it. We accept staff recommendation. Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Item 8B report on Caffetola wharf damage. All right. Good evening council give me a minute. Sorry we didn't have it up for you. It's okay. Excuse me council for not having that ready. No problem. So somewhere the last time we were here in December we're here talking about an emergency contract unfortunately. This is damage to Caffetola wharf that occurred and I'm going to start off with the pictures because they're the best way to describe it. You can see in this picture taken by our city clerk's husband with his drone is a two pilings that have been broken. They were broken in a high surf on January 1st. You can see that the decking has sagged here. This is about a 10 tons of concrete and a hoist small boat hoist that sit there causing us to sag. When this occurred the wharf was closed immediately and we hired an engineer and a contractor to come out and install a steel beam. This is what it looks like today. A steel beam was installed and you can see these little tie rods here that are actually picking up and supporting the weight of the crane the concrete slab and the wood decking. So that's the condition we're in today. We have a railing around it and the wharf has been reopened. So really quickly I mentioned most of this. January 1st the wharf was damaged and closed. On January 2nd we met with the engineer and the contractor evaluated it. The deck under the hoist was still settling. When I was there on January 2nd at 9 in the morning it had settled about 6 inches when I was back there at 2 that afternoon it had settled another 3 inches. So it was moving quickly and we determined that we needed to take immediate action to save the hoist from falling into the ocean. So starting on January 3rd the contractor installed the beam. He actually had the beam installed and the first set of anchors supporting the concrete installed by 6 o'clock in the evening on January 3rd which took most of the weight off of it and stopped the settling from occurring. He then came back. So that was a Saturday and a Saturday and then came back on Tuesday installed some additional anchors to support the wood structure underneath. That work was completed on January 7th. On the 8th Public Works installed the safety railing you saw and today the wharf reopened. We were estimating the cost date for the contractor is about $25,000. The next steps obviously are to replace the broken pilings of that hoist which is a key element to the boat and bait shop business. It can't be used obviously in the condition it's in. So we need to get the deck back in at the right elevation and support it on good pilings. So we need to replace the pilings. Unfortunately when we've lost pilings in the before we've never had the settlement occur. Because it's usually just the deck boards and structure above it and so if we get an inch of settlement then that's easy something we can deal with when we put in a new piling in. But because the weight of the hoist and the concrete ballast we're having a hard time figuring out how to get it jacked up so if we put a new piling in we can set it down there. Both the engineer and the contractor have come up with multiple options. One is to install some more steel beams that will allow us to jack up the outside of the wharf where the deck is and actually extend the steel out over there and try that. The other one is to see if we can use the broken piles by slip lining a fiberboss pile which is what we want to go to anyway over the stub if you will that's coming out of the mud and fill that with concrete and then from there jack up the pile. So we're looking at both of those obviously driving any new pile would require a piledriver if we go with the slip lining it's possible that we will not need a piledriver for that so there's a little cost savings we may see there. It's more of what's not affordable but it's doable in a short time that we're looking at right now. In order to determine if the piledpiles can be used for slip lining we need to dive and do a dive inspection and see their condition under water. We're currently working on scheduling that dive inspection. So the recommended actions tonight are to ratify the emergency actions taken to protect the wharf and authorize expenditures from measure F funding. This is what we did with the other emergency action project along the beach. Measure F funding is identified for one of the big parts of it and the biggest part of it is improvements to the wharf and there's about $1.2 million in the current revenue for measure F that would certainly cover these expenses and say that certainly whatever we build now we're going to make sure we'll fit within the rehabilitation project so we're not rebuilding whatever we do next month or so. We won't need to redo that as part of the rehabilitation project so those measure F funds will be spent just a little earlier than the rest of the wharf. But tonight I know on the agenda it said we may be requesting additional emergency actions but none are required at this time and certainly we'll be bringing any contracts back to the council for the final repairs at a later date. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Does council have any questions? Yes. Steve if you're unable to use the slip house after you've done the dive how much, well what's plan B and how much more will that cost? I don't have firm costs yet on any of them but I suspect we know to bring a pile driver out and walk it out on the pier is minimum about $100,000 by the time you mobilize and drive a few piles. We're hoping that if we're able to do the slip lining we will not have to bring out the as heavy a pile driver. We might be able to do it with a boom truck or something and I'm anticipating that could be half that cost. That's kind of I guess at this point to be honest with you but that's kind of what we're looking at. Okay thank you. Vice mayor Brooks. Yeah so Steve you mentioned the pile driver had to come out and it could be approximately $100,000. And the project that we have set in two years would we be having a pile driver come out again at the same cost? It would cost the same right to bring it out in two years. It would be at the same rate to mobilize. We'd bring a pile driver out, the contractor may choose at that point to bring it out on a barge which would be a different expense but we'll need a pile driver for that project. Is there any way not having to wait the two years and start some of that work earlier to alleviate some of those costs? Certainly we could look at replacing some of the failed piles that are on the wharf now and try and replace them at the same time. I think we could convince the permittees that coastal commission mainly that we want to be proactive and replace some of the failing piles that have been identified as part of our study. We couldn't do the widening part because that's an expansion of the facility and I don't think we could ever get that done on an emergency but it's certainly possible that we could replace other piles. Okay and worth maybe asking for the widening if by chance. I mean we could always ask. We could try it but it would be difficult because we'd be out of compliance with CEQA and there's a whole host of other agencies that are involved in the widening project that aren't necessarily for this emergency work. Okay does our city manager need direction from council to move forward with that recommendation to ask to add additional work to be done sooner than in this project than waiting the two years? I think to our number one we will investigate that and check if we're going to be bringing the pile driver out on scene we will work and figure out as much of the work as possible that we can do that makes sense. If there's some way that we can avoid double mobilizing absolutely we will pursue every avenue that we can to do that. I think as the public works director said it's not very likely that we could put in the widening project in advance but we will certainly look into it. Our goal though is to slip line at this point the remaining piles assuming they're in condition we'll find out when we dive. Yeah I think it's worth asking. Okay thank you. Yes council member Bertrand. Yeah I'm not familiar with the structure of the wharf but the fact that you had significant sagging is there any chance of other damage to the wharf that's been transferred back I guess to the Bay Shop? No we got lucky in that regard in that the pile caps which are the stringers that go from pile to pile pile perpendicular to the length of the wharf actually had a joint in them halfway between the hoist and the Bay Shop so there was no deflection they sagged but they didn't bend if that makes sense they bent to this so there is no damage. That's why we were able to reopen the wharf. If we had been in the other condition we probably wouldn't have been able to reopen the wharf without that. So it's like cantilevered out or just bent okay thanks. Alright with that we will bring it to public comment. Is there any member of the public to address the council on this item? Seeing none we will bring it back to the council. Oh my apologies. My apologies. I really case I own the wharf house out on the end of the wharf but actually the only comments I want to make I want to express my appreciation in public forum to Steve and his incredible staff for immediate attention to a big knee down on the wharf. We open today and that's pretty incredible. That's seven days of closure from a rather severe condition and I just felt like the council should be aware of the great work your staff is doing for you. Thanks Steve. Thank you. Thanks Willie. Alright with that we will, is there any additional member of the public that would like to address the council? Okay. Seeing none I will bring it back to council for comments and deliberation. Any comments on this item? Yes council member Batur. First of all I think we got really lucky. Looking at that I think the fact that the hoist didn't fall into the bay really was very fortunate for us and I don't know how all those members held together especially that much weight. I'm very optimistic that this overpiling what's the term you call it? Subplaning. Yeah because that's kind of the plan we're intending for the new portion of the wharf when we do that and if we're able to do that there and kind of dodge this bullet because that's what we're doing I think that's great. My only concern is that should we have to drive piles I think we're at a point now where we have in my mind this council by the document that we kind of authorized the new wharf is we've got the kind of pile that we want the concrete fiberglass pile that can be expanded to and that should we drive any new piles anywhere on that wharf they should be that type of pile so that they're the kind we can add on to. I think your hope is that we don't get into that extreme budget right now. I think what you're asking us is just for money to authorize the repair for that or are you looking at money now for possible pile driving? No I anticipate we'll come back to you with a contract for the additional work. Okay and that's it my only concern at this point is that should any piles need to be driven we should adhere to that policy of those type of piles but with that I'm okay with making a motion to approve staff recommendation. I'll second but I have a comment. Sure we have a motion and a second. A continued discussion council member Bertrand. So last time I was here up here in City Council I did mention to the public at large that it's great when people in public come here and you know thank City for all the services that it does so thank you Willie for coming I really appreciate that and I encourage other members of City Capitola when you're happy with the city and what it does please come and let us know thank you. Thank you. Any other comments from council? Alright I just want to say briefly thank you so much to Steve and our whole public works crew you've done an amazing job as usual and I was just surprised that there's just like exemplary work coming out of the city and from your department so thank you so much and please pass that on to your chair as well. With that we have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Motion carries unanimously. Moving on item nine considering items for municipal code title two administration cleanup ordinance which is why I ran for council in the first place. Anyone else? I say I just wanted to work on municipal code title two administration cleanup ordinances and we're here to do it. I can't run it from here. I've got it so thank you very much. Okay as the mayor introduced we have a living document in the shape of our municipal code and from time to time laws change, practices change, language changes and we need to keep up to date. Within this section there are pieces that fall into that category. We have both mandated and language changes we need to make. Basically overall fairly administrative work but there are three areas before we bring you in actual ordinance where we would like council direction and feedback and when we come back with the actual ordinance there will also be a few other pieces that are not from the direction. The first item is something that council brought up last fall regarding how the process for removing a planning commissioner. Currently it's a two step process and as you will recall in Sola we have individually appointed commissioners and should at this point the appointing council member wish to remove his or her commissioner that council member would state that that is their intention and then a vote would need to take place with support of a majority of the council so it is the two step. An announcement by the appointing council member and then a vote by the entire council. We did look at how some other jurisdictions that have a similar individual appointment address these in some cases in addition they will simply allow a council member to remove theirs to make the announcement that I plan to remove my commissioner and I will be opening recruitment and they also allow for the greater council someone else on the council to request for the removal of a council member and then that would come up for a majority vote. Another option would be to make it a super majority vote of four members. Right now we have an and what the current possible recommendations I should say is to make it an or should the council choose so that's something that we will want feedback on. The second item is referrals to an advisory body this is when an issue comes up and a council member says we should have traffic and parking look at that. Right now there is no process in code for that and we can just keep it that way but sometimes these are fairly large issues somewhat recently has been the jewel box traffic that went to traffic and parking turned out that there was really not much that traffic and parking could do it came back it was a lot of time and so staff wants to know whether the council feels like having an individual make that request is fine and appropriate and we don't need to make any changes or if they'd like to have a little more discussion on those pieces. So options are actually requiring it to be agendized or to get a general sense of support for that action before we get off that one I think one of the points I would emphasize is that I think it's important for council members to understand that when an item gets referred to an advisory body there's a fair amount of work that ends up taking place both on a stop on a stop basis to support that advisory body's discussion and deliberations and research and understanding an issue and in addition work by volunteer members in most cases they're volunteer members of that advisory body and so the question is can it just happen with one council member at a meeting saying I'd like them to work on this or it does require a vote should we put it on an agenda and have a regular council action should it be with the concurrence of another council member at the meeting so that's why we're bringing this up just because the referrals to advisory bodies they're sort of not insignificant and the third item that we are looking for feedback on is to change language about placing items on the agendas as you well know for yourselves you must do that make those requests out of public hearing and say I would like to see this come back to the council for discussion our code right now gives more power to a committee chair if it is within that jurisdiction the chair can simply place an item on the agenda and staff wanted to point that out to the council and see whether that is something that you would like to change and remove that section so after I finish up here we will ask you to go we'll go through each one and get direction on the three items that we were seeking that use that to write a new ordinance and it will include as I mentioned other items we have directly quoted old election language that's not what the state code says anymore we have some practices in the appeals process that we just want to clarify that this is how it is done we still have the redevelopment agency as a section that can go so items like that will also be included as well as the three items that you are giving us direction on tonight so I guess we can take them in the order that we had so if you'd like to give us specific questions about any of the three that we've brought forward does council have any questions yes council member I may have a question for the city attorney my question is would this be the appropriate time since we're reviewing this if we wanted to initiate a policy for removing a mayor I think so it would probably we looked into this question and you don't have to have a procedure for removing a mayor however if at some point you want to remove a mayor you need to do it pursuant to a procedure that you have adopted and so what cities who do not have a procedure on the books do if they want to remove a mayor is they adopt a procedure by resolution prior to removing the mayor and that's a tough as you can imagine like a highly politicized process because you've got a removal pending and so you're adopting a procedure at a time and so it's a good practice to have a procedure on the books and to negotiate it when you have no intention whatsoever of removing a mayor it's good to have that as a backup if that time should ever come so and it would be this would be the point we could do it by resolution but I think it's better practice to do it by ordinance because then 20 30 years from now when we're all gone the city attorney at the time will not have to dig through and city clerk will not have to dig through a past resolutions to find it and this is probably the ordinance in which it would live so this is a good time that's a very long way of saying yes well as the mayor said that she ran for the purpose of cleaning up and this is a clean up opportunity for us and I think if we're going to go through the trouble to generate a policy or procedure for a planning commissioner it's kind of like we did something a while ago we gave the city council a raise and we didn't give the planning commissioner a raise and we kind of missed that step and I'm thinking that these two seem to me to be hand in hand so I would suggest that we instead of going through three items tonight we go through four and and it may end up that the planning commissioner procedure and the mayor procedure are identical I but that's just I would like to discuss all four tonight sure the procedures could certainly be identical I mean both planning commissioners and the mayor serve at the pleasure of the council and so essentially the minimum that you need to do or even the maximum that you need to do to remove either is to take a vote in public obviously it needs to be a transparent process but that's all you're required legal anything else you can work out thank you council member return so talking about in terms of mayor I have no problem talking about that but we didn't agendize it so is that an issue that's a great question I think it's fine here because especially if you talked about it as another change that you would like to make to this ordinance because this is the ordinance in which it would live so not only I think because you talk about this I think if any other council member has any other suggestions of changes that you would like to see to this ordinance now is the time to raise them additional questions from council okay seeing none we will bring it to public if there's any member of the public that would like to address the council on this item now would be the time saying none we'll bring it back to council for comment and deliberation who would like does anyone have any comments yes council member batov well I don't know do we want to go by one by one as Linda suggested and rather do it that way I have a comment on each item so if you want Linda would like to do that but I do have questions or comments any comments and conversation about the first item the removal of commissioners or removal of mayor or however whatever we want to throw in that bucket and as appropriate okay then if it's number one which is the removal of a planning commissioner my comments are is that I am okay with the removal of the word and in the insertion of the word or and I'm fine with three voting members with for present I would be interested in actually I agree with council member batov with the or but I think that it might make more sense if it were a super majority for four council members because then it's it's you know it's the one the one person the one council member who made the appointment or the four rest of the group who who agree with the removal of that planning commissioner or mayor I think that makes more sense any additional comments so we're doing one vote correct but right now we're doing comments on each individual item but we'll have one vote I don't even think you need a vote just direction and we'll bring an ordinance back to you and then you'll vote I don't have clear direction so if we do if it's you know if we don't settle on something actually them I think a motion would make sense for the sake of discussion I'll say that I am also in agreement with removing the and and putting the or I also agree with vice mayor Brooks that if it's not the person who appointed that commissioner asking them to be removed then it should likely be every single other person on the council that believes they should be removed so that's just my opinion for the sake of discussion but we have different opinions for so to speak as would council member Bautore for vice mayor Brooks like to elaborate any further or share any additional comments I think four people have spoken we haven't heard from one so I well I'm fine with a super majority but as I was sitting here thinking and unfortunately Ed you're going to be gone for like three months so we would be unable to come with a super majority during that period of time and so if there was something significant issue that the majority of the council felt needed to be acted on then our hands would be tied so if we can come to a solution that that particular scenario then I'm fine with a super majority if you said that with the remaining council members that are you know president serving that could maybe serve it so I would just maybe ask for that little amendment so it would be a super majority of the council members present council member Bautore how do you feel about that well a super majority of the council members present essentially would say that one person was gone three would be sufficient to carry the vote and if I think my concern is just what backs the movement is you know I think that most of the items we vote on are by majority vote of three we're not a seven person council we're a five so I mean I still think that three is a significant number I'm trying to think and maybe the city attorney of the city magic can help me there's certain things that require majority urgency ordinances require super majority anytime you want to stop debate requires a super majority adding an item light to an agenda adding an item weight to an agenda you know in this position for the removal of the mayor or the removal of a planning commissioner it would probably be a contested item it may be obvious to two or maybe three I don't know that you would ever get for because you know my feeling of how it plays out is that one person who the way we have this is a person who had that by my planning commissioner it was bad and I wanted to remove him I would recommend that and it would probably not reach any opposition but if the council felt that somebody some planning commissioner or if the mayor wasn't performing I think three sufficient I mean I think trying to get a complete unanimous body to support that is probably you know it nullifies the going through the process and I think that we make a lot of big decisions for the city on almost everything else and like I said I could be on the losing end of this but I feel strongly about three votes is enough to make a decision in the city understandable. Council member Bertrand you. Yes so I'm thinking about how this council would be working you know amongst its members and so the super majority is kind of a high hurdle and to require a high hurdle when there's clearly some dissatisfaction to me is too much of a thing to ask so if three people on this board realize that there's some difficulty with the commissioner I think that's enough because you want to have a commission that's going to work properly in conjunction with the city council or in terms of the mayor right so sometimes asking for a high hurdle is not going to solve the problem. Any additional comments I'm just thinking out loud to your point council member Bautorf about the Brown Act and how one would be Brown acted so we would only have permission just like if there was something like this I'm just trying to play out all scenarios in my mind the person would only be able to speak to one other person that would technically still leave. Always. Yeah so you would still have the three left out of the five like it wouldn't benefit that I'm I guess I'm talking in circles here but I'm talking out loud for myself here so I can see how three could work because of Brown Act. It would be in support of that but the council member or the person who was up for discussion would still have the opportunity to speak to somebody else that's still on council they still would have that opportunity and there would be enough of the rest of the group to make a decision without being impacted by that person is what I'm getting at you know. So it sounds like if I'm understanding correctly and correct me if I'm wrong that council members Bautorf and Bertrand believe that three of the five council members would be sufficient to remove a planning commissioner or a mayor I believe that council member Story if I'm understanding you correctly believes that as well for the sake of if someone was missing that three would be sufficient only if someone was missing or three would be sufficient no matter what. If you don't mind my asking you to share. No thank you. I was speaking of if in this instance which we're really going to experience if one council member was absent we should redefine what is a super majority and in that situation a super majority would be the three remaining votes in that case so that was the scenario that I was trying to address with this action. Now on that general question about should you remove a planning commissioner with just three votes I get to my tendency would be to agree with councilman Brooks because the removal is a of a willing functioning and working planning commission removal is a pretty severe action to take against somebody and I think that if we're going to do that there should be a pretty much consensus it should be a pretty obvious and serious violation and not just political rancor which three votes could amount to political rancor and so I mean in my experience doing that kind of force removal should require in my view a super majority so that's my thought about it but I'm I think I could live with either scenario if it came to that but my tendency would be to agree with councilman Brooks that you should have a vote of four or the super remaining council members to remove a working planning commissioner if I may add especially if we're going to be looking at the addition of mayor I think that the process of removal mayor I think that you bring up a really excellent point about the politics that can get involved in something like that and to get a full consensus of the majority at the time makes some sense for me I just want to really take advantage of councilman Brooks because I was thinking out loud and I love it because what you did is you brought up something I hadn't considered and that is although if I talked to some other council member and wanted to remove a planning commissioner I couldn't guarantee that could happen but you if you were opposed to it you could talk to one other person you could guarantee that action by stopping it because of the super majority law so it's an advantage to the fact that if you want to stop something the brown act doesn't hurt you whereas if you want to take an action and to make the action successful I would not be allowed to talk to two other people you would have to rely on that open debate and discussion whereas you could thwart an issue by having a conversation I wasn't mine it was what I do guys it's what I do I think I think what we need to do is bring it back and we're obviously going to vote on it I don't want to beat it up tonight I need you to play that out though I need you to play that out for me one more time so I can fully comprehend what you're saying if myself and Jacques and I wanted to get rid of Kristen I could talk to Jacques I don't know if I have a third vote whereas if Kristen said that bro me out vice mayor don't get me removed you just thwarted the action because you two can talk and because of the super majority rule even though I get Sam to vote with me it doesn't happen because you two have created an alliance so the brown act favors you and it doesn't help me is that bro me out I'm sorry I think we all understand the situation now I think at this point we have enough direction to prepare an ordinance obviously it will be the source of more debate and obviously we can tweak it make it a super majority or just a majority that change can be made at the hearing since this is recommendations for an ordinance I like to separate advisory committees like FAC and planning from the mayor so I think we should have a proposed ordinance that deals with one the mayor in one sense and then the other in a different sense this is all in one ordinance correct different paragraph or clause or line you mean a different paragraph or however it's still a different procedure or different discussion for removing the mayor versus removing a planning commissioner separate out these issues so I was actually going to raise that as well I think that's a good point you could have separate procedures you could have a super majority for one and not for the other if the council wants to just complicate things further for you guys we can discuss it at the next you are always allowed to talk aloud is the council satisfied with what we've discussed adequate we're good okay we're kicking it down the road they're going to prepare an option for us when we have something specific to debate then it will come back it's pretty specific already three or four we're moving on to the number two within this referring items to an advisory body we require that it be an agendized item in a council majority or a council member can make a referral at a council meeting with a concurrence of one or two other members correct or we remain silent or we remain silent comments on this council member Bator I think that if someone want if I want to say I want to recommend something to parking commission I should I should require a second someone should there should be a second vote to generate that so one of us just generate that action it wouldn't be a vote it would just need a second so a little counter to that when someone comes up with an idea it may not be obvious at first why that is a good idea and it will take some work to do a proper presentation so that you have enough to make a decision so I have no problem asking staff to put that back out before the various commissions or before us so that we have something to think about and come up with a discussion so I think one person is enough you may be lucky enough to convince someone if you do it ahead of time so that's another way to look at it yes council member Story thank you well I guess I want to reflect back because in a recent meeting and this is probably why this came out I had yeah that's what they say now but let me and what that item was there was a person here at the podium talking about gas powered leaf blowers and I made the referral and asked that it be referred to the commission on the environment to study it okay doing that my expectation was staff would take the item they would go to the commission on the environment the commission on the environment may say we don't want to do this this is too much work and staff may concur with that and then a report would come back and there would be an explanation at that time about where that item is going and maybe why it came to move forward in that body and then we would have a deliberative process which would take a majority to move any further so I think it's okay for any one of us to be able to say can we just refer this to one of our advisory bodies without it become having to be a politically supported item which then becomes almost more of a mandate to that body that they feel like well they have to move forward and tackle this item because now two council members have weighed in on it and to me it's just an opportunity to address a citizen and to refer an item that we may not have enough information on to bring in more stakeholders and community members and it there well be that at the initial meeting that that committee may say we cannot do this this is just above our pay grade we get paid nothing and then bring that back and then we have to decide at that point well do we drop it or do we are going to move forward with it and I don't know the reason why you explained to me why you wanted to have additional council members weigh in I don't know how that addresses your issue because you know two people could chime in but then you got the same issue at that committee level they may still say this is too much work we can do this and those assessments and so I think I mean I've used it and I would like to be able to continue to use it without having to depend upon other council members just to have that initial introduction now if there's going to be anything more than that then yes I think there should be more of us weighing in before too much staff and city resources get used on a particular topic so that's my sense of it I think it's I think it's okay I don't know how it creates a problem or how the alternative would solve the problem Vice Mayor Brooks from our normal practice if we were one if we wanted to put something on the agenda we would look at staff and say we'd like to put this on the agenda or we would like for you to further explore this option or X Y and Z is that correct so in a we're not talking about the council agenda to committees and commissions right and so if somebody were to come up and say you know I'm interested in doing this instead of the I mean this is the scenario instead of me saying to that person specifically this is the action that's going to be taken I'm thinking it's more a play on words right that I feel like this is a good we're getting mixed up on the process where instead we could just say directly to you to staff could we explore putting this item can we look to see if this particular board or advisory committee can take this on staff can you look further into this is that different than what you're saying council member story could so let me let me first off I just want to say it's not different right so we still at the will of council can I mean we get to do that with any agenda item at the beginning we can say to staff we like you to do X Y or Z right so sort of the brown act articulates a few things that council members can do in a meeting about items that are not agendized you can ask staff for a report at a later at a subsequent meeting on a particular issue and you can ask staff to put an item on the agenda asking to have an item referred to a committee is not specifically articulated in the brown act is something that the council can do so what you seem to be contemplating is I'm not sure if I'm capturing this correctly but could you just say to the city manager figure out this issue and report back to us that is well within the brown act yes you can do that and we have decided I have decided my read of the brown act is that you can say in a meeting I would like something referred to a committee the question is really about you know referring something to a committee arguably uses more staff resources than referring it back to the council because then you're just using your council and there's a staff report but it's just the staff I'm kind of merging into your territory here with the staff repairing that report whereas a committee they may spend months working on something to get it so to have one council member requesting that it's really about it's really a resources issue more than anything and what would the difference between I mean in the recommendations presented in the staff report it says and require a council majority how would that benefit do we pass the questions for it already may I ask a question okay um how would that benefit the staff how would that support the staff you know that you would get the council majority what's the difference there so a couple things first off I want to make it clear to council member story this wasn't just about the leaf floor it was the most recent example but there's been a trend of this and actually the most significant situation like this came about with the jail box traffic and frankly there was a community group that came up to public comment and it got referred to the traffic and parking commission who went and then spent literally months working on things doing studies counting cars developing all kinds of big alternatives and then it came back to the council who concluded that there really was no great solution and at that point the work done it was it was a challenge so the issue here really is about I think the city attorney articulated it pretty well is about an individual council basically from the dais creating this workite and it's fine it hasn't been a terribly big problem but I've seen it happen a number of times and I saw it go pretty wrong that once and I've realized that it's kind of a weakness we have in our system so the alternative to answer your question is the first bullet there would be basically rather than saying I would like issue X to go to committee Y as an individual you'd say Mr. City Manager can you please put on the next agenda an item to refer this to a commission and then the next committee the next city council agenda would have we've had a request to refer a potential leaf blower ordinance to the commission on the environment a little background on leaf blower ordinances here's about how much estimated time that it would take place the full council would consider it and say thumbs up or thumbs down something we want to do or not so that would be that first bullet point the second bullet point is kind of this in between thing where an individual council member could in response to something somebody was saying from the public comment I think this would be a great item for a commission X to work on does anyone else agree with the concurrence of one or two others it would get referred to a commission so those are the two differences and either situation just provides either more information before the decisions made in the first example and a full council majority or in the second example just more than one council member sort of sending the city off on this path thank you and I would agree that you weren't the only one Sam I too have done this about the plastics situation and one thing that's come up at least for me is the follow-up and by agendizing something like that holds staff more accountable to doing that follow-up versus me saying hey Jamie or hey city manager do you remember that I brought this up at city at public comment and I asked for this and so I've kind of run into that scenario where since it hasn't been agendized it's kind of been the circular thing so I could see how it holds everyone more accountable with option one council member about your comment thank you I wanted to bring up another case because I had one also say I remember when we were doing the arts commission and we're doing the banners and I said well why don't we refer to that to the arts commission and we and the thing that came out of that was you were protecting the arts commission because you know as Jamie's doing you didn't want to overburden them with a you know with a one person request and that's why I come from the position we're like I don't think one person on the council should dictate any action we take I think the only way we learn that was we learned last year that the mayor once called special meeting he can do that but other than that it takes a couple of us to do something so that's why my suggestion was that we do two things two people to do that but I think going with council member Brooks's theory it's probably better in the long run if we say can we agendize that because we all have the right to agendize something that's already agendized we agendize that for possible recommendation to a commission and then it comes back and then we have the discussion so I'm actually okay with either one but I was trying to just get away from any one of us just dictating send that to the arts commission okay because we had a lively discussion and then every one of us so I think we all carry a little bit of the city manager's ire as far as just randomly pointing out commissions to do stuff so and I'm okay with either one of those but if the council feels it's better that we use our policy we already have where we are allowed to put something in agenda and agendize it I can live with either one so had a little bit here so if we're recommending or we are proposing to recommend to a committee have them be part of that process to determine if this is something for them to work on so I have no problem with saying if we really want to agendize it more than two people I could go along with that but I'd like to hear from the committee whether they think it's a thing that they would like to actually work on does it really fit into their scheme of how to approach things and I'll tell you why so come up in our next part of this discussion in terms of the chair of those committees agendizing things so I've been on the I won't be on the fact anymore but I've been on the fact for over 12 years and one of the things that keeps coming up is we can't do anything unless we get it from city council but there are things that have come up in that 12 years of discussion that seem like reasonable things you know and so how do we get it on our agenda agendize so we can act on it so you can go to city council person and go that route too so there's I believe a willingness to be part of that discussion maybe if it's a good item to discuss from that committee and so if we throw something to them I think having whatever committee that is be part of that discussion would be a good thing so I could see what you're saying not a lot of work on staff but have something that goes to the commission the commission wants to be involved they want to focus on this thing which they volunteer to do so to have them be a part of that discussion I think it's a good thing and I think that sort of came up with the art and cultural so I have no problem with the two people from city council to actually agendize something to a committee but if we say we kind of like to see if they would like that and we ask staff to come back I'd like to have that commission get a take on that some sort of say do we want to discuss this do we feel this is a reasonable thing for our committee to do and a little bit about the jewel boxing even though it was a long and laborious process to figure out what to do in the jewel box that process I think we learned a lot and if we hadn't involved the people in the jewel box and we had just sort of run with it I think it would have been a minor revolt you know there were some problems obviously there was a lot of people that were upset but in the end that whole process I think came up with something that worked I think people were a lot happier with the results because they were involved you know and sometimes that's what makes these things work is the fact that you actually go to the citizenry and get them involved even though it takes a little bit extra work in the end we want something that large portions of our citizenry are acceptable they're acceptable because they're a part of the process they might be acceptable because it answers their particular issues but in the long run I think it spreads it out and the whole system works if I may throw out an option for council to consider we could do both and say that a council member excuse me concurrence of two council members is required to refer something to committee if someone suggests that he doesn't get that second they could simply say then I would like to see it come in a future agenda any thoughts on that we can do that currently if he gets the second then it would go to the commission but if it doesn't get the second then we would have what we already would already exist which is we can put it on the agenda but if you like if you came up and you said the leaf blower thing and you said I'd like to recommend that can I get a second one of us might have said I might have said it may to me that request made sense I'm just saying that night and what Chris and I would say I believe is that if you if also you throw it and you hear crickets you can just look at the scene manager and say I'd like to put that on a future agenda and then we all win it just takes a little bit longer then there's an opportunity for debate and an actual vote on whether or not that should be done I can understand if you say I'd like this to go to a committee and you don't get a second it seems like it would be dead however if you don't get a second then it comes back on an agenda and there's itemized opportunity to explain why and a formal vote so I'm that's just an option that occurred to me as something for conversation I mean we already have the ability to agendize at a meeting for a future meeting so but with two votes Sam you could do it right away if you came up and said that guy's at the podium and you said I'd like to send that to the commission on the environment can I get a second and if I were to say I'll second that then it doesn't go to the it happens immediately to the commission what we have what I think it's good about just a referral process a way to engage our volunteer committee members without a high level council direction and letting them make the decision about whether it's appropriate or not and then coming back in coordination with staff to either say I mean to reject it and then it dies to have a plan of action in order to move forward which would then require would have to be agendized would require council majority so I think the ability just to refer something it kind of relieves a little political community pressure on taking some immediate steps to address an issue that one of our neighbors may have and it may be something that we yet do not have enough information to decide whether it's even appropriate to have staff put on an agenda because those are pretty high level discussions at least I would hope they are and would require a lot of preliminary research whereas this is just a referral and I think as the city attorney said it's about resource allocation and using them whenever at the lowest level to make an efficient determination about whether we even have the ability to move forward on a particular issue and so I mean with that I mean and maybe it should be more than one but if we have the concurrence of two council members just to make a referral and to me that does not mean there's not a or an assistance upon that advisory committee to actually take that ball and run with it it's just asking them look is this an issue that you think you are interested in fits within your purpose and you have the ability to follow through with answer those questions and then come back to us and if they say no then we have to ask the majority before it goes any further there has to be a majority here to make that happen one way or the other and so that's what that's just my thought about it but so I think the second option on that would be fine council member story if I'm understanding correctly and maybe this is just a matter of wording that we need to reconsider is that what you're suggesting is that a request for a committee to consider taking up an item would require only one council member no no that's the second option is that in order to make a referral and to me a request or referral or synonymous requires at this would take two at least two council members to make so no one of us could do it but if you had a concurrence of one of the council member at least becomes a referral for them to for the staff to bring to them and say is this something that you feel that you could do because that was the question that we were discussing about the arts commission all I was asking is that it be a request to them which they embraced they took it on okay and so to me that's what the referral would do but I'm saying I agree let's have it be at least two council members before even that happens understand what you're saying and because of that I think I disagree with you okay because this is what came back to the last thing my position right now unfortunately is that I believe I'm an elected official and I believe that that attorney over there and that city manager served at the will of this council and I believe that those bodies served at the will of the council that's why we that's why they are on these bodies and I think what we got into last time was you felt that I needed to ask the planning commission if they would like to take this on and I was put off by that I mean I'll say it straight out those bodies are here the fact the parking commission they're here to assist the city council and if we have a group of people and I'm saying not just one I don't want to ask them to do that and this is they're here to service and if we say this is something the council needs we have two council members that feel this is important for you to look into this and this is what you do so I think and what I want to say is I'm thinking I fundamentally disagree with you because you want to make it a referral or request and I'm saying I think it should take two I don't think any one person should dictate anything but I have two people say that the parking commission or the planning commission the parking or the commission on the environment or the finance committee should look at something then it should be done and that's me I just want to make sure that everybody understands why you and I are different on this item and just maybe to respond to that quickly and because I think you and I want the same thing and for me it's just a question of bandwidth and capacity are you sending it to the right people in the right place and if you don't have a willingness I don't think you're going to get a good result and so you might as well start there about asking about what they feel their own self-assessment about their ability to do that that's all I'm saying and but I get your point too but I think that you should always assess before you impose that's it and so I'll leave it at that. Council, Vice Mayor Brooks and then council member and here in the both of you speak that's why I ultimately feel that option one would really balance that out requiring that a referring issue to an advisory committee be an agendized item I don't know that I would want at that moment of time when someone comes up to say what does everyone think right now because we don't have that kind of information at our fingertips what I would like to do is say to staff hey can you look into this is this an option for our environmental committee can you look into it give them a call see if this works out for them and put on the agenda or report back to me to report back to the council if this is something that they can take on I think that's how we can get to both to get what we want is by with option one I think it's the agendized item it might not necessarily be an agendized item right it could possibly be well the environmental committee reported back and said they can't take this on right now because they've got 15 other things but you could report back to us at the next meeting so I don't know if we could adjust the language just to say requiring that a referring issue to advisory committees be X Y and Z or be a request to staff for future comment or for future for as a future agendized item or slash discussion item or something like that because it's hard to say that an agendized item well I guess agendized item doesn't have to necessarily be an action item right so you could certainly agendize an item and take no action I mean it could be a discussion of leaf-flowers we'll use that as an example I do think so there seems to be a comment about the role of committees between council member bachor and council member story one thing you might think about is if you're interested in if there's ever a time where you would like to resolve that issue on a case by case basis for instance if there's some issue that one council member may feel is somewhat important to have an advisory committee look at but if the advisory committee doesn't have time that's fine no big deal versus another issue where all three four or five of you may feel like this is absolutely something that needs to go to a committee that is not something that you can resolve without the matter being on the agenda you can't if someone comes up in public comment and says this is an issue and then one council member says this should go to a committee that's about the extent of a comment that you can make without the item being on the agenda so if you're interested there does seem to be a split about what a committee's role is if that is something that you'll think you want to resolve on a case by case basis you will need to agendize the item so let's see if I can help a little bit from my standpoint the city manager I think the number one thing behind this is that the act of referring an item to a committee generally involves a lot of resources more than in general an item just bringing an item to the city council just because committees often will ask a lot of questions we follow up meetings with the groups they may volunteer to do counts things like that it generally can turn it doesn't always but it certainly has the potential to turn into quite a work item I think about these two options number one is kind of the most bureaucratic and the most strategic it's like it's kind of nice to be able to deal with I think as council member story said somebody's at the podium and we just resolve it go work with the traffic and parking commission it's a nice solution it's not very strategic and it's a bit reactionary at times the second alternative is more responsive and we can deal with something and we don't have to be really bureaucratic it gets it moving and it sends it to a place where it comes particularly if it's if it's just one council member it can be it's not super strategic there's not necessarily a lot of analysis done of like is this even a thing we can do can we even regulate leaf blowers you know those kinds of fundamental questions aren't answered so that's the way I differentiate those two options is the first one is more bureaucratic more strategic and the second one is more responsive and moving quickly that's the vice mayor Brooks question one of the items that may come out of an agendized item if the agenda item is bring back a discussion for us about leaf blowers and one of the options may be to refer the item to a committee something that may come out of that meeting instead of a referral to a committee might be we can't regulate that we can I think we probably can't regulate leaf blowers actually I'm sure we can regulate leaf blowers so that is just an example it's hypothetical but just it would give it gives having staff come back to you first does give the council the opportunity to consider options other than something going to a committee including it not going to a committee all of us are accountable to follow up if I may I believe council member Bertrand was waiting to speak do you still have comments um I do but it's more in the vein of Yvette you know sort of thinking out loud and I think we have some discretion in terms of what we ask our committee members to do so I think Sam brought up that it could help us in a tight situation like a political situation in the fact I've realized that sometimes an issue may be difficult to bring up like are we going to impose some kind of tax are we going to impose some kind of user fee you know maybe hard to get those out in the open but maybe the fact could enumerate these things finance director could look at other examples and various stuff like that and these could be put on the table it wouldn't necessarily be we recommend that this would be the case that city council would adopt but we are putting these on the table for you to consider as options I like the idea of going to various commissions to do some of the groundwork not necessarily deep dig so not putting city staff in the situation of having to spend hours and hours and hours on something but to do the first look the first approach to how someone would approach this particular problem back to us and then we could say to staff we want to have this done in terms of the deep dive come up with some possible resolutions or scenarios what's it like in other cities and stuff like that so I think the commissions depending on what we ask of them so it's not like just give it to that commission so I think it's incumbent upon us to be responsible in what we ask of that commission and that would set the stage for what kind of work would be done in the commission level or what kind of work would be done on the staff level in conjunction with supporting the commission so maybe a way to phrase this particular change is how we would phrase the request to a commission so on some level it could be more detailed and so we have to have two votes and another level could be have a discussion on this and give us some recommendations of some ideas that you think are worthwhile discussing and then we take it from there and that might seem a little more complicated but it allows us to have more options in terms of how we refer things to committees if I may in listening there's some points that came up that I think are really important and one that I thought of was if it only takes one person to put something on a future agenda and it comes off of for example public comment we may find ourselves in a situation where every person that comes up to the podium is expecting that what they have an issue with will be sent to a committee because they've seen it happen before and that is a concern of mine we get a lot of emails we get a lot of calls we get a lot of people that come here with different concerns and so it is a concern of mine that every person that comes to the podium will say well you sent that leaf blower thing to the environment why won't you send my concern about graffiti to the art and cultural commission and then we're going to have to be in a position to defend each of our individual decisions or choices to or not to send something to a committee another thing that I think is really important is Vice Mayor Brooks mentioned having an agenda report come back to us with additional information is something that I hadn't considered that I think would be really important someone could come to us and say why what's up with the leaf blowers and we say send that to the environment committee when in fact all we may just need a staff report that comes back and go here's how we can regulate leaf blowers here's how we can't and if at the end of that discussion we realize oh well we're still at an impasse I think at that point we would have a vote on sending something to an advisory committee rather than just a suggestion I can certainly understand and respect both the idea that we're requesting a committee to review something I think it's important to request and not demand at the same time I can also understand that we are requiring the people in these committees to do these exact jobs so personally I feel that at this point I feel personally that the requiring an agendized item for a future vote for something to go to a committee would be beneficial because it's possible that once we get that agendized item on in front of us at a meeting we'll realize it never needed to go to a committee that we have the answers that it's already in our code that are highly skilled and educated staff already has the answer for us so that's my comment at this time and we'll continue discussion if you're with bullet one I concur okay can I make a motion we're not we're looking for or do you want to direct snap we're not voting do you need a motion for when or the other to be put on the point I would like to see if we can get three votes for one of the options so is it appropriate to call for a vote okay let's go ahead and call for motion I guess we would need a motion I'll make a motion with option one requiring that referring issues to an advisory committee being agendized item and require a council majority second okay let's do a roll call vote for this councilmember story no councilmember Brooks yes councilmember botard I councilmember and mayor Peterson I all right the third item on or the third issue on item 8C is placing item on agendas so previously it was an issue of us sending matters to committees right now we're considering if chairs of advisory bodies can send matters to us without any additional action is that correct okay comments councilmember I don't want to see any committees putting things on the agenda okay further comments councilmember I have no problem we've chosen these people to act in these particular capacities finance environment art and cultural and to me that says we're asking them to come up with ideas within that purview that very restrictive purview that doesn't mean we have to act on them but for them to come up with ideas that might be of interest to us I think is a good thing and to the city council which may take that as an item to agendize or not agendize is fine with me they're saying they can agendize an item so this is the way I read this the way I read it city manager can clarify it not agendize for city council but agendize for that committee to agendize for city council okay so I read it wrong I agree with that one I just have a question so if I'm just thinking of a scenario if this were a fat committee and they were working on something and they have a recommendation to bring forward a new tax or something like that how would that take place what would be the next steps for them if they didn't have permission to do so they would talk to the city manager well both the mayor and the vice mayor sit on that commission what's another committee that I can use as an example commission on the environment have been working on the plastics ordinance want to do updates want to bring it to council for the ordinance to be updated so the process would mean that the staff person for the commission on the environment would basically come into my office and say hey the update on plastics is ready to go to council so could the code instead of saying no you can't put those like instead of saying no should it be more open to say the process is that the staff that sit on you know have the permission to bring things forward to council because it just sounds really stringent it sounds almost like you're not allowed to bring anything forward the way I'm reading it could the advisory chair come to a council member and say we want this on the agenda there's a lot of different ways the chair person can't put something in your agenda there's a lot of different ways there is someone on that commission when you're on the fact can you put that there's a clear process for the staff being the sole gatekeepers about what comes on the agenda they could come to us the advisory committee could come to us to act any council member could put anything on any agenda that's how it's been working for years but not a committee member I wasn't done with my question what is in the current ordinance does it say no or yes that they can or cannot is there any language about that that's it the current code requires a council member to place an item on a future agenda item requesting at a public meeting but aren't we talking about the chair current code requires council members it says the following should have the authority to place a matter on a council agenda any member of the council with the condition that the proposed agenda item be requested at an open city council meeting the city manager the city council may after the 72 hour posting add items in the manner provided in the government code and then it says the chair of a border commission and so what you're presenting today is to strike that through and it hasn't been an issue in the past it hasn't been an issue in the past but I think as it's just a little bit funny that there's more authority for a border commission chair than there is for individual council members that's the thing that's just we've noticed okay that's my question can we go back to the slide that had the can we go back to the blue slide the easy slide I want big letters and small paragraphs how about what does the council think about something like chairs of an advisory body may add something to a council agenda upon approval of city manager or a city council member isn't that what we're doing it's complicated we just want to get rid of what we're doing is cleaning up language so if we strike that all together okay I see what you're saying we could strike it all together and they would still have the right to come through a council member or city manager like they already do do we agree to that to just strike that all together I would like to make a motion that we strike the language allowing a committee chairman to put something on the agenda we have a motion in a second all in favor any opposed any abstentions that motion carries we have made it through item 8c wow I love you talking out loud and you know we didn't bring some of the other more ministerial items maybe we should have about you know the time and place of council meetings we'll have another crack at the next meeting should I call a special meeting for that to happen no I think we can we can knock it all out just kidding okay thank you we're going to move on to item 8d annual donations report good evening mayor and council this is the fiscal year 2019 or I'm sorry fiscal year 2019 annual donations report first I'd like to just point out that the City of Capitola benefits greatly from the generosity of individuals local businesses nonprofits as well as others in the community and in July of 2013 the city implemented a donations policy and that policy basically gives the authority to the city manager to accept grants of $5,000 or less and appropriate those for already pre-approved projects and programs and it also established a procedure for acknowledging and reporting donations so as far as fiscal year 1819 the city received a little over $447,000 in donations and grants 68 little over 68,000 of that was donations from individuals of $5,000 or less I have a list up there I don't want to read the slide to you but I thought it was important to it's in the staff report and for the folks at home to at least see the not so much the dollar amounts but the types of programs that get grant funded and the folks that are doing that so you can see some of the movies at the beach and Twilight concerts and Sunday art and music and then those folks that are contributing or donating to those programs and then as far as Twilight concerts I wanted to pull that one out because there was a number of businesses down in the village and throughout Capitola that contribute to that and without those donations those Twilight concerts wouldn't possibly take place or a lot less of them might take place also last year we received a little over $154,000 in state and federal grants and I have those listed up there again I don't want to read the slide but I thought it was important to at least list up there what the grants are for and how we got them or which entity we got them from and finally this report's basically focused on the $5,000 or less but I did we do have we can take donations of greater than $5,000 if we have an agreement within any entity and right now we have one of those agreements with Friends of the Capitola Library and they contributed $225,000 they had over at the Santa Cruz County Community Foundation which brings their total I just went through what we had received through yesterday and we're sitting right at about $525,000 in donations and pledges so we've received $475,000 and we have pledged for another $50,000 my understanding is there's some other commitments that have been made to the Friends that are going to push that number probably north of $600,000 so a very successful fundraising campaign and then once they're done with their fundraising campaign we'll come back and do a full report on just the donations that were around the library project so tonight's recommended recommended action is to receive the report and with that I'd be happy to answer any questions. Are there any questions from the council? Councilmember I have a question maybe you don't have the itemized donations whatever but I know the current part of the donation for the library right now is the pavers which has been very successful do you have any idea how much we're getting right now with pavers and is that donation cycle still available for the public to participate in? So the paver donations my understanding is the deadline has been extended a month at this point maybe extended again we've had a lot of activity in the last week or so as we approach that deadline off the top of my head I want to say we're getting close to $60,000 of donations for just the pavers probably close to probably a little more than 200 pavers now. Okay can you tell the public what the pavers are and where they'll be placed in the present library, the library to be planned? I can tell you what the pavers are as far as placement I'll probably have to defer to Steve but there's three different options for pavers a 6x6 a 6x12 and a 12x12 25, 225 or 325 based on the size of the paver and then as you get larger you get more lines of text in there and I don't know the exact number I want to say it's like the first paver is one line the second is two and then three but don't hold me to that one as far as placement I'm going to defer to Steve Yes the pavers will be located outside the front door of the library there will be three there's kind of a patio or sorts and they'll be in that walkway in three sections. Okay thanks Any other questions? Is there any member of the public that would like to address the council? Seeing none we'll bring it back for any further council comments I just want to say thank you to all the donors for supporting our city and yeah that's it thank you I was prepared to read off the list but thank you for putting him on a slide because I totally agree with you that it's amazing how much the businesses in particular and like junior lifeguards also have been donating a lot of money to the city and greatly appreciate it. And a lot of these donors donate on an annual basis so it's not one time it's every year Yep well the junior guards is great the concerts are great all these things are just wonderful that contribute to the wonderfulness of being here in Capitola. Great thank you so much if there's no additional council comments and there's no additional items I have a comment. You have another comment? Yes not on this slide but on general so I think it's been suggested in terms of Jamie a council item and it was brought up I just want to remind it that this I think needs to be dealt with and that is to have a session or have an offsite session that deals with protocols and procedures for how city council should be in terms of conducting public business I'd like to add to that that we also include the fact in the city planning commissions so that we're all on board and maybe you know council environment and other committees so that we're all on board in terms of how we interact amongst each other and how we are conducting business for the city capitol thank you. So this has been requested in the past I'm just extending it to other committees so that we have across the board a uniform way of doing business for the city capitol. Just to have clarity on this we have a pending item which is a code of conduct for the council and that was going to be a code of conduct for the council I think for other city officials that is pending is that what we're talking about here Yeah I it may be pending in terms of your planning process but it hasn't been brought to us yet. Oh no it hasn't happened yet it's coming So I'd like to add that you know at this point I hope the city council would agree with this I'd like to see other commissions be part of this I don't think it's just the city council that needs to benefit from this but city planning, council environment and other issue other council committees that you know we have committee members to. We will be agendizing that for coming meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Also invite the committee members obviously. Alright. Thank you for that comment. With that we have reached the end of our meeting this meeting is adjourned take care of yourselves and take care of each other good night. And now we will be moving on to the successor agency meeting so now I call that meeting to order. Is that too? No it's perfect. I'll get a mouse pad or something. Roll call. Board members story. Still here. For board or staff comments does any staff have any comments? Do any members of the board have any comments? I have one question though that's all. Wait is it related to an item on the agenda? Oh excuse me yes. It is. Okay let's wait until we get there we're almost there. Item calendar. Does any member of the public wish to address the board on the consent calendar? Seeing none. Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Sorry I have to change programming that was story and Thank you. Any opposed? No abstentions. Carries unanimously. Moving on to item 8a general government and public hearings and that is a recognized obligation payment schedule. Staff report please. Thank you Mayor and Council. So this is just the annual adoption of our recognized obligation payment schedule related to the Capitola successor agency. At this point we're down to basically three items. We're requesting a total of 133 thousand seventy dollars. Fifteen thousand is for the housing authority rental assistance program. Eighty eight thousand and seventy dollars is for the castle mobile home housing assistance program and that will be the end of their funding under the successor agency that's why it's that oddball number. And then fifteen thousand for our admin costs. I believe that next year now that we're wrapping up castle I'm going to have conversations with the housing authority but I believe that they're pretty much wrapping up their program so next year we will probably be doing this for the final time is what the hope is. But for tonight the recommended action is to approve the fiscal year 2021 recognized obligation schedule and if that is approved this evening then I will be at the countywide oversight meeting on January 21st to get the oversight approval and then we send it off to the state by February 1st. And with that I'd be happy to answer any questions. Great questions. How much longer for this I understand CASA because we hadn't extended. I believe that next year we'll be able to file our final rops. I just need to confirm that I need to go through the housing authority agreement one more time. But we're wrapped up with castle we're pretty much done with risk and I just need to see what's left with the housing authority. I will probably do a final rops next year but there could be another lingering payment or two after that but we're getting really close to the end. Any further questions with that we'll bring it to the public. If there's any member of the public seeing none we would like to return to council comments and motion. Motion to approve staff recommendation. Motion in a second all in favor. Aye. Any opposed. Any abstentions. Motion carries unanimously. And with that we are adjourned. Thank you.