 Okay, council is going to reconvene for this special meeting of September 24th Madam city clerk. We have an announcement of the roll call That's a record show that all members of the council are present with the exception of council member Sawyer. Thank you Mr. McGlynn item 4.1 item 4.1 review and discussion of landscape maintenance options for citywide parks civic sites and roadway landscapes Jason nut Assistant city manager for public works presenting. There's a different name down here. Yeah, good morning mayor and council members Jen Santos has been Reassigned for today as she is critical. She is part of our critical overnight operations in the emergency operations center and so with that I'll be providing with the presentation today And hopefully giving you some good quality information along the way So what we're going to do in talking about our landscape maintenance Is really to do a quick background on where we're at. What does landscape maintenance mean? Talk about some definitions specific to Things that we'll be discussing along the way and things you might hear when we come back to award landscape contract We'll discuss different service levels This is going to be the heart of the discussion is really trying to gain feedback from you as to what level of service We should be providing within our parks and roadside landscape areas And then lastly, we'll give you a little description about what other agencies have done what we could foresee with different levels of or different types of performance metrics and and again try to try to vet out some feedback from you as What what level of service or what performance metric we should be looking for when it comes time for us to? Go and solicit and award a contract for these services in the future So with that Our merchant issues relating to landscape maintenance is really is really how do we do weed control and weed control can be Done in a number of different ways it can be done manually it can be done mechanically it can be done with chemicals and our prior landscape contract was renewed last August For one year and as some of you recall that was a 10th amendment It had been our landscape contractor for a substantial period of time and we pay roughly about $550,000 a year as we've gone back and started to look at that that particular Value is an unsustainable practice in the current bidding environment relating to landscape maintenance And so we know that the increase in cost was would come as we start to just try to even control and manage the Facilities that we have out there today At the levels that we were asking the current contractor to do That contract expires at the end of this month and that is after a one-month extension So we awarded the contract in August of 2018. It was for 12 months at the end on August 30th We agreed to with the contractor to extend for one month of additional time And so we now we are now set to see that expire on September 30th So as I said, I kind of want to talk about definitions because there are some words that get thrown out there and and I want to make sure that we're at least all Speaking somewhat the same language. So we use a term called glyphosate and glyphosate is a synthetic herbicide It doesn't describe synthetic herbicides It is a specific particular product in some in a synthetic herbicide or or or several synthetic herbicides And its purpose is to not only kill the or or address the Topical component of the plant but also work its way in through the system and down into the roots With an effort to try to address the entire weed for a longer period of time a Neonicotinoid did I say it okay vice-mayor? Okay, a neonicotinoid nicotinoid is a it's a product that that addresses the sensory Components of some insects and animals that utilize sensory things like bees and keeps them from being able to function properly and Both of those products were prohibited by council council specifically asked us to not incorporate those into this last year's contract Based on the August 24th council meeting a weed is basically something that's growing out there that we don't want to grow It doesn't fit with our landscape protocol and it wasn't intentionally planted and that so when we use the term weed It's something that we didn't Specifically specify for that location and don't particularly want there Integrated pest management is a term of art It's a plan and a strategy to develop how we would go about developing a program To do all sorts of these different components of landscape management Whether we're using the physical prevention or we're looking at our cultural resources and whether and and how that Particular plan or organism fits within that and whether we're using mechanical means That exists out there to manage that specific product Whether it's biological or it's chemical and with chemical we talk both synthetic and organic and we'll describe those in more detail in a moment One of the things that we wanted to just highlight We've we never use Chemicals of any type whether it be organic or synthetic in certain areas playgrounds dog parks picnic areas creeks bioswales and And so on This has been a practice of the city for many many years All components of the organization have abided by that and that is something that as we move forward It's in our intention to continue in many cases We have requirements from the regional water quality control board that stipulate that we can only do certain things within certain areas And we have as you see up here the healthy schools act Says that we can only provide certain levels of weed control and management or other pesticide management in and around school areas With certain products and so we work hard to comply with all of those so as we continue to go through That's all pieces of an ipm strategy and while we Have an ipm strategy We're interested in growing that ipm strategy into the future In an effort to continue to keep up with current practices and policies and quite frankly This discussion that we're going to have today is going to start to kick off some of that future discussion Organic and synthetic herbicides That's probably at the heart of the discussion that we're going to have today and So an herbicide is a is a chemical used to control and manage Weedy debris or plant debris And it is fairly heavily regulated by a number of different organizations and I've provided those up there And the question for us is which product should we or should we not use and do either or all of those products have value within an operation of weed control In our past we have worked. We have contracted with Our current contractor sorry Has been authorized to utilize organic methodologies Up until this last year. They were also allowed to use synthetic products This last year council gave us direction to To not use glyphosate. There was not a direction to not use synthetics And so again glyphosate and synthetic are Glyphosate is a component of synthetic. It is not all synthetics On synthetics and we'll talk that'll that'll be in one of the next slides to get into more detail about synthetics But we do use those periodically up until this last year Santa Rosa water Has an IPM strategy that allows them to use a synthetic um once per application But they have never done that over the last year of that contract You'll also see the epa in the state agricultural commission. They approve These products and there are labels and protocols with which they are to be utilized Anytime a spray of either of these two products is used it has to be recorded and then Submitted to those agencies at the end of the year An organic herbicide It's a chemical that focuses predominantly on the leafy component or the topical component Of a weed or plant Its primary goal is to burn The that product with an idea that you're controlling it from the from the surface down It's not a good product to get into the roots that would cause it to not regenerate in the future In order to try to have the best Application possible you'll come back multiple times applying to that same Plant in an effort to try to stunt its growth or to try to ultimately Restrict its growth so much that it begins to die off from the ground down Um, as you can see we rely on the omri or the organic materials review institute They have identified specific products that are appropriate for this type of application And the product itself generally dissipates within a 24 hour period. It doesn't stick around and last beyond beyond That time frame, but it is predominantly a burning concept and that's the that's the method with which it addresses weeds We took an opportunity to test out organics Over a five day period just to give you an idea of what an organic product does This is an area that we would typically want to use some type of chemical treatment in an effort to control weeds This is the Back area of a ball field. Um, those typically are dirt or rock in an effort to Make that part of the outfield a little more playable. It also Provides for more stable ground for the kids and adults as they approach the wall so they don't trip and End up hitting the wall or the fence On day one the organic compound or the organic Weed control was applied. You can see at day three you start to see Some of the weeds begin to burn off on the top But by day five, there's not a substantial amount of change in that It requires Continual response to come back again. It can be effective. It just takes additional time We thought it would be appropriate just to kind of provide you with a visual demonstration of how that works On the synthetic herbicide again, it's a chemical weed control But it is focused more specifically to address the root at its at its base Or at the weed at its base and so it not only addresses and attacks the Surfacial leafy component on top, but its intent is to get into the roots and kill off that weed Earlier on in its process Those products can also be used to As as a pre-emergent in an effort to deal with weeds as they're starting to germinate So the hope is that you keep those weeds from actually Presenting themselves during a course of time and some of those pre-emergence last for months some last for for longer Once applied it generally has a 24-hour life before its components dissipate as well And this these products are also fairly heavily regulated So what I want to do next is to talk about What weed control means I think this is going to be in my opinion probably the meat of the feedback that i'll be looking for you from Is to try to identify what level of weed control we're really looking at Because the level of weed control will will to some extent dictate what staff brings you when it comes time for contract management For example, if we're looking at something that's 100 weeds weed control where there is there are no weeds Visible You know, we might make well, we will make a very specific Proposal to you whereas if we go to a different level There'll be a different series of options for you to consider at the time we look to contract So This is what a hundred percent weed control looks like this is in essence a brand new park Before we've really had a substantial growing season It looks really great. We would love to be able to do this It it is costly and and labor intensive to get to this level At 90 we start to see some weeds that generate But for the most part we have a fairly good control over the site 70 weed control seems to be one of these thresholds that we're starting to hear a lot about especially as we listen to Different companies discuss or different agencies talk about either synthetic or organic control 70 percent is one of those targets. And so here's an image and a picture of what 70 weed control looks like in one of our parks 50 percent is another key target site And so 50 percent is the left side that kind of describes and shows the level of weed production that will occur during the course of A growing cycle throughout the year And we would hope to manage to about that level if 50 percent weed control worth of proposed On the right side of the screen, you'll see it's 25 percent weed control At that point, we're really allowing the weeds to manage the space themselves And we're just at that point doing For the most part safety type of of management And then lastly is is is pretty much a native space. We're allowing the weeds to Fully consume. We are not doing any management of any type whether it be chemical or mechanical The only type of management we would do in a situation like this is one specifically for safety If this were on a roadside or at a median We would be trimming that in such a way that it didn't impact users of the public space adversely or create any other type of visual impact hazard The next series of slides will go through kind of talk about areas where where we think Where we the staff would say We feel that weed control needs to occur in these spaces. And so when we talk about I kind of mentioned it in the first slide. We never deal with any type of chemical control within certain areas There are certain areas where where weeds also need to be controlled that might not be in playgrounds or in dog parks But that We have to figure out the most appropriate and prudent way of handling those And so you'll see at baseball fields. It's both the infield and the outfield the outfield in the area immediately adjacent to the fence line Pathways we talk about personal and public safety This is one where you want to make sure that the weeds aren't six foot tall adjacent to the sidewalk or adjacent to the walking path Because you want to feel safe as you're walking through and so there's a level of weed control that we would want to Impose in that area in an effort to make the public feel comfortable in and around our parks Um adjacent to roadways I talked a bit about vehicular safety If I can't see the intersection and the vehicle coming out of that intersection that poses a safety hazard And we need to be able to manage weeds whether it's whether it's removal Or whether it's just trimming. Uh, there needs to be some level of weed control To ensure the public safety in and around our roadways From the park standpoint, it's a matter of enjoyability. What is the park there for what is it? We want that space particularly to be available to the public to use and Whether it's just general open space or whether it's something immediately adjacent to a park bench The question that we have to ask is as to what level of of aesthetic Weed control or safety weed control do we want to accomplish in those particular areas? And then again areas in and around playgrounds, you know, we do have fall zone requirements that we have to maintain and We try our best to make sure that there are no trip hazards or other Types of hazard that exist within a playground that would cause a child to get injured or an adult to get injured chasing after that child And so we need to make sure that some of those spaces are kept open free and clear Or at least in a safe and manageable condition We can talk about Fence lines not necessarily fence lines in an adjacent to ball fields, but fence lines that we may have on the park ends They could be adjacent to a sidewalk. It could be between properties You know, we recently received an email from a constituent out at a place to play that was concerned about um Berry growth in and around that property and so it's it's products like that that we have to make a decision Okay, how best to handle that situation? If you cut it it will regrow if you try to kill it Well, it's a berry it'll regrow but um the idea is to to start to understand expectations and to be able to set up a protocol that helps us Best manage those facilities wherever they might be And then there's also the parking lots and then other landscape areas Dutch floor park is a beautiful park. It's a great picture because it's predominantly turf We generally don't deal with weed control in turf We kind of allow the turf management to handle in and of itself whether it's periodic whether it's uh Periodic spot pulling of a weed or removal or whether It's it's part of our aeration process, but You know turf is is kind of an actual good product to handle weeds But it's not typically something we would do any type of application to So to give you a picture of a couple of spots that have reduced weeds already Finale park, uh, I kind of led with some of this. This is one of our newer parks in town Once you start new it's a little easier to try to maintain it in that condition But at the levels that we currently have we're starting to see those things slide and more weed growth starting to occur Luther Burbank home and gardens obviously we put a huge amount of effort Into managing and maintaining that and we also have a fairly substantial volunteer group that assists with the efforts out at Luther Burbank home and gardens and so that particular property looks fantastic all the time Um, and then as I mentioned with the dutch floor park when we talk turf areas We have reduced weeds generally on a on a on a norm because the turf takes over and uh, it It has a tendency to reduce the number of the amount of weed growth So just to now step back to our current contract, um Weed removal with synthetics is allowed with our current contract um Our current contract prior to last august twice a year Based on our last agreement, uh in august of 18. We eliminated their use of glyphosates That didn't mean they couldn't use other synthetic products or other organic products But they do two applications a year and that's the extent that we allow them to do it They spend quite a bit of time trying to manage and maintain our turf areas We don't talk a lot about that, but that is a major component of the contract is our turf maintenance Whether it's soccer fields baseball fields or our civic sites that have just generalized turf They're doing quite a lot of that work They're also helping us maintain and manage some of our landscape medians and site on landscaping With the elimination of glyphosate that's been there that's been stepped back quite a lot So they've chosen Based on our current contract not to uh do some of those and unfortunately our current contract doesn't have great performance measures So it's difficult for our staff to be able to step and go have a discussion with the current contractor To state that they're not complying with the contract It's our intent moving forward that we have a much stronger Performance metric for that contractor so that we can make sure both from the contractor standpoint and the city standpoint That we both have a mutually agreeable Product that we're trying to deliver and that there are methods with which we're ensuring that that product is is Being a is being done to assert to that performance metric Our city staff does Have to in this case assist our maintenance contractor There's just the contractor is not getting to everything and so we do have staff members that go out At routinely and do some of the weed control for the most part they're doing the safety protocols ensuring that our that our roadways medians and Entry areas are safe for people to get in and out of As I mentioned early on the current contracts about $550,000 so Talking about some of the weed application sites and some of the Commonalities that we're starting to see as we look around to others when you're dealing with civic and park sites Those entities that we've seen that are using an organic only method Their their goal is to try to achieve a 50 weed control type of performance metric When you move to a synthetic product, they're trying they the general Feel is that you can achieve about a 70 weed control There is the ability to do combinations of these where You're reducing other forms of risk For example, you'll have some folks that will find park areas that have a lot of A lot of concrete or a lot of asphalt where there's not a lot of Human interaction or animal interaction. They'll use Synthetic to try to address weeds in those areas to try to reduce the labor impacts But Then so this is just kind of an example of of different generic application concepts The other is roadway landscaping again. It's about the same percentages member early on. I said 70 and 50 seem to be sort of becoming normal targets In this particular case one of the suggestions is that that People are utilizing synthetic still in and around the roadway areas where you're limiting the amount of traffic control that you have to do You're limiting the exposure of the applicators to live to live vehicles and you're and you're minimizing the the traffic impacts to the Motoring public And so that seems to be somewhat of a commonality that's starting to work their way around And then utilizing organics in those other areas where you have more Public and animal interactions maybe along the road sides where you have side on landscaping and and whatnot A couple of agencies that we had discussions with to try to cut You know to try to vet some of this we talked with the city of davis Who recently awarded a contract? They their original award was for an all-organic contract They have since stepped back and are utilizing synthetics in and around Roadway areas and around those areas where There is a very limited human and animal interactions the city of clayton has Reduced the use of or eliminated the use of glyphosates a glyphosates But they have a lot of districts. We don't have a lot of districts in our town So they've got a different funding mechanism for how they're For how they're financing their their maintenance Having worked in novato as an example Most of our landscape maintenance was funded with with Benefit districts benefit assessment districts And those areas looked fantastic The areas that weren't with benefit assessment districts We struggled to keep them looking as good as the rest of the town The town of healdsburg they discontinued the use of glyphosate But they they increased their staff to supplement the use of the contract in an effort to ensure that they had Safe spaces in and around so those were folks that were typically doing Weeding type of landscaping in an effort to keep those tall weeds lower And then of course they have a Transit occupancy attacks and landscape and lighting districts through town that are also help feeding those So that kind of concludes the presentation What i'm like i say i think the images of the different performance levels That's what i'm really hoping to hear from council is is where would our where should our targets be not only from The metric of what percentage weeds would we be comfortable with but then also a discussion of the different types of management processes that we have or or products that are out there And if you have any suggestions, I would love to hear it and i'm happy to answer questions Great, thank you for that presentation yet jason very informative you're a man of many talents. Thank you council Questions for mr. Knight jack Thank you, mayor And thank you jason a good presentation. It was really informative You know, I guess um some of the questions I had is uh on page six if you could go back Um Where was it some organic products are not regulated I think it was basically where are we currently not using Synthetics uh because it has kind of schools. We listed schools. We listed parks Um, not using synthetics, but reason ball fields are using synthetics I mean, I think what i'm looking for going forward is Where are we going to not have synthetic uses at all where pets and people interact with the landscape You know right off the bat. I'm thinking a median in a roadway or it's probably unsafe to have Somebody there picking weeds That might be an appropriate use in my mind for synthetics, but Everywhere else. I think we should strive for biological uses um Sorry, you look like you were Trauma the bit to say something. No, I was just um, I I I think I appreciate those statements. Uh, I think your question is where are we not using synthetics right now the current state of the Environment that we have is we're not using either synthetic or organics currently and have not for the last 12 months And that has been you're saying difficult Uh, well, yes, because we're using only mechanical means um And neither the contractor nor the city have staff Currently, we're not staffed at the current level to do a full comprehensive management plan with mechanical The sander was a water department has a separate contract their contract Allows for the use of organics. It does allow for a single application of synthetics on a specific location um, and But all of those are in second and third position to to hand and mechanical weed removal and Their particular contractor has as I found out this morning never used either of the two chemicals They've done only things by hand and they're obtaining about a 70 percent weed free environment And so that there there is certainly something to be said about the program that they've been able to establish They have a lot smaller acreage and it's a small It's a smaller company. That's local And so I I don't know if that has anything specific If specific relationship to the end product, but it very possibly could so okay So I think I think to follow up to your your your questions council member I think what we're trying to do is establish what's an acceptable level of performance here I think what what's not being articulated fully yet in the presentation is the volume of Of community concern that comes to us About maintenance levels and because there's not a clear level of acceptability We have a hard time communicating to folks. So if you I think underlying this is some of what's the acceptable level There may be exceptions that you want us to take into consideration around safety But I think underneath it is a 70 percent an acceptable level of weed control We know what that's said. We have a way to communicate that with constituents We can tackle issues But underlying it you're also hearing that there's no contract performance, right Because we don't have this measure as a community and what what what gets translated then is There's a a level of artificiality and pristine this that comes with frankly Only a case you're seeing only a commitment to certain type of chemical use you get that pristine Environment if you're going to commit to using certain Things that the council has told us not to use but in the absence of metrics And and an acceptable level to talk to the community. We don't have a way to dialogue so what we end up is in a volume of of Conversations and quite clearly no clear direction So again, that's what we're looking for so we can help shape that future conversation Not only with our contractor, but with the community This is and you're hearing that there there are ways to do this you establish the 25 percent 50 percent We want you to look at as you said we want you to look at medians in a slightly different way We're willing to do that But for us to understand how to contract with somebody long term and what the performance is going to be and talk to the community We need metrics to start to be established to do that Yeah, and actually i'm glad that you brought up Jason that you're kind of operating or you had you did this last 12 months It's 70 percent because i'll be the first to say that when I looked at that diagram I'm okay with 70 percent In fact, I felt like that was a good target if it's helping us achieve this goal of not using synthetics Because I want to be clear. I do want to get away from the use of synthetics even on roadway medians But why I threw that out there was to me there would be A logic if we were going to use them there But i'm also looking at megan who's in the audience and has put in tons of work on this beginning at the bpu And I look forward to hearing what you have to say at public comment about that So 70 percent is good for me Let's drive towards synthetics and I do want to just say one more thing and that is you know When I brought this up when we were talking about the measure m funds And I I still am a firm believer that we need to do more seasonal hires for maintenance of all our parks And where weeding can be Incorporated into what their duties are and it even goes so far as to you know I think it'd be amazing if the city could come up with a contract with You know catholic charities or somebody cuts that you know might have Employment opportunities for seasonal workers people trying to climb their way out of homelessness So I'd love to see that and thank you. That's all my questions and comments. Thank you Mr. Fleming we have a question. I do have a question about process. Are we going to get take public comment After we ask our questions. Yes. Okay, so I will answer your question about what sort of standards you would like after I hear from the public I'm curious um for a couple. I was not on the council when you last received direction on this and so I'm wondering When I when I talked to a few people I had heard that all organic was the direction from the council It sounds like that's not the direction. Can you clarify what the direction from the council was last year? So I had to watch the video a couple two or three different times to make sure I clearly understood Council was very interested and vocally interested in wanting to move toward organic council, however made two distinct alterations to the recommendation to award the contract one was to prohibit the use of glyphosate The other was to prohibit the use of neonicotinoids And that was it so so generic statement relating to synthetics was not incorporated into the motion Was that the spirit of the direction from your interpretation and you don't have the answer that I get that's an interpretive I would I'll be clear it Council appeared to have wanted to move towards an organic But there was questions about what that meant And there was questions to have us return with additional information such as what we're doing right now So that so that the long-term decision could be made knowing all of the information I do wonder about the wisdom of giving You and our contractor a standard without having very firm direction But I will defer to my other council members as we go along here I'm wondering if you could define a couple terms of art for me when you say cultural means of Weed abatement or control. What does that mean? So so of course these are things that that that Deputy director santos had incorporated in there and those are a couple of things I don't particularly know I can look up and see if either of our staff I can google it too And do we know what a bioswale is a bioswale is a roadside is a roadside water catchment area with the intention that it will filter out some of the Non-natural products that are in stormwater and so you'll see those in areas like Peterson Lane Out and that southeast or south northwest area that has a lot of bioswales up there So I'm wondering with the non Non glyphosate non neogynucatinoid Chemicals you said they fully dissipate after 24 hours Does that mean that if an animal or an insect is to come by and eat it afterward that they Ingest none of the product and I know this is a very technical question Probably not at your pay grade But it's important to understanding how we make this decision And it is my understanding that that you are correct that after that with that The particular chemical component of the product will dissipate will become a non product after a 24-hour period and therefore If something were to come along and interact with With the the weed or the plant It would see no ill effects of any residual chemicals that might still be there because what my wondering here is that if we Were to go to a system where we were to use those types of products in areas that don't have a lot of interaction With people or animals That we can see there's still lots of interaction with all kinds of animals that we can't see and I know I don't know about you But I've seen Scrolls of epilepsy and all kinds of other conditions that i'm not licensed to diagnose But the point is is that they don't look well and and it seems like they're interacting with the the chemicals And I I don't know which type of them they are But I want to make sure that we're not Planting one for another and creating an ecosystem hazard just because we don't see it or we don't touch It doesn't mean that it doesn't get out there So so a couple of points one staff having watched the video from from august also picked up on this particular Comment that came out at that point Did some research and unfortunately they're actually we haven't been able to find any specific studies that either Say that in fact that is something that occurs where a scroll will come up and interact with a particular product Or a spray area and have an impact or not And so we've been looking around we've gone to universities that that deal with chemical applications we've contacted other cities and organizations and and we haven't found any research that That tells us a yes or a no So I I I realize it's kind of a non statement, but but I understand that my my observations are anecdotal And that there may not be a great body of squirrel research out there. Maybe that's an opportunity for us, but you know I have I have my concerns and wonderings around that I'm wondering besides the visual issues around fence lines What the actual problems with allowing weeds To grow in those areas are Well, so I mean I use the place to play example and where we have where we have berries growing up along the sides The neighbors are not happy having berries growing up on the sides It's growing from our property and they've asked us to mitigate and control those So you're hearing again, there's an aesthetic expectation in some of these locations and again, we're looking for the measures Is aesthetics the qualifying criteria or is it or is it health and safety issues to be clear here? This is not a criticism. This is a curiosity so that after we hear from the public I can make comments that are holistic in nature That's that's why I wanted to say to your point. This is exactly where we're going to struggle is On a fence line. Is it is it an aesthetic issue that we're responding to or is it a health and safety? That gives us guideposts, right? Are we getting to like somebody getting caught in it? Or are we looking at pleasant building right now you're hearing safety you're you're hearing staff respond totally to an aesthetic conversation And we're looking for criteria What is the most important part of this so we can bring back a program for you to to propose With these types of auditions or subtractions. Let me be clear Is it a safety problem or is it an aesthetic issue? And so something like that actually could be it could be either an aesthetic issue or what they're considering is a public nuisance So whether it's berries or whether it's poison oak or other items that are growing within our parks and So let me let me we could set a criteria the community of interest may be setting a criteria We're look we're interested in what you want to do. I think it depends on the situation and we need the available value to If I think right now The aesthetic is driving the conversation We might have some internal conversations about safety whether it does rise to let it will safety because berries are frankly different than poison oak Height is going to be a different conversation than non height If we can get some clarity from from you councilmember Then we can start to build that program and address it So I I think the reason we're not answering is because it's going to be dependent on the situation the location of the fence It is But not all fences are created equal not all all weeds are created equal But if we can get a clarity today to say you want us to prioritize health as safety over aesthetics That starts to get driving to that question of what we can do in a 70 control on how we communicate How we're going to respond to a particular and I'm not trying to jam you guys up And I know it's been a lot of things are going on now, but it's difficult to give direction when it wasn't party to the Conversations last august and it sounds like there was a spirit from the council, but not clear direction All the way around so that's where my questions are coming from. I will cede the floor and come back with direction at the end Ms. Holmes Thank you, mayor I want to emphasize that i'm very interested in hearing from the public and that Comments made here questions here I would love to hear from the public if they also have information to to provide on these questions That said thank you for bringing this forward to us I was aware That we were not as clear as we needed to be in the last conversation around the contract and i'm delighted that we are able to be more clear now I'm I'm interested in knowing sort of what the safest option standard is Um, it's just saying synthetic and organic doesn't really get to what's safest Um, so I'm not happy that the epa and the state ag both continue to allow glyphosates and i'm going to call them neonix Um, it's easier So that makes me want to look to a different entity for a safety standard because they're clearly allowing something that our public won't Won't stand for I mean we sinoma county doesn't like glyphosates and eonix so Following those standards doesn't seem appropriate to me O. M. R. I seems to only be organic. Is there available another Way of evaluating the safety of these items or another standard that we could be applying So that we can make a determination. What's the safest based upon that standard? So there are some other Entities for example the russian river friendly guidelines is one that we've utilized it as far as santa rosa water as a way of Fact checking or managing our own proposed ipm So that is another guideline that's out there. It's not a Requirement or criteria or threshold We do have certain thresholds that we're responsible for whether it's water runoff compliance, whether it's chemical composition of of our creeks and waterways So those are end products that we need to try to meet How we get there is the question that you're asking and I think I don't know if there is a specific regulatory agency like o. M. R. I for synthetic products there are proposed or there are guidelines and There is a risk warning on each of those products And the risk warning May dictate the level of personal protective equipment. It may dictate the amount of Time it takes for that product to dissipate. Where does the risk warning come from? I'll let me and I want to say first that I appreciate that staff provided me with some of that information During the private conversations that I had with staff who couldn't be here today because of our other emergencies Give me a moment and I'll see if I can get an answer for that I have a follow-up question on that which I apologize for not having provided in advance That involves the time frame of the research for example You know an initial exposure versus What happens to long-term exposure versus you have an exposure but you have a much delayed consequence So if you can let me know what because i'm looking at it doesn't make sense to me to just say organic Yes or no or synthetic. Yes or no it makes sense to me to do a comparison of what's safest If you just give me one minute when I can for All right, the good news is when you've got your certified applicators in the room they can they have some answers so And if I stray tim will step up and go into more detail So the warning labels on each of the products are identified by the by the EPA And the manufacturers provide the level of toxicity within or the level of components within the product and then it's regulated there And it's toxicity to humans It's it's not going to be just toxicity to humans But it's going to take into consideration both the products interaction with what you're trying to Eradicate as well as the impact to the applicator itself Thank you, sir Would you say your name again and get closer to that mike? Oh, my name is tim finnegan. I'm the crew supervisor of the parks department. Thank you, so Another test are done on humans. It's done on rodents animals and given the the health of that animal the weight and so forth, then they try to Put it into terms as far as that toxicity They're making a guess from animal toxicity to what the human toxicity is But the measure is for human toxicity No, because they don't try it on humans I understand they're not doing human testing right what I'm asking is when it says this is safer than that They mean this is safer than that for humans from the test results that they have done from test results from on animals on animals, correct Yeah, when you put together an msds for a for a product At herbicide it's going to be for human interaction, right? And so that's set up and so we don't know We may we may have something that's safer than Then something else for humans as well as the test can tell us But we don't know for example if it's safer for bees or not Well, there are some studies for example on the neonicotinoids We know that that has a stronger impact on bees than some of the other Pesticides that might be out there. So there have been studies for certain animals and certain for certain products I don't think we're questioning at all Just to be clear. I'm not questioning at all the ban on glyphocytes or neonics But my question is how do I decide Whether a particular synthetic is safer than a particular organic and in some of the Material safety statements, what's that called? It's four letters the msds in some of the msds It looks like some of the synthetics are safer than some of the organics and I'm trying to evaluate that result I don't want to say all synthetics are okay I want to say only use synthetics when they are safer than the alternative organic And I'm trying to understand what safer means So, um, I'm gonna I'm gonna put out a quick a quick response and then we may have to bring some more details back As we come in the future There are some differences between Not only just in the synthetic world, but also in the organic world and then between the two As we mentioned early on organics tend to be burn-oriented style um chemicals and synthetics Are not they they have a different chemical process that they utilize whatever the application or the The end product that you're trying to eliminate And and they're you know, whether there's more nitrogen or or or other chemicals in that and that'll the chemical balance will change What we know is that Some of those organics are more hazardous to humans, especially from the applicator standpoint They have to be more cognizant of the personal protective equipment because it will result in burns to their body Whereas some of the synthetics don't require as significant of personal protective equipment to do the applications And through the certification process our professional applicators understand by reading the labels What level of protection they need to take and in turn they do their best to to Utilize the material descriptions as to how to protect the public and other Animals from interacting with that product Thank you. I would be interested in hearing back How we make a statement like use the safest option And I'd like to understand the time frame of the safety And the extent how we do how we make that judgment Because i'm hesitant to say Absolutely no x When y might not be better, but y might be better if you have a professional applicator who knows what they're doing in the long run I'm going to move on but i'm looking forward to hearing comments on that Um, I'm not hearing alternate planning planting as a strategy for Shouldering outweeds. You sort of mentioned the turf I've seen roses used. I've seen ivy used. I've seen other ground cover choices Um, at what point do we investigate what other ground cover choices we should be making instead of the ground cover or non ground cover We're using and so that may be one of the strategies that we that we come back and discuss Is the potential to do ground cover now there is an investment that and then needs to happen in order to make that And then there is a management protocol for each of those products as well and so so it's There is no there is no easy option. Trust me if it's come to us. We know it isn't easy So I understand that but I am feeling that it is missing in the presentation and would very much like More detail on alternate ground cover methods to use to come back to us Happy to um, particularly in medians and places where we're thinking of using things that Are less pleasant to our community Um, I'm also interested in having more details on what we would need if we wanted to increase mechanical means So I know that we recently removed some groundskeeper positions from our budget Over my personal objections because I think groundkeepers give us lots of benefits including Eyes on the parks, but one of the benefits would be mechanical means as well So I see a bone a double payoff for having more people in the park pulling weeds So with the concern that the current contracts expiring at the end of this week We have done some evaluation on what it would take for our staff to pick up at least the minimum level of effort necessary Um to maintain a safe world to maintain a safe Park space or roadway space and so we do have that that data that we'd be happy to share With you if you so desire I would like to see it. Thank you Before I would make a statement about level I would want a matrix of locations so that I could say 70 percent might be needed at the ballpark But I might be happy with zero percent at some other location So um in Asking a question back to you in this regard. It's uh with over a thousand acres of property that we have to manage Generic matrix meeting General categorizing general categories because if you feel that there is a specific location that needs to be pulled out separately I would be willing to to entertain that but I think we can't just say We want 70 percent or we want 25 percent without having at least some generic idea that we're talking about So i'm going to urge council to think of that as a long-term goal because we have short-term goals And we'd be happy to entertain that but i'm not sure how we're going to get organized to do address the thousand spaces We need to start down this pathway because it's absent of that happy happy to get into that conversation But that's a whole that's what this team is starting to do about re looking at these processes But it we won't have that delivered in the next quarter. I just want to be realistic But we already are talking about ball fields Places where children and dogs are Medians and back-ons You know, we already have this conversation going but we don't have it written in one place so that we can clearly say Yes, 70 50 25 and we're gonna we're gonna strive to get there in general categories But but it is going to still need some general statements till we can start and then Fine from there. We're not going to be able to get specific to each park We're going to need some commitment to the category level and that's what staff will bring back Is it possible for us? I notice that heelsburg uses toot Is it possible for us based upon the agreements that we have for us to use toot money For this particularly if we need to expand mechanical means Is that something we are able to do or are we locked in we can analyze that but right now again with that's a question I would ask Can we look at page nine? and This is probably more comment many we used the word pristine when we Showed this at least at one point someone used the word pristine And I think that we have a culture change coming where we have to see that and see toxic Instead of seeing pristine And I think one of the things that we're going to need to do is to educate the public That that isn't beautiful. That's toxic And I'm wondering if we are also including some kind of public education program for that conversation So this is how we establish this public education program is setting the guidelines as I said That is artificial That includes that's why I think that's why it includes synthetic and so you're hearing that conversation That's where staff is struggling That is some of the community's expectation is pristine and you're hearing that creep into our vocabulary if you want to change that This is this is where we start to to drive to that change of what's acceptable What's our percentage that we're trying to achieve instead of pristine? Thank you. I have some comments, but I will reserve them for after the public has made theirs Mr. Alvarez, do you have questions? Thank you, mayor. Jason you during your presentation you shared with us some Examples range you from a hundred percent down to zero percent And so whatever we land I'm Will that be a goal or a standard meaning we Referring to page nine slide nine for example beautiful park. So Because if we chose 75 percent doesn't mean we're going to let that go to 75 percent We're trying to maintain what we have right But at the same time trying to build everything else that's below over time up to that Minimum standard that we're trying to find so the minimum doesn't mean that everything's going to be looking like that That's just the minimum. We're trying not to let things go below that That's correct. Okay, that would be our performance metric is to try to maintain Each of the locations designated to that performance metric that council describes for me as the target Right and and again having though having that threshold if you will there will be some variations because I get it with ballparks It's it's a place where you there's there's a game going on there There's certain expectations about an appropriate field soccer all these things are important The other question is what is a correlation between Weeds and trash Because again from my perspective in an urban area where I see a lot of tall weeds etc That's where I see the trash right So and and that goes to the fence line the sidewalks and all this where we have this High we build up is that a tendency that we see is that's where the trash build up occurs Yeah, unfortunately, I don't have I've got no study that describes for me a direct correlation between them I certainly feel like I understand the statement that you're making is the less camped the location is the more likely it is for other products to show up in that space but I I couldn't say with any study or Empirical evaluation that that there's a Actual direct correlation. Yeah, and I know we see I know dean probably sees it on his regular rounds as far as those correlations And in some places where we have an excess amount of high weeds It's not just the trash then it's the couch and everything else that starts to accumulate in certain areas Uh, but again, I think there is a correlation there because from my experience walking That that's where I find the trash is hidden in the weeds and my point is that it makes it more difficult to pick up the trash when it's embedded in weeds and Buries everything else. So I have other comments, but I'll wait till the comment period. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Vice mayor Mr. Mayor and I'd also be curious to see if Areas that have fewer weeds don't catch as much trash before it gets into the waterways. So it might Who knows? Yeah, there's uh an implied in the the conversation or at least in the way that the presentation has been laid out so far Uh, that the $550,000 is the amount that we're going to go with Obviously, we haven't set our budget going forward Uh one What does the process look like going forward in getting a new contract? Is that a full rfp or is it uh A reauthorization for the 12th time and two Will there be a room in the next budget conversation for us to talk about compensation level? So I I can assure you that the $550,000 is not the target moving forward It is well below any expected target regardless of the level of performance that we're That we're going to be moving towards the feedback from the current contractors and absolutely unsustainable Funding level for the level of service that is implied in the contract and so They're they were happy to See the contract come to an end and rebid with a new contract um the Landscaping program has already been released for for a proposal that we've received three different proposals We'll be describing that in more detail on the first Within the proposals there are a series of options that exist within there and the question That the reason we're here is just try to understand What type of options we ultimately come and present to council? and so We're at that point in the game where we've got contractors that have already given us their pricing lists We've asked them to develop performance metrics and how they're going to describe and self manage the products that they Claim that they can obtain and then We will make a final selection and make recommendations and there may be more than one recommendation that comes to council There may be an alternate a and an alternate b depending upon the specifics of the feedback we see today But that will be the the discussion that we're going to have on october the first I would hate to delay that However, given some of the council questions and if additional questions come up, we may have to push that date off Our intent if nothing else would be to have a baseline contract that would get the turf managed because we do have uh Clubs and other activities out there that rent the fields for specific athletic purposes and Without the ability to manage and maintain those we're violating our agreement with with those customers So that is an area that that you will likely hear from us as On the first as we really believe we need to do it minimum this and we can come back with further discussion for others So, uh, so that's this that's kind of the process that we have right now And and why we're looking at trying to understand what that specific performance metric is that council's comfortable with Yeah, and I appreciate that. I look at this the same way as say public safety or other vital city services, which is We can put as many resources as we want into it to try to Have the best that we can for our city But we generally talk about what is an acceptable standard and how are we going to meet that standard? And that may or may not include at the end of this a conversation about it It's acceptable to us to use synthetics in the medians versus not acceptable to us in the parks I'd like to be able to have that room to have that conversation within the rfp. Can you give us a ballpark of Uh, how much more we are looking at? on the next contract With if we go mostly mechanical versus if we allow some use of synthetics So the feedback that we're receiving is For example an organics only program 50 weed control is about the best that we're going to be able to achieve with that at a cost of about $2.2 million or 2.3 million dollars. So about a 4.4 hundred percent increase from our current contract amount Um Synthetic use product is slightly less although not substantially less which was a little surprising to us But nonetheless Because of the cost and the cost and service level Challenges that we have under our current contract Everything just looked really big As we were starting to hear back from other agencies and and perspective bidders so We're looking at somewhere between about 1.8 million dollars and 2.2 2.3 million dollars with the lower number being a synthetic only the higher number being a in an organics only and any type of combination would somewhere fit between Okay, and that goes back to also that measure m conversation As well if we know that Even just maintaining what we have it's going to be this additional cost one one way or the other I want to make sure we keep a pin on that But just remember that that from an organic standpoint. It was at 50 weeds The synthetic was closer to 70 weeds any combination you're going to start Start at the 50 and incrementally work your way up depending upon the acreage that you use the synthetics with 70 control Not 70 we 70 we'd control. Yes. Sorry I've talked about it both ways. So I get Yes, have we also evaluated for certain other high risk areas like the medians potential liability to the city or worker impact As it is a more difficult situation for our employees to be working in From an employee standpoint, uh, we we mention it as an area of concern However, you know, we we have professional staff that do this on a daily basis And so our practices and procedures are already in place to be able to manage that Certainly the more time you put an employee out on the street Whether it's a city employee or contract employee the level of risk increases Because you're having them adjacent to live traffic for longer periods of time So shorter periods are always better In that regard that's from an employee risk standpoint not necessarily from an ipm or a A community risk And then just as a suggestion, uh, and I haven't read it myself But I do hear that marine county's ipm is pretty good as well. So you might take a look at that happy to you. Thank you Thank you. The only question I have I'm still a little confused about the budget process. So When did we learn of this or how did you can? Propose the budget that we adopted in june for the entire fiscal year We had not opened bids at that point And so we kept status quo and assumed that we would be making some level of adjustment to the budget as we move forward It's we believe that the budget implication is a little larger than we had originally anticipated. So so we We should have had this conversation with council A while ago. That's all I can I can say Mr. Mayor is that this this conversation Should have happened this past spring around the conversation. We're having today about expectation levels Thus without expectation levels. We ran into an assumption about Performance metrics when we started to get into the performance metric conversation that radically started to alter What was coming back in the contract process? So so again All I can say is this should have been a conversation that took place earlier this spring So then I would anticipate during mid-year budget adjustments that we annually have that this Whatever we come up with after you hear feedback from the council will be included in that mid-year budget adjustment There and in the formal budget adjustment, you know, again We're going to have to look at this we but we have to understand what the expectation is to to Make these kinds of decisions about where and how we bring back the appropriate budget level. Okay. Thank you Sure I wanted to ask a follow-up question from one of my colleagues questions With regard to our employees or contract employees. Have we engaged or just With our risk management department with regard to any of these conversations And is that inappropriate it seems to me we go to risk management for a number of Employee wellness program for example, I think came out of risk management. I'm just wondering if they're engaged in We always engage risk management in these conversations. Thank you Okay, we have one card on this item megan kahn Mayor schwantelman members of council. Thank you so much for having this discussion today And thank you for staff to staff and especially jason nut for stepping in I know it's a really complicated subject I have been working on this topic for the last four years And so I am always happy to provide my scientific expert opinions on Matters if anyone has any questions just to answer a few questions that came from council There are differences between chronic and acute effects of pesticides. So if you only look at acute effects You know if you get an organic pesticide on your hand versus a synthetic one, maybe the organic one it burns So you may see an immediate effect However, that pesticide will not give you a long-term chronic illness like cancer Or reproductive effects or endocrine disruption. So when staff is talking about which product is safer They're really only looking at acute effects and not the long-term chronic safety of the product So please keep that in mind when you look through the staff report As far as the question on whether there's an entity that looks at both organic and synthetic Pesticides and determines which is safer. There really is not and that's because the synthetic pesticides are the only ones that are associated with all of the long-term chronic health issues The organic pesticides are not The synthetic pesticides are also the products themselves are 95 98 Trade secret ingredients and those are not regulated at all And there's lots of speculation that the ingredients in there are more toxic than the active ingredients themselves So when you're using a synthetic product, you really really need to be careful There's just a lot of unknowns When you're looking at the safety studies often the safest quote-unquote products are the ones that are the newest And that's because we only have industry studies to look at we don't have the peer reviewed independent studies That's why we know that glyphosate is not safe because we've had decades and decades of research that shows us That it's not but for some of the newer products like lifeline We only can rely on the the industry studies which often just say that they're they're completely safe The materials do not dissipate the synthetic pesticides do not dissipate in 24 hours If you look at the back of most of the product labels that it will save several days to months And if you look at some of the independent studies that often can be a year or more We're finding glyphosate and all sorts of things like wine and consumer products So it's very obvious that the stuff is not breaking down quickly Again, the organic products, they're mostly vinegar or essential oils based and so they do become Safe for people to interact with very quickly When i'm looking through the staff report, I see that all of the problem areas that were discussed are all wood chips areas They're not lawn or turf areas And we need to remember that a lot of these areas were planted in wood chips because we were trying to save water And so I think we don't really have a weed problem The problem is really that the landscape areas in santa rosa weren't designed properly and realistically given nature Nature always fills in a blank space. And so that's what's happening in santa rosa right now I have more comments to make but I will send you all an email later. Thank you again. Thank you right Jason Can you reframe the questions? I heard you want feedback about metrics from council What other specific thing before I ask each of our council members to give you the feedback you're looking for Yes, I think the key component that i'm hoping to see back is what what do we want our landscape our parks Our roadside areas to look like what is that? That metric that we're trying to shoot for I gave you some ideas about the percentage of weed control granted weed control is a Is a single component of landscape management I dare say it's probably one of the most visible For some individuals again, it's and and to some extent that's a matter of taste of a particular individual But at some point we as an organization have to establish a commonality among all of our products Or all of our our Properties and so that's what i'm looking for is feedback From you as far as what we believe the appropriate level of of landscape management is um And if you have a strong opinion one way or the other for the use of synthetic level products versus organic products Those would be the two primary questions that I have at this point in time All right, thank you And so again the feedback you receive today will come back to the council in the form of probably this RFP or the the contract for park maintenance We will take this information and formulate We'll we'll finalize the council item for october the first And it will have either a single recommended alternative depending on how clear The council is or a couple of alternatives that give you different options Depending upon the feedback that we receive great. Thanks. Okay. Let's start now this end. Mr. All there's would you like to give your word feedback? Thank you, mayor. It's it's difficult to give a number right now as far as a threshold without knowing Everything as far as the conditions of all our parks, right? But I know we want to get there So I would look forward to a recommendation of what we want to be So we can work from there, you know, we you gave us some various Suggestions, I don't believe that anything less than 70 percent would be acceptable But if we're gonna if we're gonna say that well, why not 75, right? So I think looking at some kind of recommendation based on our capacity And what would it take to get to certain levels as far as resources, right? I think that would be important for us to consider The other thing I would look forward to is to share with us a little bit more related to trends beyond What you shared with us already with the couple of the communities that are kind of in the area What's what's what's happening within the industry? What are we moving towards as an industry? Again, we're not going to get dizzy land. Okay, and that should be our gold standard for this But I also think that we need to look at this beyond just the typical weed control It also there's so many other factors. For example, who we are as a destination And what we want to represent the people coming to visit and spend money here in Santa Rosa Which will in turn provide more resources to do what we want to do So it's not just about the weed or so many other pieces of it, you know Being a destination for outdoor sports, for example, that happens by having nice fields of play on that are You know legit as far as the rules go The other thing is Public notification about this coming our way I think the public needs to weigh in on this about their their neighborhood parks community parks, whatever it may be Is they need to know that this is happening And then the other thing as we've come to some final decisions down the road is to provide I would ask that we provide appropriate signage at the parks as far as what kinds of things are being used to control Weeds in this park and what is it? What is our goal as a community to maintain our parks? I think it'll hopefully it'll help educate the community on a regular basis to say, you know This is your park is what we're trying to do we're trying to maintain it and for your information This is what we use as far as weed control the types of methods that we use Great. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Collins Thank you So for me long-term safety comes first Um, I don't feel that I can answer with regard to a percent because we don't have I would prefer to be specific about Properties I don't feel the need to have anything greater than 70 percent anywhere But it may be that there are some properties that will need that kind of attention If we need that kind of attention, I would want to seek out what our alternatives are um But I can imagine sites where if we frequently mow That would be enough so that would be a zero percent site with lots of mowing um, so for me again safety first I want to explore us to explore the option of using toot so that we can do more Mechanical means and more appropriate ground cover using those resources um In general, I would like to see us look at more alternative landings ground covering mechanical processes We clearly I agree with my colleagues need public outreach and engagement um I'm familiar with vena valley vision, which does a really good job of helping us out on back-ons along certain parts of roadways I think garden clubs and other Neighborhood groups can be used more effectively than we're using them if we can provide explanations of why and outreach And I also think we need to outreach to the public with regard to understanding why we're doing what we're doing and why That slide isn't what we're have is a goal at least not not me um I'm going to tell a brief family story um This is a story when that balances the discussion about acute effects versus uh long-term effects My grandfather had an apple orchard and raised these They go together And I can remember conversations about whether it was a five spray year or a seven spray year on the apples We did everything with the apples. We Had apples we made applesauce. We made apple cider with the stuff you wouldn't want to know about And as a family Were exposed regularly to whatever the spray was that my grandfather chose My grandfather My uncle and my mother were all very active in the orchards all three of them In late life had Parkinson's We initially looked to see if there was something genetic And kept being told no no it's something else and traced it back to repeated exposure To the sprays that were being used in the orchard There is no conversation in my family about Acute effects nobody said oh we sprayed it made our hands raw those stories did not come down But the Parkinson's ultimately killed my grandfather my uncle and my mother So I have a lot of concern about the chronic effects of synthetics And we'll have a very difficult time being persuaded that it is safe to use any synthetic anywhere based on What happened in my own family with regard to chronic exposure? And and I'm I want to be clear that I am concerned about the safety of our employees But I think with appropriate measures they cannot burn their hands But that's very hard to avoid cancers and Parkinson's So thank you Thank you, I do appreciate that you're coming to us looking for guidelines and And the presentation was great And I know that there's other Extenuating circumstances that has kept Miss Santos and that you guys did a really great job in in lieu of her presence A couple of issues come up for me with this and none of them are intended to be Obstructionist but the one is that having this hearing at 10 30 in the morning Is not a great opportunity to get a robust public engagement in one of our most publicly utilized services outside of water consumption in the city of santa rosa and road use I don't know what what is a more public good than our parks in our public spaces so That we only had one public comment card is concerning to me and and has me Challenge to give direction The other thing is that you know, we do and I've heard my colleagues say this We do have a potential culture shift and we have to balance that You know, we're not pleasant feel we're not disneyland, but we do want to make sure that our spaces are usable and that they don't impede The use of them and the attraction to for both our residents and for our visitors That haven't been said I Haven't seen any data that would allow me to give you really clear direction And I'm I'm really sorry what I can say is that we should have robust public engagement We should have clear explanation to the public of what we do We should not belabor the decision too much. We should have you know It broken down by let's say medians in roadways Public use parks, you know a few different categories Doesn't have to mean that every of our thousand different parcels fits into one of them But if you can bring me three to five Various categories that would be extremely helpful. The other thing is that I cannot direct you to use Synthetics without good research I don't believe that people were using glyphosphates or neonicotinoids thinking that they were going to make people Or animals or ecosystems collapse So that having been said I'm going to stick with the original council direction in august to go to all organic I'm fine with Less than a hundred percent. I'm fine with a much lower percent of Weed abatement Um, whether it's 50 or 70 percent as long as it's not disproportionately Unabated in lower income areas and doesn't give our children who most need access to these parks You know a less Enjoyable or safe experience and finally safety for both our employees our contractors is really important But also broader safety issues Well, um in terms of not just the safety of the products but the safety of the use And any potential fire risks, which was not touched on of having Unabated weeds, which is something that I'd like to hear about in the future So again apologies for not being very clear with you on the exact number, but let's say for me It's whatever we need to do to get more information and I use synthetics. I'm okay with weeds while we figure this out I'm not okay with poisoning our environment While we figure it out Thank you tibbets Uh 70 weed controls, okay No synthetics use only organics And um, we are going to hear about it from the public. I hear about this from a lot of the aesthetics. It's a big issue Uh, I think I expect that to ramp up and we as a council should expect to hear more about that Uh, I would just encourage you looking forward with the additional supplemental measure end funds that we're going to have to strongly consider More mechanical use of weed abatement through seasonal employment opportunities And hopefully for people experiencing homelessness. Thanks, jason Thank you, mr. Rice mayor So jason just quick as a point of clarification when you said 50% is the best we could get with the organics. Do you mean in In totality or do you mean at the current funding level or the current anticipated funding level? Based on the conversations that we've had with other agencies and with Service providers or contractors. What we've learned is that 50% is one of the best possible outcomes for the use of only organics That doesn't mean that you can't achieve higher as we found with the contractor that's working with water They're using all mechanical means what it does mean is the increased Personal labor costs is going to go up. So so the the price is going to increase substantially Potentially as much as you know, 20 or 30 percent. So By by trying to use more labor So those are just things that that We've heard is that 50 percent is the is seems to be the target when you talk organics But if you if we need higher it'll increase the amount of of labor that has to go in All right. Thank you. Yeah, for me, there's Sort of an interesting juxtaposition here where I think everybody at the dais wants to make sure that our parks and our public spaces are Usable and for some folks that means aesthetically we need to maintain probably about the 70 percent or better And for others it means that we need to make sure that we are Not using synthetic herbicides and not putting their children at risk So it is an interesting conversation. I'd be interested in seeing come back to the council A conversation that to show us what you think it would take for us to do a 70 percent Or better in our neighborhood and community parks in particular Using the organics and also what you think it would cost using synthetics I think was it about 3.1 million for measure m funds We receive about 1.9 million annually from measure m. Okay Yep, and so I think that that'll also be wrapped up into that conversation as well that We have this Initial conversation where we said it might be that those funds are best utilized Improving the conditions at our current parks and not necessarily building new ones And I think that that's going to be a very real conversation if we're talking about how we meet the 70 percent weed control While also still using the organic herbicides Along with councilmember combs. I am interested in breaking this up into different areas I think that the conversation about how we treat our parks is going to be much different than how we treat our medians Which are a higher risk for our employees as well So i'm interested in the 70 percent in those buckets But then also let's break it out and have specific categories for us to discuss parks schools medians Those sorts of things Mr. Mayor before you go I left something off when I was talking about trends just very quickly When I was talking about trends the other piece was a research but more of the research as it applies to We control itself where it's going of things that are being tested out there This will not be the last time we have a conversation like this. So I assume research continues and developing new ways and means of controlling Weeds and it may not be chemical organic or otherwise, but Maybe if you whatever you have share that with us, we have a better standard Where where is the industry moving in some of these areas? We'll we'll look into that and bring that back So thank you again for this jason. So um what i'm interested Actually the 90 percent level It sounds hard for me yet We want to be 70 to me um we can strive for better as I mentioned with the measure m conversations I would love for us to be known the city santa rosa known for the quality of our parks And I grew some of my colleagues. Maybe the medians are a different item to discuss But for our parks, I really want us to be known for that And so if that's 90 percent and again, I'm not interested at all in any synthetic materials So how would we achieve 90 percent and I would need to see what would that cost be versus if we decide the 70 Metric what would that cost be because it's rather difficult now to say okay If that's the the goal that we're all striving for we want to be known for the best parks in northern california If that's that 90 level there is a cost there and again I as I mentioned with the measure m discussions believe That's where we should be using the majority of those funds to make sure the quality of our parks is that raises that level But again What i'm hearing you say 1.9 million especially if we want to rebuild the parks damaged by the fire There's probably not enough at least this year, but that would be I think that goal I want to get I'm not comfortable with the 50 percent level quite frankly even a 70 percent. I think we can do better than that So with that, thank you get the information. Did you need any clarification? I I believe I have enough information to be able to formulate our discussion on the first great. Thank you very much Okay, we're going to adjourn adjourn this meeting and we'll take a brief 10 minute recess as we transition to our regular council meeting Are we there? We're there We'll call the regular City council meeting on september 24th to order madam city clerk. We get a roll call, please Let the record show that all council members are present with the exception of council member tidbits Okay, we'll move on to item 3.1. Mr. mcguin Thank you. Item 3.1 is a study session review of proposed building and fire code adoption And presenting is jessie. Oswald our chief building official and ian heartage our assistant fire marshal Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity. Jesse Oswald chief building official So this is our second study session in front of the council and it is Not a repeat but an update on the process that we've undertaken for in general our building and fire code Adoptions coming up for january of 2020 The primary function for today is to provide that update and fire will have Uh, probably one or two specific requests for direction on some of their their code updates So again, this may look familiar. Um the background on the the codes In 2019 early this year The codes were adopted in california and in july they were actually published for california And those codes are what we are focusing on for the local jurisdiction to make amendments to To adopt for our the account for our local conditions. So that's that's the focus of our work today So again, this is a familiar slide throughout the year My colleagues and I have engaged with the sonoma county fire protection prevention officers and another organization. It's called um the Code officials group and we've had several meetings discussing codes to try and Create a uniformity throughout the region as much as possible per each jurisdiction Much of the the code language that is in base code Used to exist in numerous amendments that local agencies adopted. So the codes are Continually catching up with what local agencies wish to adopt again the collaborative effort Started with those groups that I mentioned and Some of the early conversations we had Surrounded the cw Cwwp program that is going to be coming forth with the fire districts So now we have more information that fire is going to discuss on some of the efforts we can use locally In our wild land urban interface areas And ian's going to take over from here. Thank you members of the council. I'm ian harry's assistant fire marshal senator as a fire So we we glossed over some of the goals that we were looking to achieve with our adoption This coming cycle based on experiences code updates local conditions So one of the items that we're improving on is two points of access for Future developments. We used to have a threshold of 50 dwelling units required two points. We've since lowered that To 30 so that we get multiple points of access. This is in line with the state fire marshal is recommending for developments Limiting specific flammable and hazards vegetation. This is Part in part a proposal that we have in the code adoption But we'll be finalized through the cwp in the hazard mitigation plan that comes out of that process Um with a separate vegetation management ordinance So the part that's going into the code adoption with the building standards is this vegetation restrictions within three to five feet of structures We're You know working with the north bay fpo's marin county who's been uh kind of spearheading The development of this language. We're referring to it as an ignition free zone For buildings that are sprinkled this zone is three feet surrounding the building for buildings that are not sprinkled That's a five foot ignition free zone around We'll skip over the 7a because i'll finish on that limitations on types of construction materials in the wui so in the wui some of the things that we experienced in our Firestones was cast off of building materials Due to the high winds and the convection Um Uplifts and so what we're trying to do here is limit the number of the amount of material that can be cast off of buildings and that is by prohibiting Woodshake and shingle roofs and sitings within the wui area um so The multi prong approach to this protection community wide protection is to also Require minimum class a roofings outside Of the wui area so that if our reduced number of cast off materials does get cast off We have a level protection higher than what we would normally have outside the wui area with the class a roof um I want to go go back to that just want to finish up there on the 7a upgrade because this is where our question will come to you For your input back to us and so Previously 7a only applied to new buildings being constructed 7a is the construction requirements for buildings within the wui area Reaching out to my fpo friends far and wide in the state We have a large number of agencies that are already doing what we're proposing to do here Which is any additions or alterations In the wui area would be made be to be compliant with 7a So you add 200 square foot addition to your house that 200 square foot addition Would be compliant with 7a with siding windows and such so that that portion of the house is protected It's really only one way to capture Our built environment into this home hardened You know construction and that is one bite at a time And so as people pull permits and do alterations to their homes in the wui area They would be required to comply with chapter 7a requirements We're we're we're there. That's the language we have already You know have developed in the ordinance and ready to present to you Come october 22nd the direction we're looking at is do you feel that's enough? If you don't we have a second level Of proposal for your consideration, which goes in line with a practice We already have and we see throughout the code in various areas One of which is for example within the wui area if you change out more than 50 percent of your roof Within a 12 month period of time you're required to bring that roof up to current code that whole roof okay, so You don't do the whole thing But at a certain point you hit a trigger that's going to make you do the whole thing So our we have historically had a requirement for Substantial improvements or remodels that trigger sprinklers into the buildings. This is our existing sprinkler ordinance We do it in residential commercial projects across the board we have Put a proposal together that would trigger Full building compliance with 7a if you trigger a substantial improvement meaning you're improving more than 50 percent of the building Which would then say you now have to do the rest of the building in in that project or in that permit Everybody knows building to 7a has an additional increase in cost associated depending on the scope of work That scope of work Could incur up to a 30 additional cost in you know in that construction so We're not sure that's where we need to go that is the direction we're looking From you as to whether you think Additions and alterations one by at a time as we go along Is sufficient for our community or if this significant improvement trigger Which we would be one of the first agencies in the northern california area to do something like this That comes with a cost impact So that's that's the question back to the council on that we can go to the next one now And that that'll bring us back to uh chief building official as well So with that we did discuss that this may be a like a likely pausing Point to discuss the fire code aspects and the the home hardening prior to getting into the remainder of the codes which really are going to be some information you've seen on the Additional emergency housing measures that we've discussed before and then the reach code So if it pleases the council, we'd like to discuss the the fire elements and then move forward past that great Council questions about that first part of this presentation. Mr. Weiss mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor So if you could go back and talk a little bit about that 7a section just a little bit So currently as folks rebuild their homes, they're having to rebuild their homes up to the 7a code Is that correct? Correct all of our rebuild homes that are pulling building permits to rebuild are being rebuilt to 7a So we are going to have a large swath of the community up there that is built to the home hardening Criteria that wasn't up there before Do we have any idea? So when was 7a passed? 2008 was the first year it was enforced here in state of california So in our wooey do we know how many homes currently were built before that was passed that also survived the fire That survived. Well, I can tell you up in the fountain grove area within our wooey area We were approximately 2 of the homes that were built to 7a criteria between 2008 2017 sorry, let me let me rephrase because It seems like we're talking about a very narrow Amount of homes that are both in the wild and urban interface Were built prior to 7a passing and were not impacted by the wild fire So how many homes are we actually talking about that would fall into this section where if they were to to a Fix over 50 of their home. They'd have to come up to to full compliance We have 12,000 Approximately 12,000 homes So within the entire wooey area, which is roughly 30 35 percent of our community We have worked with gis and we're just about 12,000 homes within those areas So with respect to your question We see very few Homes that would meet that criteria as far as permitting goes where they're going to exceed 50 percent Of their square footage or a cost estimate for a project within these areas So with discussions with the chief building official We anticipate this to be a very low number that we would see move forward for review But it is an opportunity for us that we've heard from council We would like to take steps to address this built environment Because that's going to be our only opportunity Because we are dealing with predominantly a built environment within our community located within this area of homes that do not comply With the wild environment interface requirements for building construction Okay, thank you Okay, do we want to take it? If I could just do a quick recess So let's just break for about five minutes and then we'll come right back Okay, we're going to reconvene the meeting. Madam city attorney. Could you update all of us on about some Sure status changes sure Um There are two council members that own property within the wui area What is being discussed as new regulations that are will be applicable only within the wui area Therefore those two members council members Have a financial potential financial interest in how the regulations get shaped Um There we were looking at the numbers the public generally exception does not appear to apply There appears to be less than a quarter percent 25 percent of the Homes in properties in Santa Rosa are within the wui area And therefore I do recommend that both council member Fleming and council member Tibbetts Um recused themselves from the discussion on the wui regulations Thank you for that clarification So if you two would like to And for the members of the public the way we're going to do this presentation So we'll stop here. We've received the presentation on this I'll solicit any other questions from council then I will have two public comment periods The first public comment period will be on that first part of the presentation So if you do want to make comments on what you have heard from that portion of the presentation You can make a public comment Then we'll give our feedback to staff once we're done with that part of the presentation Then we'll invite the two council members back to finish your presentation You'll have another opportunity To do public comment on that portion of the presentation and then the entire council will give feedback to staff Does that make sense for all council members and as the doors close so Council are there any additional Questions over that portion of the presentation miss combs Thank you and thank you for bringing this forward to us. I appreciate it I have a strong interest in how we do our codes I have a question about the two points of access I appreciate you decreasing the number from 50 to 30. I think that's a wise decision I have a question about I'm thinking about some of the roadways where both points of access would essentially lead to the same road Um, and so I'm asking how is it that you're making the determination about the two points of access being separate and providing sufficient evacuation So with the two points of access when two points of access are required There is a remoteness requirement for those two points of access and that would be One half the overall distance that the area served Now those two access may come back to the same roadway But that roadway is then also supposed to have two points to it So for example, and you're probably thinking of fountain grove parkway It comes back to it. But fountain grove is a main arterial roadway And has the ability to move a fair amount of vehicles All of this subdivision development does get a traffic study, you know Report done to it to validate the capabilities of the roadways So the fact that we're requiring multiple points of access sooner than we ever have before Is going to help disperse That impact onto any singular roadway So if the two points of access go to a road that then only has one point of access to Fountain grove is that an acceptable answer? No, okay, so it has to correct Fully the whole route fully points of access. Thank you. I appreciate that I remember the building exiting is half the diagonal distance. So I'm guessing very very similar concept. Okay And I think we're talking about how to make 7a in some way retroactive In some way to get at the existing buildings that have Shake roofing material or siding Within our wooey. Do we have That in our existing wooey Yes, okay, and um The choices that i'm hearing are uh The nibbling choice little little bites and the other choice i'm hearing is if it's significant then the whole building Correct, I've also heard a third option that I was told was in use but do not have an example in front of me Of when the property is sold That it has to be modified at time of sale um, is that is that something that you've seen at all and Did you explore that at all? Simply not look at it or eliminate it for a particular reason We we didn't in this process because this process is a building standard Adoption and just the sale of a property doesn't invoke any building standard requirements. Okay um Okay, and I I'll listen to the public but I have an inclination um I'm looking at the And I'm not sure if this is the point or if it's the previous the next conversation I'm looking at the fire hazard planning general plan technical advice series From may of 2015 and I think I I told you I'd be looking at this And there is a recommendation here. Thank you. There is a recommendation here To establish certain policies And I don't know if these policies would go under this section or not For example, one of the policies specifies ensuring access and availability of water supply in case of wildfire And I know that we ensure water supply and capacity For typical fires There's a difference though if we're doing it in case of wildfire. Would that be in this section since it would apply to the wui? The the state already incorporates Multiple water supply Standards, so we have the the cfc requirements that we adopt through appendix bnc through chapter 5 And in that they also reference nfpa 1142, which is specific to wildfire protection And then there's the title 14 fire safe standards, which also have water supply requirements in All of which our local ordinance already requires Higher water supplies than both title 14 nfpa 1142 and title 24 water supply requirements But I think we experienced that we didn't have enough water So i'm wondering if we If we need to be looking at whether we're constructing in an area where we even with those standards don't Don't aren't able I think as the code's applied to specific projects as they come in We have water supply requirements are up to three times as much as the state or any other regulation we require We hear your concerns But I think what you're discussing is not a building standard requirement But a master water plan requirement outside of the scope of this adoption Okay, then I will indicate to staff that I have a strong interest in a master water plan requirement That matches our needs for wildfire because the state building codes and fire codes Water requirements have not been sufficient to meet our needs I also note that there is a policy recommendation in this document that is avoid Approving avoid where feasible approving new development in areas subject to wildfire risk And uh, I'm interested in having staff bring back to us Planning document policies that recognize that we need to take any An aggressive approach to not increasing The hazard in this area And I appreciate that that might not be part of 7a Correct, and I think that that discussion will come up and we are starting the general plan process Which will address land use citywide that that conversation really concerns me that we should mitigate before we harden I understand hardening, but I think we need to mitigate first And i'm not seeing the mitigation coming forward Let me check one more thing if you don't mind giving me a section This this document also recommends looking at the emergency response time as a Um A method for calling for more stringent mitigation measures In other words if something is very close to the fire station It may not have to build at the same hardness level as something that's much harder to get to or within Outside of the five minute response time Did we look at that at all? For our we We took a different approach for our standards of cover. We have minimum requirements For our local response area, which are higher than the national standard And in lieu of having varying degrees of construction requirements throughout Already a high-risk area as identified in the wui We've we've we've adopted the philosophy that everything should meet the most stringent requirements within the wui area okay, so Whether you're close to a fire station or further away your standard is the same But that's because you're using the highest standard available correct. Okay. Thank you. That's an excellent answer and I appreciate it Any additional questions I had one question when you talk about the 7a the significant improvement trigger And I I think I heard you say more than 50 percent then might apply to the whole building who determines 50 percent I would think um some construction product. How do you equate that? Who makes that determination that it is 50 percent? The determination has been typically in conjunction both building official and code official Historically, we've only really looked at it using it for the trigger of retroactively installing sprinklers, which has been the determined under the determination of the fire code official We have standardized uh, how we look at that through working with the building official utilizing similar approaches within the building codes as it relates to um American disability acts upgrades, you know when you hit certain square footages amounts Thresholds to trigger When you only have to do a portion or when you have to do the whole thing and that's the same approach We took this significant improvement or remodel triggers So 50 percent is a fairly common trigger throughout the building standards for significant uh bringing a building up to full code And so within the industry it's Again, I haven't done 50 improvement of my house before so but that's very understood. So it's a it's a semi You know, it's it's where the the codes have identified a significant remodel improvement Uh threshold again the number of homes that we see hit this are very few So the impact will be to few but the benefit could be great and you know We've presented, you know the additions and alterations since the first You know and what we were hearing was feedback that We need more. So this was just a proposal to put in front of you for consideration It's not necessarily our recommendation. It's We've heard you want more and here's more. Okay. Thank you. There's no additional questions Is there anyone any members of the public who would like to comment on this portion of the presentation? And I've got several cards, but I think most of them are further reach codes. Not what we've just heard Please debba Please identify yourself Is it on there you okay? Thank you. Thank you very much debba taveras Having been over a 30 year developer in southern california And certainly also being in the wooey um The concern that I see with the enormity of our housing problem Is the convergence of policies That are incrementally being imposed upon the public without they're really realizing the enormity of the convergence That is in place right now And I do see Triggering remodeling. I've been I've seen that over the years with our construction That is going to eliminate rebuilding remodeling people's investments into their homes It's going to reduce the size of homes. It's going to reduce the availability of homes And it's going to drive up the costs enormously, which will reduce housing Also, it's going to cost homeowners with the climate action plans that have already been adopted That you're working incrementally to put teeth in to require retrofitting across the board For all existing housing in other words retrofitting all existing housing And that's my biggest concern because this incremental bit by bit approach of Extracting tremendous amounts of monies out of homeowners and renters pockets alike Because if homeowners or have a rental cap And they're being imposed to reach these reach codes and all of the requirements To meet those reach codes with rental caps And then increase costs. We've done some estimates on reaching the codes Across the board with relationship to the climate action plans We're looking anywhere between 20 and 50 thousand dollars per home and per apartment And that's enormous when you think about the fact that the most of the majority of the public is unaware of this So I think in fairness and in Clarification and and Being transparent I think you need to talk about the climate action plans that you've adopted a number of years ago And go over the intention of those plans to reduce to meet your required goals of reducing the greenhouse gas emissions So I think that what would occur if you were transparent fully is we would not have the number of rebuilds We would have a far greater reduction in housing available To all levels homeowners that can't afford to buy and tenants and others that need housing This is what is occurring And it's a drop by drop And we see it because our team reads the plans having been builders We're accustomed to planning and building codes and ordinances and plans and it's not a foreign language to us So therefore we've read them We've been putting out information and warnings Which have been failed to be done at your level? So I would ask that you you listen to what I have to say Thank you. Thank you. Would anyone else like to comment on this portion of the presentation? Seeing no one else rise Ian or Jesse, would you like to reframe what feedback you want from the remaining members of council and we'll get that feedback to you As it relates to the 7a, you know, we we've presented the addition and alterations from the first study session to comply with 7a This is pretty much the standard through the north bay area where we have a lot of wooey The only direction we're asking is do you think that's enough? And if not, do you want more and we provide an additional step? That's it Great. Thank you. Ms. Collins. We'll start with you Just as a point of clarification if it doesn't meet the 50 percent rule We would still be enacting if we chose That new construction at new additions have to meet That is correct. That's what we presented the first time around at least plan to present on the 22nd In my own opinion, I think the 50 percent rule is very reasonable. Um, I I think it's Reaching a bit for us to I mean, I feel a little bit less if we should go further Because I don't think we should be allowing shake roofs Anywhere in the high fire hazard area period we but I don't see it as politically possible To ask people to change their roofing out for example at time of sale So I think the 50 percent rule is an excellent rule and I appreciate you bringing that offer that available to us Um, I also want to thank you for the two points of access because the The safety address is really important. I will look forward to hearing how we will be doing enforcement on some of these items Thank you Mr. Olvarez I'm good with what you brought forward to us today Mr. Sorry I agree with councilmember olivares And vice mayor rogers and I agree with both of them as well And it it actually reminds me of that old adage about if you keep changing the parts on a ship at what point does it become a new ship And I think that's what we're trying to do with the will we and trying to protect people as homes are upgraded And I too I think the 70 standard is sufficient at this point Okay, so we're already transitioned to the next portion. Could uh, someone get our two council members Invite them back Mr. Oswald, please continue okay, uh So the the beginning of the next portion Starts out with the emergency housing requirements that we have discussed a couple times over the last year and a half or so and what it essentially does the hcd housing and community development state of california department provided These emergency measures back in 2018 To allow local jurisdictions to utilize them and adopt them locally to Provide baseline minimum criteria for emergency housing and it and it ranges from it does include certain items like tents or Sleeping under the stars so to speak it it allows for jurisdictions to have that baseline So we proposed on the first Visit we had our first study session To adopt these and we are proposing to go ahead and adopt these and it does help the local jurisdictions to have that baseline So that if there's more discussion on that i'm certainly glad to hear it But it is straightforward and it does give us a very good tool here locally as in our jurisdiction So moving on The the next portion gets into our reach codes This is a highlight showing The the overall body of work for the code adoptions and this are all electric reach codes As we've been directed by the council To pursue that adoption We want to bring an update to that process and where we've where we've come from the last time we met We've also had our individual climate action subcommittee meeting and the previous Council study session So here is uh These are some of the kind of highlight items that we are going to get in the base code adoption As opposed to the reach code So our base code adoption is going to include these these fairly significant increases in efficiencies The lighting efficiencies you won't find an incandescent bulb in a new house going forward If you do it would be probably a novelty And or decorative It will be more than difficult to build any new home with anything less than two by six exterior walls Up and up and through this current code code cycle You can build uh two by four exterior wall construction, but it takes a different method to show compliance with the energy code Doors and window or windows have always been addressed with the energy code now It's doors which have never been included. It's a pretty interesting aspect of it There are some specific Quality type inspections that will be required on all new construction They're calling it this qii quality insulation inspection. Believe it or not insulation improperly installed or Not maintained shortly after Installation Provides some losses in energy efficiencies. So they've implemented a specific inspection just for that A photovoltaic solar systems as we know them will be required on all new what we're calling low rise residential That's a term you'll hear frequently this low rise residential is any residential structure Three stories or below and that includes anything you can imagine underneath that which is the triplexes the fourplexes the duplexes And an apartment building That is three stories or lower And natural gas is included in the base code This uh slide was presented before and it's been provided by the california energy commission which highlights some of the The new upcoming base code requirements higher demand efficiencies on HVAC units water heaters Again, solar photovoltaic systems will be required increased in indoor air quality and efficiency Of air and the envelope efficiencies are significantly increased and again this slide is from the california energy commission Showing from their calculation a 19 thousand dollar savings over a 30-year mortgage with an initial cost of construction of $9,500 So here is when we get into what we have have adopted locally is the the the phrase of an all-electric reach code And again from direction of council. This was the the pathway. We've chosen. We've we've partnered with Bay Area regional energy network Sonoma clean power and the regional climate protection agency to team with not only this jurisdiction But they've done work throughout the greater bay area and other areas in california to bring the data forward for this code adoption And at the bottom of the page as you can see we have our wonderful All-electric page here with the city of santa rosa that we continue to update information on So here is a little more extension of this reach code We have our base code that we discussed has fairly significant increases in efficiencies that are coming. Anyway, this reach code it is Termed reach as we're reaching past the base code and the primary Function of this this forum and several other forums is to To give the opportunity for the public and the council to hear what this really means So that as we've discussed before these codes base codes are adopted and and reviewed in this manner every three years I can tell you this year has been more significant than most other i've heard of and here we have a list of cities and counties that are interested have shown interest In pursuing some form of reach code. We don't have specifically those that may be Wanting to do an all-electric only that all of these these jurisdictions are looking at some some form of a reach code So santa rosa is certainly not Out in front on the on our own anyway one of the primary Requirements for adopting a code that is above the base Energy code in in the state of california is what's called a cost effect in this study This was performed and we do have a copy of it available on our website It's a quite long 120 or so page document That brought forward these numbers as baseline From the the research that the entities did and these are What we what we would call or considered baseline Averages not specifically for every specific area Individually so these are the costs that the california energy commission has accepted in in the cost cost effectiveness study and Part of that study is is only about dollars This information provides What our potential 2016 base energy code brought us in Emissions savings in reductions 2019 base code with gas and electric That is proposed Then we have the 2019 code that is proposed With some higher efficiencies Then the final red line is your 2019 code with the electric only reach option So you can see the the change Drastic change in any of these options across the board These again, we mentioned some of the opportunities that we've brought this out to the public and in front of the council or and or subcommittees there are There's one or two other meetings that is missing here We had a study session early on in july, I believe and there was one more prior to the North coast builders exchange workshop Some of the information i'm going to be be providing we didn't have time to get into a report We had a this meeting that was shown on last thursday the 19th And I i'll go over some of the information that we received from that and we'll make sure that gets in the record Proposed after this meeting our next time to to discuss is going to be the actual first reading of the ordinance Taking the information we've learned today from the council We will finalize our draft ordinances work with our city attorneys and have those prepared for that October 22nd if all goes well then then we pursue that November 19th for that final reading to get our codes adopted in the proper amount of time for january 1st 2020 So in conclusion, I won't read the whole slide We've we've worked through this process with numerous stakeholders The council and the subcommittees Our counterparts in the industry as far as code regulatory bodies I I can say from my perspective first time as a building official doing this It's been really refreshing to see the engagement of the jurisdictions It's it's more than I've ever recalled it happening and and the jurisdictions themselves also Are all recognizing it when we when we do get together and discuss it I want to add some of the information that we did learn that I wanted to bring forward and then we'll get it into the record from that The 19th last Thursday meeting and we had a large amount of comments that came forward and we tried to group them And I'll I'll just highlight some of the things we we heard and what what we know of them There were solar concerns some specific questions as to What if a house can't have solar put on it because it's shaded by a hillside another building the code allows for that there's an exemption already built into the code to exempt solar installation Along that solar installation exemption line governor Newsom signed AB 178 about three three weeks ago What that essentially does it's a very short bill It exempts solar installations solar photovoltaic installations in Declared emergency areas in other words our rebuilds would be exempt from installing solar panels They actually the bill is signed. They are now exempt from it if we had a requirement By proxy currently until we find out more information. We are tentatively Interpreting that is that all rebuilds will be exempt from all electric only And that's been a common themed question that would the electric All electric requirement be able to be exempt from the rebuild. So that's a tentative interpretation We're hoping to get some final word from the california energy commission Barring that that is the direction. We we believe this will go In that law that exempt solar that was signed by the governor sunsets on january 1st, january 1st 2023 Some other concerns that were brought forward or We're moving too quickly on this type of an ordinance That was brought forward in the meeting They just wanted to know how much more state level Decision making may have been Discussed on this or has it been yet? There were some concerns that although we're having stakeholder meetings that the the decisions already been made We reassured them that it hasn't this is yet another opportunity to have the council hear it And and provide us the opportunity to give you all the information necessary to make the decision Other Issues brought forward Challenge to the cost effectiveness study that the state has accepted Individuals have provided specific examples that will have Added to the record with communications with some actual local Cost estimates for work in in the same area They're question about Incentivizing as opposed to mandating and if we want we have Rachel kykendall here from Sonoma clean power to talk about some potentials for incentives And we'll give that opportunity as well health and safety concerns There were several brought up as in support of the Adoption of the all-electric only the burning of natural natural gas in homes produces The hydrocarbons in the air so that wanted some folks wanted that to be very clear that they had concerns with that Another concern was What if the electrical grid goes down and we have an all-electric home? Another Group of questions and statements were essentially that there's a lack of education on what all-electric means Some folks Feel that we could do a better job. Not just as a jurisdiction, but overall for california Other there were several statements to along the lines of can we consider other options? And I wanted to also state there were some statements provided about a couple about an environmental Analysis sequel compliance We are providing a sequel analysis that will come forward with The adoption in october And I have received and I believe the council has also received several communications both Supporting and opposing the Adoption of the all-electric only And that is I believe all I have any questions for me or Again, we do have Rachel cockendall from Cinema clean power our technical expert on the energy efficiencies Great. Thank you. And having attended that meeting last week I really do appreciate the openness and the dialogue that did go there because again, it's just a lot of information And I like the way it was facilitated the information that was raised during that meeting So questions for staff mr. Tibbets Thank you, mayor Jesse. Wow. Thank you for all the public outreach that you've done on this and I really like how you kind of brought The high-level concerns to us As somebody who wasn't there and can't be there for brown act reasons. I appreciate that. I feel like it was Plans in process you may have already addressed this and I apologize But I just want to be very clear because one of the concerns I did hear a lot about was for the people within the rebuild That if they've got an architectural design that does not show conduit running from point a to b They'd have to make that change and that could cause a delay Is that an insignificant concern? Is that a valid concern? I mean I hear that we are looking at a possibility of exemption and we're in the process of verifying that But if we couldn't exempt would that become problematic for rebuilding families? We have heard from the development community the building community that That is one of their major concerns is they already have plans maybe nearing completion of the plans Or or actually completed and haven't submitted yet. They do have that concern So from the building community, they they have voiced that is is a valid Concern how confident are we that we'll be able to exempt and is there a way to get Affirmation before the second reading of the ordinance if the council were to move forward Our goal is to have that affirmation prior to that meeting I was actually hoping to have it before today, but we haven't received it yet. Okay And I guess my only other question would be for rachel. I was curious about how Sonoma clean powers incentive programs have done on the whole So advanced energy rebuild we currently have about 250 folks who have filed an application which represents 7% of currently permitted projects We'd obviously like to bump that up and we're working on enrolling a big hoa right now We do anticipate PG&E just filed an advice letter to continue that program through next year So rebuilds would potentially be still eligible to receive the up to 17,500 We're also working on a spin-off program that would be eligible for all new construction projects So that's something we heard from developers and builders and we're actively working and should come up in our next board meeting Okay, thank you. And can you I mean, I'm sure you maybe don't know this this might be too granular it would be for anybody but You know of the total program funding how much have you Used or applied to these 250 applicants So we're a board allocated About two, sorry two million dollars over three years to six million dollars total and scp funds We've spent just about we anticipate sending down two million of that. So you're you're basically Those 250 applicants are going to consume that that fund Correct, but PG&E is looking at doing this partnership with Sonoma Clean Power again Yes, and I think part of it is it's been a really good partnership with them sort of providing the funding and us doing the The boots on the ground Intake of projects. Okay Thank you very much Other questions That's for me. Ms. Keiken Rachel. Yes. Hi. That works Hi You mentioned that you're working on a program that would incentivize future bills Can you give us any inkling of what that might look like? I can tell you what we'll bring to the board obviously Any program is subject to board approval? But we're anticipating sort of the same structure as our advanced energy rebuild program With a lower incentive level. So we're imagining $1,000 for homes that do use gas that are 20 more energy efficient than code For all electric homes that would be 3500 and then offering a kicker incentive of $1,000 for homes that install battery storage We've also heard that's obviously a very big concern with the psps events Thank you, and we look forward to hearing more about the details of that program as it is rolled out The next question I have is um, you know, you brought forward a concern that I've heard from a number of constituents around What happens if the grid goes down and perhaps not just in the psps event, but there's lots of situations that we could imagine So, you know, we can't none of us have a crystal ball, but in the future. What are we looking for? When homes are more dependent on their own production of electricity? so Most it's kind of an interesting question and a nuanced question because All new appliances whether they're gas or electric the safety features and the electronic ignition if it is a gas appliance are electric So this is really an issue That's going to affect everyone regardless of how they power their home is is how we put it We're going to be looking a lot more into battery storage and I think the question is How we provide backup power to all homes essentially regardless of how they're fueled right because I know we're mostly talking about Home hardening in the situation, but I'm imagining if I'm a homeowner with a fully electric vehicle That and which is not relying, you know, which is fully separate and then you know Maybe I don't have a generator. Do I have a backup battery? How does that work and I'm asking in part just to Have the conversation start to enter the public consciousness about that Would it be a disaster or do we have plans are we going to start implementing it? I don't expect you to have all the answers today You guys certainly have a whole lot of them This next question might be for uh, mr. Oswald I'm wondering when it comes to the solar exemptions that are coming down from the state for new builds How it would it be determined whether or not a property qualifies for that would it is it a percentage of coverage? Is it subject to whether or not they like if it were in a Wildland urban interface would it have to do with the distant, you know, should there be vegetation management? Should the trees be trimmed away? What types of things and how much could we compel a homeowner to get into a situation where they might Then not be exempt from a solar exemption They're in the base code Even if we had a reach code adopted there is inherent and it will remain in in our base code exemptions Really, it's it's founded on the amount of exposure a solar photovoltaic system receives on a on an annual basis and if The solar installers actually evaluate that for to optimize Um The efficiency of the unit so if a a home was constructed Near a larger building Near a steep hillside in an area that maybe they can't wouldn't be allowed to trim all of the trees They could qualify for that that exemption if the construction of the home is such that the asmyth Of the angles of the roof can't be accounted for in the installation of the panels That would be another measure That could exempt the home if that home was then exempted from those solar panels even for those reasons it would automatically be Potentially exempted from the all-electric only requirement And this next question is a little bit. Um, it's related and it's off topic slightly which is You know, we look at something like hansel going to solar roofs and then Stopping short of producing extra energy because phgne will not purchase Or extra energy what happens in situations where People who have solar are producing extra energy and are there opportunities in battery storage coming down the pike either through Sonoma clean power or through grid hardening where we might be able to capture that rather than disincentivizing the production of Of electricity through solar panels with technologies for storage primarily for the Smaller type units the the residential single family residential. They're there. They still are in In general fairly expensive But the technology much like photovoltaic From what we see on submittals purely from a technical aspect. They are advancing Thank you for the information. I appreciate it Miss comes Thank you mayor. Thank you for bringing this forward to us I have been equally awaiting this conversation and I think we had a sort of major climate action Just a few days ago. So I I know it's on the minds of Even our youngest people In our community If you can look at slide 13 I just want to appreciate that you have looked at the cost savings Of not having gas infrastructure And that you're showing In cost savings for doing this I appreciate that essentially we can do the environmentally correct thing and have cost savings. That's that's good to see I wonder if Sonoma clean power representative. Is it rachel? Thank you for being here Can Can let me know if there's any plan to expand incentives to include remodels for example I know quite a few people who might want to remodel a kitchen and change out a hot water heater Yeah, so we did receive a grant Almost two years ago now Ten million dollar grant we're throwing in an additional three million specifically for retrofits And our permit or fire permit is currently with city of sanarosa For opening a downtown storefront through which we'll facilitate those incentives. Okay, but yes coming, uh, hopefully Summer of next year. We'll have a downtown storefront where we'll be distributing those incentives. Okay. And so it's it won't just be new construction that's not in the Louis correct what i'm hearing is that there's also a trend to not Make this requirement for our most recent round of new construction Correct. Yeah, I'm kind of sorry for that. It seems to me that they would like to take the cost savings That's made available. I hope that we can talk with folks who are rebuilding Actively when they come in and encourage their use of the incentives plus these cost savings But i'm hearing from the governor level that We aren't going to be able to require all new construction Thank you, mr. Rogers Thank you, mr. Mayor So this is primarily a question for you. I know windsor is out in front on this having already had their first rating They almost immediately received a letter from uh from a developer Threatening to sue over sequa. I know at our subcommittee We had a brief discussion about whether or not this ordinance adoption would be subject to a full sequa document ahead of time Can you speak to that just a little bit? Actually, our office is currently reviewing what the options are and working very closely with jesse and his team okay Mr. You and you look like you wanted to jump in Yeah, i'll say now. I think just to clarify too that the state did do a sequa document for the building code So what we're looking at is what that difference is and so there there there's a discussion currently going on And we're working regionally not just santa rosa alone, but I know our attorneys are working with other cities So we'll be prepared when we come to the first reading with That either resolved or have whatever we need to bring forward to make sure that you have what you need to move Move that forward. Yeah, that was actually the second component of this question Is I see on the list of folks who are considering it santa rosa windsor healdsburg I think katadi is as well I know rcpa is discussing it Perhaps there's a way for us all to partner to have this discussion around What it actually would mean uh from a sequa perspective I think the number I heard for windsor was 150 000 to actually defend the the ordinance And so if we could work as a region, I think that that'd be a little bit more effective And and we're certainly doing that great. Thank you so much Any additional questions The one question I had I know at the climate action subcommittee We were presented a third option and was it the all electric preferred ordinance or favorable Can you explain what that option was? Or is That what the all electric preferred Was an option I honestly don't remember all the details about it, but it it incentivized in some sense the the Coated option to not put gas in but the option was still there Because I think my understanding was if they did choose to put gas yet the rest the house has to become like 15 Percent more efficient or something like that. I don't believe it was 50 So they're required to meet cal green tier one, which is about 15 percent more energy efficient And what is the name of that option? We call it we call it the all electric favored favored that was okay I knew it was preferred or favored. Okay Any additional questions for staff? All right, we have several cards on this item up first would be alima silverman followed by kevin conway Good afternoon, mr. Mayor and other council members. My name is alima silverman. I'm an architect here in santa rosa and a member of the climate action Friends of the climate action plan us green building council And the rebuild green coalition I was at the round table meeting last thursday, although I didn't speak Afterward, I wish I had spoken and To bring a balance to what most of the builders were saying about all electric With it being too hard or too expensive to do Several builders spoke to the fact that their clients didn't want all electric Uh, their clients wanted gas stoves gas fireplaces gas furnaces gas dryers I myself have been a diehard gas stove person until I tried it and I've um, I've now been converted to As soon as I can change out my stove um They also think the all electric ordinance is being shoved down their throats. That was one statement One builder asked what's the rush? Why are you in such a hurry to pass this ordinance? And after this last week the answer should be apparent Millions of people around the world last this last week marched and demonstrated the united nations had a special session We are in a climate crisis. This is a climate emergency We have to do something different We have to reduce our greenhouse gases So I can sympathize with the point of view of builders. My husband is a contractor I've been an owner contractor myself built a couple of homes But I want to add something here to the discussion something that was brought up at the round table by one of the last speakers a builder named john education Education is needed now for home builders and for home owners to understand the risks of Uh having gas in your home and the benefits of having an all electric home Yes, there will be some people who want gas in their homes just like there's still people who smoke cigarettes even though they know the risks But with education and information about the risks There will be many more homeowners that will choose to build all electric Thank you for your time and thank you to uh, mr. Goon and uh, mr. Oswald for all the work they've done on this All right. Thank you. Kevin Conway followed by diane wheeler Good afternoon. Kevin Conway with friends of the Uh climate action plan. I just want to speak briefly to the a few things But one is the cost effectiveness studies on this have been done several have been done Uh, a study funded by southern cal Edison found the initial cost savings are estimated to be in the range of three to ten thousand dollars Palo Alto study totaled the cost savings of six thousand dollars And here in Sonoma county, uh for fire survivors The incentives for going all electric can be as high as 17,500 And by the way as a lean alluded to uh 90 of the people that switched to induction cook tops say they like it better than Cooking with gas I want to also mention that wolf contracting built 14 tiny homes here in santa rosa for homeless veterans and the cost savings for not running the Gas infrastructure was 30 thousand dollars This was from john morgan who was the project manager With the Most important though is that methane is I mean natural gas is 85 percent methane and methane has a greater heat trapping effect on the atmosphere than carbon dioxide does So with the tighter envelopes that are required in new homes It's even more harmful as an indoor polluter and then when people talk about the unintended consequences of all electric reach code What we have to do is think about intentionally putting more methane into the atmosphere and talk about the intended Catastrophic consequence of putting yet more greenhouse gas into the atmosphere Uh, if someone told you that they were intentionally going to put something in your house that they knew Was harmful to your family and to the environment whether it's lead paint asbestos or methane Why would we tolerate that? PG&E supports this vice president robert kenney says From PG&E that PG&E this is a quote welcomes the opportunity to avoid investments in new gas assets That might later prove underutilized as local government and the state Work together to realize long term decarbonization objectives With all this in mind PG&E supports local government policies that promote all electric new construction When cost-effective, so I hope the council will stay the course and continue to push for an all electric reach code for our city Thank you. Thank you. Diane wheeler followed by laura niche Hi I'm going to read a letter. I'll submit it by email if I don't finish. I'll stop at three minutes This is from john sardar contractor california I'm writing today to share my experience as a general contractor and designer builder of 33 years in the north san francisco bay Counties of sonoma marin san francisco My firm has recently switched from using a combination of gas and electric appliances To all electric the high efficiency of new building envelopes and systems and the cost savings afforded by eliminating an entire outdated and volatile system From my projects has easily allowed the addition of enough solar generation in my projects to enable the buildings the building of z&e Net positive energy homes. This creates local resilience The excess energy beyond living needs Beyond living needs allows for ev charging and enables the development of zero carbon living and transportation systems the homes i'm building As a result are healthier for the owners and for the communities as they have no operational emissions from burning fossil fuels He gives information on a recent project which will be in the Which will be in the email with lots of statistics about that specific project called soul lux alpha In san francisco a six-story building with all kinds of wonderful things happening I just returned from a national builders summit in colorado where other builders shared similar projects They're developing across the usa There was a time when using gas appliances was more efficient cost effective and greener than all electric However with the recent increase of efficiencies created by induction cooking and heat pump systems for hvac water heating and drying This is no longer the case the electric grid also now has more renewable energy than ever before The costs of high efficiency electric appliances are on par with gas And eliminating the entire gas system resulted in and the savings of $8,800 per unit in his project According to the recent rmi report. That's the rocky mountain institute My experience in the field verifies this the savings goes a long way toward paying for the solar systems in order to be z&e natural gas also creates Unregulated emissions in the home and the smaller home is the worst those unchecked emissions are Creating an unhealthy indoor environment the new And continually lowering costs of solar energy storage Are allowing development to become more easily self-powered and be part of the solution to climate change Rather than an ongoing part of the problem I strongly encourage the movement to all electric infrastructure for all new buildings As well as retrofits of existing buildings. He'd be happy to tour his projects with you. Thank you. Thank you Laura niche followed by matt taylor Hi, i'm lauren niche i'm the executive director of 350 bay area and this is climate strike week Kicked off on friday by mostly young people all over the world asking for us to act aggressively on climate So i just wanted to frame my comments with saying we are working through the list Of the least we can do this is literally the least we can do and it all starts adding up And santa rosa is not at the forefront of this. We're not at the tip of the spear But I would like to think that sustainable sonoma Jurisdictions would be at least slightly behind the tip of the spear. So just echoing a lot of other people All electric homes are cheaper up front and this is supported by numerous studies that have been Bandied about including the rocky mountain institute California department of buildings and standards the air district and the nrdc and southern california edison All saying that it's less even up to 25 000 less per home They're also cheaper to operate and I just want to keep bringing that to the forefront If you have solar panels on your rooftop and you have an all-electric home Then your operating costs are minimal and you get to the point where the payback on your solar panels Which is not included in this what we're talking about this reach code, but is Once your payback is over your your energy is virtually free So the other thing is that in order for california to meet its emissions reductions goals They will have to shut down the natural gas infrastructure for the most part So now we're just talking about not adding to it And then we're going to have the much more difficult conversation probably not here about how to reduce that Also, all electric homes Are cleaner and more comfortable according to many other studies So When you have pgd standing up and testifying for an all-electric reach code in another jurisdiction saying that they think this is the right thing to do I think that should be a very serious consideration as well. Thank you very much. Thank you Matt taylor followed by debba Good afternoon. Mayor schweildham City council members and the staff city staff and members of the public My name is matt taylor lead designer with feral faber and associates architecture and planning i'm here to represent Both future homeowners and what would be our future clients as they don't have a voice here In this city action And i'm here also to discuss some relevant info regarding this all electric reach code Um since the fire in 2017 our firm has designed over 300 homes here locally Uh a major portion of those in an effort with the rebuild And of those homes about 95 of them have um Gas ranges and about 97 of them that we've designed have gas fireplaces Some of them also have exterior outdoor kitchens barbecues and that sort of thing that they like to have plumbed in with the natural gas The couple things i wanted to mention today was um The state exemption that jesse had mentioned and encouraging the the city council to look into that Exempting the fire rebuild properties as they once had many of them once had those um natural gas appliances and To exempt them now on january 2020 I believe is not fair for them So something to consider there One other thing is the possibility of phasing in or or providing incentives to these homeowners future homeowners to when they're building a home To encourage them to go all electric without requiring them to go all electric Some of the things that we're seeing people are more willing to give on is Maybe a gas water heater exchanging that out for all electric looking at electric heat pump Mechanical heating in the homes and also even electric dryers over giving up their gas fireplace and or cooktop So a couple things to consider there and I I do want to thank the city staff For all your work on this and and encouragement and working with the local building community as well. Thank you Thank you. Deborah followed by brian ling Thank you very much. Deborah taveras was stop the crime net I'd first like to encourage everyone to go to our website stop the crime net go to our menu And then to our video youtube channel where I was an invited guest speaker in london several months ago I cover much of what the original intent with the smart meter grid deployment was globally As well as the smart meter water grid that is being deployed globally as well Sadly, uh, our kids are being traumatized in skews They're not being taught what john f kennedy was telling us when he gave that monumental speech Just shortly before he was assassinated about the monolithic and ruthless conspiracy Nor has anyone read the report from iron mountain I cannot underscore Reading the report from iron mountain more highly What we see Is a predatory system run by roth child, which is also pgne as well Who is a convicted felon and has breached? All of the requirements under their conviction as a felon They've also been financing and working with russia and other countries all over the world On a new corporation and delivery system called soleran sol a r en This is a new delivery system of energy From satellites back to space Now, I know that you're really amplifying photovoltaic and energy backup storage Savly the battery systems are silicon They're not silicon salt, which they should be their lithium ion batteries that explode This becomes a weapon. This is also the type of battery that's used now in the e-bikes Lithium ion batteries So when we're talking about storage and particularly in the wui areas We do not want to have to report to the fire captains Where the lithium ion batteries are because they do explode it takes a tremendous amount Of additional time to put these kinds of shrapnel exploded batteries out So I am in the wui area I can tell you that we've been told by the fire departments. We are on our own And I can see that we're on our own Because we don't have the two points of access We don't even have really a good one point of access And when I went and saw paradise and I saw the inability to evacuate I see that it is going to be a crowded evacuation situation with all the motor homes That are parked all over the county when they Literally clog up our road systems that have minimal access points to begin with stop the crime dot net the report Brian land followed by john sutter Thank you, mayor and council people of brian ling executive director of the sonoma county alliance Couple things come to mind in the last hour or so When we looked at wui slide five top top Wasn't the title but the first word more restrictive amendments those three words Earlier speaker talked about the negative impacts of our continual incremental additional requirements to build Reach requirements we're talking about now by definition go beyond the existing california building codes The wui we've talked about the electric reach we're talking talking about right now The the rental inspection program next the anti-discrimination tonight All items that are adding to the cost to build remodel and or operate a rental All discontentives to future development in this this area Uh, both before and after the fires the one thing we all agree on is it costs way too much To own a home in sonoma county in santa rosa and we all agree there aren't enough homes We also acknowledge that we already have the most rigorous time consuming expensive process to achieve entitlements of permitting Until staff can find a way to reduce the burdens of this process We sonoma county alliance are asking the council Not to reach beyond currents and future state laws, which already are the most restrictive in the nation We need more homes Not more regulations that lead to reasons not to build them. Thank you Thank you, brink uh john setter hello hi, i'm a remodeling contractor i've been remodeling in sonoma county since 1979 i hate to admit it About 15 years ago. I stumbled into a pg and e energy class Taught by one of my gurus gentleman named rick chitwood And he showed me how stupidly we've been building for many years Very very careless about how airtight our structures are It's like building a refrigerator without putting a gasket on the door You know, how well is that refrigerator going to run? um so I took more classes. I eventually became a building performance institute building analyst And I shifted the operation of my business to energy efficiency I got tired of debating whether we wanted pink tile or turquoise tile And whether uh linoleum is better than bamboo I wanted to wanted to do something that I considered more meaningful which is Reduce the carbon emissions of our county so About four years ago We made the full commitment to doing zero net energy retrofits. So that's essentially snugging up the Building enclosure and then Um providing energy efficient appliances And then putting solar on the building to Zero out the utility bill and greatly reduce the carbon emissions And I've come to realize The last couple years the future is all electric We have to as soon as possible Stop bringing methane out of the ground And burning it and leaking about five percent of it before it even gets into our houses So we've completed about 14 Almost all electric conversions Probably the biggest problem is convincing clients You know for years and years and years. We hated electric cooking. I hated it. You couldn't have given me an electric stove But the old resistant stove and the new induction stove are completely different creatures Julia child cooked on an induction stove Anthony Bourdain cooks on and cooked used to past tense on an induction stove The I just got off a cruise ship all their stoves are induction Um, so and you know change is scary I remember how scared I was when I put the first solar on How scared I was when I installed the first heat pump water heater in the first mini split conditioning system I'm happy to say I have not had one customer out of 13 complaining about any of the all electric we've installed Thank you, jim. Those are all the cards we have here. Um Jesse could you reframe what you'd like to hear what feedback you want to hear from council? Primarily we received the the direction we wanted for the fire code elements Today the remainder of the presentation was more an update And if the council so chooses to change any direction, that's your prerogative But we have been provided the direction already to pursue the all electric reach code. Okay, we'll see if we have anything to add Miss Fleming we'll start And thank you, mr. Mayor and again. I want to uh congratulate and appreciate our team for the robust engagement I was not able to attend Because i'm not on the climate subcommittee, but I did see that we had a packed chamber I also was able to attend the builders roundtable and I was able to attend the climate strike here in san aroza and I think that any good decision comes from a lot of listening And I do want to say to the builders who are concerned about this that I really do hear you and that your concerns are not falling on deaf ears. It's just that When I turn on the gas in my home and I look at my five-year-old and I think about the toxins that are leaking into the air I can't in good conscience Support that going forward I know that change is hard, but I can't imagine what year we all got gas in our homes It wasn't that long ago and with an induction cooktop that I use regularly It is faster and easier and it does require a bit of a learning curve But I think that in 50 years if if we're part of the solution that people won't be missing their gas stoves They'll be grateful that we had a planet that we could live on and that we took proactive action to Ensure that that our species is able to inhabit Our area and I think that that they will look at san aroza as part of the solution rather than part of the problem I also want to be clear that we're not looking at you know massive changes here We're looking at a few different appliances that are in homes. I think four appliances We're not looking at totally remodeling all homes for everything Additionally that the one thing that I didn't hear brought up is the fire safety aspect of this I've heard from firefighters that after A lot of the fires were put out during our tubs fire that there continue to be gas lines That were sparking that were flaring and that this continued to provide us with additional challenges and my concern would be that Why would we make a decision to Allow for for this type of infrastructure when we have clear evidence that it poses a safety risk for our residents As well as our firefighters and first responders first responders so with that, um, I'm in support of the ordinance, um going forward and I just want to appreciate our team for doing a lot of outreach and listening Mr. Divits Thank you, mr. Mayor. I actually have a question for you Jesse So when it comes to these building codes if you're going in to submit to do a remodel down the road And you do greater than 50 percent remodeled to the existing home the people would have to meet the reach code compliance No, they would not these codes are actually for new construction. Okay Thank you. Yeah, I'm you know I support moving forward on this just looking at the data And you know in a lot of times we as council members have to rely on the data provided to us and trust that it's accurate and gathered from a variety of Different sources and I think that we have done a good job of doing that here today But looking at the data the potential cost savings that exist for the occupant of the home down the road combined with the fact that We're looking at two million metric tons less than the 2019 Code efficiency home to me is pretty compelling. So I'd like to bring that information keep this conversation going Uh and continue to move forward, but I will say that I will have a keen eye for an exemption for Rebuilding Families I think that's to me that's going to be very important because one thing that this council said that I think that we need to Stay true to is the fact that uh, we did not want we wanted people to be able to move back into their their lives Is you know as they were saturday night and I I just want council to continue To I think maintain that vision Going forward Mr. Oliver's Nothing to add mayor. I look forward to this coming back to us Thank you, mr. Sorry Thank you, mayor Well, I'm one of those. Um, that's very I'm I'm concerned with the um A major change like this. Um, I am looking forward to it coming back to us again I'm I am concerned about the rebuilding whether the victims of the fire and Making it more difficult for them to rebuild So I'm looking I would be looking for a carve out for them um I'm one of those that that has become accustomed to natural gas and I removed my Electric stove when I moved into my house And put in a gas stove, but I also see the writing on the wall I I understand the the the future is Something that needs to be considered Our our environment cannot be degraded Where we can avoid that And I I feel for the for the builders I feel for this kind of major change in in in how they are Going to conduct their business and I also feel for the for the For those that are concerned with an all-electric home and are faced with Not having that choice unless they buy a home that already exists So I'm I'm it's it's hard for me to to to be excited about it But I understand the the need to move forward with the with the reach code It's a I am I am often challenged by People losing their options and this does Create one of those environments where they are losing that option At least in a new home in Santa Rosa So I look forward to coming back Look forward to more more conversation. I'm a little The all-electric favored concept is something I'd like to hear a little bit more about And uh, we'll just see what happens when it comes back. Thank you, miss Gomes Thank you, mayor. Thank you for bringing this forward to us. I very much appreciate the work you've done on it I'm having trouble viewing Saving people over $6,000 plus additional incentives In the rebuild area as Some kind of loss to them It seems to me that that's a population that in particular needs to Should understand the need to reduce Greenhouse gas effects climate effects should be motivated Um So I'm surprised that it's a population that isn't motivated to remove methane from the atmosphere I hope that we can post this Cost savings and make sure every permit has you know, you could save these costs I personally would not separate this group out I think all new construction should should meet This standard When I moved into my new house, I swapped out the gas stove for an induction stove And it has taken me some time to to get used to it, but Just about all my old pans worked anyways a lot of the concerns I hear people say are It's it's actually been a pleasure to use I am also like my colleague mr. Sawyer interested in hearing more about the all-electric forward And would be inclined to go that direction If if we had a fuller understanding over that that direction Thank you again for for bringing this forward Mr. Westerner Thank you, mr. Mayor and first and foremost absolutely agree on Folks rebuilding their home within the resiliency overlay It makes a ton of sense for us to make it as easy for them to get back into this community as they can So that's absolutely not a problem. I I did want to point out You know last friday, we did have millions of kids marching around the world Who what they were calling for was a little bit subtle and what they were calling for was for those of us who were in a position to be able to do so to Take steps that are of minor Inconvenience to us to ensure a future for them And to me this isn't even a difficult discussion. I've heard three concerns about it. I've heard cost I've heard convenience and I've heard catastrophe. Well when it comes to cost, it's cheaper So let's set that aside when it comes to convenience. Okay. I understand people like to cook on their gas stoves I totally understand that but two-thirds of the homes in california were built before you had any type of energy efficiency 29 percent of santa rosa's emissions come from inefficient buildings and houses and we're not even asking to take back your gas stove We're asking you to make a commitment to the future of somebody who might move I see leased up there in the audience in prop 13. That doesn't happen very often So on a new home that somebody is constructing that you could hypothetically move into It is the barest of minimums of what we can do to lower our building inefficiency climate impact by up to 80 That's not a small number and it's a as I said a really minor inconvenience on a Future hypothetical that we get to that point the third Was around catastrophe and I understand the questions about PGD's public safety power shutoffs None of the policies that we do are done in a vacuum and we're going to have to address the impacts of that Whether we do the reach codes or not as we heard from sonoma clean power You still even with you with your gas Infrastructure still have challenges when the power goes down and in fact having the solar panels on the home Which is not our requirement, but is a requirement coming that'll be coupled with the all-electric Actually makes the homes more efficient more Resilient as well and I'd suggest to folks take that $6,000 saving Invest in a battery and you're on your own little micro grid in the event that you do have a public safety power shutoff It makes a lot of sense for our community We'll be bringing back to the council probably about the same time as the reach codes a discussion about declaring a climate emergency And talking about the impact that climate change is having on our future I would be Amazed if the council passed that ordinance while also not taking a step of addressing Our building infrastructure as well with the reach codes. I'm fully supportive of it If you couldn't tell I look forward to the discussion coming back So and thanks for this presentation some of the my comments are what you probably heard during the climate action presentation At that vote I that's the direction. I thought we needed to go In the reason there's something I haven't heard too much of but it's the choice I heard it at the builders roundtable where some even look at my household, you know We chose to go electric. We're choosing to go solar and it's my choice And we're changing some of the the way my wife and I have run our house and the way we've cooked right And as we're doing these changes I think that really has a lot to say that we're going to take a look at the next step Because it's one of the speakers earlier today mentioned. Okay. What about the hot water heater? What about your cars, you know the the number one contributor ghe is our transportation If we can get people to start thinking in a different way and I think this is the right direction But I would like to see a little bit more definition coming back to us when it does come back They all electric favored just I think that is a viable option because yes That would give the choice to the um Buyers and the builders that if you do put gas there you're gonna have to make it up On other parts of the construction and that's why I thought that was really A great way to get us where we need to be going But at a rate that I think more people will be acceptable to change in which will lead to many other things And for me, it's got an absolute with the resilient city overlay There needs to be some exemption there Again living in that area The um, it's not just the thing about Cost getting their lives back together and some people would say well if they haven't rebuilt in two years What's going on the trauma of this community when you've lost their house to throw another challenge on them. It's Walking in their shoes I'm not willing to do that to those folks that have been devastated by the fire So I heard you say just it sounds like they'd be exempt I would not be comfortable going forward with this without that exemption 100 in place I just don't think that would be right to do to those members of our community who've experienced such a So much more of an incredible disaster than those of us that our houses survived But it really I don't want to do anything else. It's going to further traumatize that rebuild effort So with that do you have any other clarifying questions or anything else for council? I don't need anything else. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much Do we need time to set up for the next study session? We ready to go And which city manager assistant city manager is going to be Mr. McGlynn item 3.2 Item 3.2 study session on fee based rental inspection program Carmelita Howard deputy director of housing and community services presenting Good afternoon city council members. This is Dave Gwine director of housing and community services joined by Carmelita Howard our deputy and together We're going to walk you through a proposed rental inspection study session Go next yep good purpose What we wanted to do is first of all confirm it the council is interested in advancing a program in order to do so We're going to go through some program details that you have to select from We also will provide the feedback on a proposed model that we receive from stakeholders And ask for consideration of the existing code enforcement and neighborhood revitalization program models as your current tools So the process today would be if the council is interested in moving forward with developing a rental program We would use this input session to provide feedback Consider those components within a program design that would come back to you in november 19th with an ordinance It would consider things such as your program structure the implementation plan the fees and other components based on your feedback I'm struck by this as the a dated slide presentation. Um, but I was just going to comment. That's not what we've got It's a different slide presentation I'm sorry to say that Can we take a brief recess and I will reset the slides. Why don't we take a brief recess? Thank you. Thank you Okay, are we ready to reconvene? Okay, thank you after a reset we'll start with an overview of our presentation today We're going to unpack a lot of information to try and facilitate your decision regarding advancing a new business model called A rental inspection program. So we start with the purpose. We want to go through some background of other Times the council may have heard rental inspection program We want to outline a process for you to consider We want to show you what we think is the estimated number of rental units here in santa rosa, especially since the annexation of roseland We want to review your existing programs for housing inspections. That's basically the voucher program code enforcement and neighborhood revitalization We will talk about the cities we surveyed for best practices and then we'll review What we call rental inspection component choices if you want to build the program Along with some stakeholder feedback So first the purpose is to confirm if you want to advance a rental inspection program And if so we would be working to bring that back in an ordinance fashion in the november 19 timeframe Like I mentioned, we're going to review our existing rental services And we seek feedback today and ongoing until the ordinance may be in front of you on the best way to proceed So first with some background a rental inspection program is designed to proactively inspect rental units in a jurisdiction Your current program that proactively inspects units is your neighborhood revitalization program And your housing choice voucher program Um in october 2015 some city departments reorganized and code enforcement joined housing and community services And it was shortly thereafter that we held a study session on options to improve code enforcement Surveying other cities for best practices and that was the time we first mentioned that Perhaps that we should be considering a rental inspection program as a part of that City manager approved a study and off we went and that you're going to hear today some of the cities We surveyed from that three-year time span But also during this time the council began discussing rent control and just cause eviction policies And so we were working in two environments. First of all the rent stabilization Just cause eviction seeking feedback on a rental inspection program from pretty much the primary stakeholders And both the california apartment association and north bay associative reliters at that time again three years ago Expressed that they would be in favor of rental inspection program in lieu of the other policy initiatives So then in 2017 a program outline for rental inspection was developed We started meeting with council members one-on-one with stakeholders, but then again the um rent stabilization factor was Was our primary focus and the idea has since been deferred Due to wildfire recovery So this is really the first time in this chamber that you've had a chance to talk about a rental inspection program So our suggested process is if the council is interested in moving forward with the program is get input today Get some questions answered. We'll continue to get stakeholder feedback Hear your ideas of what components in a program you want to have And if so we'll get back on november 19th with the ordinance and the program design based on these features you see So with that i'll turn it over to karma leader to walk us through the next few slides regarding Rental the rental inspection program So, um, this is um, we got the information from gis through our it department that there are approximately about 35 000 rental units in the city. This is a 40 47 percent of the housing stock 53 percent are owner occupied And included here are the single family dwellings. There's 15 178 And these numbers that we included here the single family dwellings. It is one component Of the um rental inspection program that maybe we would like to be able to self-certify right away during the start of the um inspection program and then based on um An opinion from cAA and recommendation. They are they're recommending that we Inspect units that are three or more and there are 13,789 of those kind of units These are the existing rental inspection programs that we have right now in the city We have the housing choice voucher program This is a HUD program and it It has a minimum requirements for health and safety And um, they do a moving inspection when a new When a client moves to a new unit and also a annual inspection I mean an inspection is completed every other year for the regular units And then we have um code enforcement program. They use the ipmc, which is the international property Management code that has been adopted by the city for property maintenance so for fiscal year 18 19 we had 214 complaints based on substandard housing And the neighborhood revitalization um a program in the city it has inspects approximately a thousand units annually and 700 of those units had violations related to substandard housing These were the city surveyed and as you can see Berkeley does all rentals Concord just the multifamily units that is recommended by cAA city of sacramento and richmond Also do all rentals and son louisa bispo has stopped their rental inspection um And also these are the exemptions for some some exempt units that will build five years or less and um and some others that are New within the you know five years are also owner occupied Units inspected by another agency and mobile homes Mobile homes are inspected by the state. So we don't do inspections of mobile homes here So the inspection standards they there's the ipmc the california housing code uniform Housing code and then also the hqs that is done for section eight clients So the first thing we need to do if a rental inspection is a recommendation from council will be to do outreach in the whole city um You know, we've discussed this with the california apartment association Norbar and also the tenant groups and they're willing to work with us to make sure that The whole city is educated of what this new component That you know that what this a rental inspection is and then also the other goal is to use the nrp model in outreach And the nrp model uses a community outreach specialists to make sure that when we go to neighborhoods You know, especially in the nrp model Neighborhoods that they feel like they could trust somebody who can discuss with them what the plans are And another thing we're thinking of is as part of the education is to teach them. What are the resources and requirements that we Do here in the city and also like how can you be a good neighbor? So those are some of the goals that we want and then maybe Using the nrp model We can offer also services that maybe are needed in some neighborhoods that are not available to them right now So another component that council has a choice will be what kind of housing do we want to inspect? Multifamily those are the apartment buildings. Are we going to include single family shared housing? Granny units ad or any other units that you would prefer us to be that you prefer to be part of the inspection And also one of the components will be a frequency of inspections Do we? Sacramento model inspects units once every seven years some other Jurisdictions In do you perform inspections one every five years or we can also Allow units to be exempt if they are able to self-certify Or if the unit passes inspection we can just put them in a self certification program for a number of years so Here is the self certification It's kind of like rewarding the good property owners And so should compliant owners with no violations, you know, they then they can self-certify The Sacramento model All single family units are allowed to self-certify right away And the self-certification is done with their tenants So they both signed the form and then 10 or 20 percent of those units You know can be inspected unduly at random. So we make sure that those who self-certified did it correctly And then for registration um Should we require all property owners to register their units and include a fee in the registration And also should there be penalties for owners who do not register And also these are the exemptions that um, you know, we might want to include include as part of our component choices So i'm doing um exempt newly constructed rental units within 10 years or five years What kind of unit type do we want to inspect? Should we also in um include in the program units that are Assisted by the housing choice voucher program Especially if we decide to use the HQS inspection that's already being done by our technicians Then we might want to inspect the housing choice voucher program from the rental inspection as a You know as a tool to attract landlords to the program And then of course mobile home parks are the responsibility of the states. So we will be exempting those So these are the inspection standards So if we use a If we use the hqs that's done by the housing choice voucher program We will be able to use some technicians right away. So it doesn't look like we are looking for code violations And the decision, you know, one of the decision points will be if we find if a technician finds violations in the In the unit that are egregious for example, you know hanging wires With they don't have enough smoke alarms or You know mold then it can be referred to code enforcement And in when it goes to code enforcement, there might be penalties included If they do not follow what they're supposed to do within a certain period of time And or we can use the ipms. That's already being used by the nrp program and the city So the inspection process we will notify the owner 30 days in advance of the inspection The owner is responsible to secure tenant consent to access the unit Um, and we will also allow owners to request one rescheduling at no cost Seven days in advance so that um, you know, we don't lose the time of the Inspector the inspection must be rescheduled within 30 days from when we sent the letter And then the city notifies the owner within 10 days of finding if it pass inspection or if we will provide a violation list The property owners given 30 days to repair And if repairs are not complete property will be subject to annual inspection And property owner must be present during inspection with the tenant Currently if I can ask you to break we're gonna have to take a brief recess Sorry, so why don't you save this spot where you're at and we'll Come back in about five ten minutes Okay, we're gonna reconvene the meeting sorry for the delay, but um One of the potential consequences when you tried to do an all-inclusive policy sometimes This situation is with individual council members changed so Madam city attorney, would you explain our current situation? Yes, uh, unfortunately As we were began the reviewing the various components it became Clear that there are five different council members That could possibly have a conflict Depending on how decisions are made and the element that is Causing the issue Is what exemptions are going to be included in the policy? So what does the policy encompass whether encompasses all rentals? Not single-family homes Only rentals above four units That decision impacts Potentially five different members of the council in different ways So We have decided I don't know if you want to talk about what the procedure is But that we will come back With a structure in which we'll be able to address that issue With some portion of the council And all of the remaining Elements of the program could then be discussed and considered by the entirety of the city council Yes, so due to those conflicts and with the the way the presentation is currently Designed there's no way that we could have a quorum of the council listen to any information So we will not be taking any public comment So staff will be coming back on a date specific. So we are going to Continue this item until october 22nd And between now and october 22nd staff working in the city attorney's office will reconfigure their presentation So we would at least be able to have a quorum of city council members present All right from council perspective. Do you have any questions go ahead mr. Thank you, mayor. I'll try to make this brief, but uh madam city attorney Yes Is there any procedure or process to where a council that is regularly restricted on on particularly a lot of these rental issues can seek special permission of the fair political practices commission through fact finding and individual because This is happening To so many of us so much and it's getting ridiculous Sure, there there actually are provisions within the fppcs regulations and the Fair political practices act that Allow for this situation where you cannot reach a quorum because you have Too many conflicts and there are mechanisms under those regulations by which Council members can be Randomly selected To continue participation That is not some that's not a process that we would like to do on the fly here today So we want to be able to come back to you when we have a clear path We have the decision-making process clear as well. So both the clear path to to The selection of which council members will be able to participate because we'll only bring it up to a quorum we'll not go beyond that and then How we're structuring the components of the your consideration of the components of the program So that we can get that piece out of the way first and then the entire Council will be able to participate thereafter Well, I appreciate that that path forward that you've created for us. I do because You know, we do want to participate. Yes, and I think that You know the random thing is nice, but it's not nice if we're trying to be a transparent public Or excuse me or transparent with the public Where people want to kind of talk to us about the issue and have a sense of where we stand or what our Concerns are So thanks for for cutting this out, but if there is any way this council could send a letter and You know bring consistency to a lot of these decisions around these issues I think we should proceed that certainly. Thank you and and between now and October 22nd. We'll certainly explore All options that may be possible to have as many council members participate If not the entirety of the council will explore all options, but I'm I'm not aware of a path at this point to do so Okay, so we'll not be taking public comment and we will be continuing this item until October 22nd So we will recess this meeting until uh four o'clock this afternoon Okay, we're going to reconvene the september 24th city council meeting. We're on to item four Madam city clerk. We have the announcement of the roll call Thank you mayor. Let the record show that all members of the council are present Okay, we have No closed session today. No proclamations. Mr. McGlynn. Do we have staff briefing? No staff briefing today. Thank you. Oh and my mistake. I would also like to introduce tyler ledlos sitting behind me He's a resident of south park and he has taken advantage of the opportunity to sit along with the council members to see what it's like From this side of the desk so welcome With that city manager, do you have a report today for us? Yes, I do I want to give a little update on The public safety power shut off watch We find ourselves under Yesterday the city activated the emergency operations center due to a potential power safety Shut off and declared a local emergency in the city of santa rosa As of this morning staff learned that pg&e has reduced the footprint of potential impact and the number of customers that may be impacted by the shut off Early this afternoon More information well later on this afternoon more information will hopefully become available As there is a 17 30 update scheduled from pg&e The national weather service has also issued a red flag warning for upper elevations over a thousand feet In sonoma county through 11 a.m. Wednesday and a heat advisory from 11 a.m. To 7 p.m. Today and tomorrow Due to the forecasted high heat and potential power safety shut off Ahead of us the city is Opening a cooling center today and tomorrow at the finley center at the hours of operation or 11 to 11 a.m To 7 p.m. Each day residents and potential outage areas should prepare for the possibility of losing power Conceivably as early as 8 p.m. With a re-energization beginning the following day if de-energization occurs pg&e Anticipates it will take 12 to 24 hours to completely restore power to the city Once pg&e makes the determination to restore that power For pg&e updates and to identify service areas that may be affected by potential power outage residents should visit wwpg&e.com Backslash psps and check individual addresses on png's interactive potential outage map Staff continues to prepare the public for a potential power safety shut off And is monitoring the situation through ongoing communication with pg&e in the county beginning this morning the city deployed field teams and stood up a call a center to Call and make contact with care facilities in known and also with folks that are known vulnerable populations That reside in the impacted areas as the situation involves staff will continue to provide updates to the community through a variety of channels Including srcity.org backslash emergency our social media channels email and through communications with media partners Great. Thank you for that report Madam city attorney. Do you have a report? I just I do not have a report this afternoon But I did want to clarify with respect to the closed session just so the public would not be confused There was a closed session item that was listed on our agenda for a special meeting earlier this morning Um at 10 o'clock that closed session was canceled due to a change of circumstances Thank you. Thank you for that clarification All right item 9 statements of abstention by council members Mr. Tibbets, thank you mayor Unfortunately tonight, I'm gonna have to abstain from the benna valley and sam jones hall roof Given that I think both of the city and the organization I work for a drawing from the same funding pool But also I'm gonna have to abstain from the section 8 housing source of discrimination ordinance tonight, and I just want to communicate to the advocates that I'm personally pretty Disappointed about that. It's something that I talked about when I was campaigning for this seat three years ago And I have provided the information from the fair political practices commission to you And I'm happy to share that with anybody else in this audience I'll be also asking for further clarification from them through additional fact finding to be able to participate in issues Like this coming forward in the future And that's it. Thank you mayor So to confirm that's item 14.1, which is anti discrimination ordinance and then item 14.2 for the sam jones hall and point three and 14.3. Okay Are there any other abstentions? Okay, thank you Mayor's council members reports who would like to start Mr. Vice mayor Just really quick. Thank you to staff. We had about 50 people in this room last Tuesday night Maybe last Wednesday night for the final screening of last october The documentary that was put together that really chronicles the night of the fire What was happening with city staff and and the subsequent response if you haven't had a chance to see it It is on our website And should be up and streamable for you. It really is a fantastic film And thank you to everybody who shared your personal stories and for folks who came out to to check it out Okay, any other reports miss columns? Thank you I have a concern that we have an existing council policy That requires a council seat to be actually vacant Before replacement of the council member who's given notice can be begun And That also means that the current council member in the vote Can't vote for their replacement. It would be I would like to have us agendize This is the first step in that process Looking to revise that policy That once Is given the council be able to move forward with replacement Because then you don't have a gap in with only six council members at some times Because the individual Council member Was elected and should have a vote in who represents their base And it also becomes a significant problem for district seated people when the individuals who select the person from that district Are all people who are not from that district So I think that we have a problem with the way our our policy for Vacating seats is and I'd like to ask that we Agendize a conversation on that at the next meeting I'll second that. Thank you Thank you Any other reports miss flying? Yeah, I mentioned this earlier before we were in our regular council meeting that I had the opportunity to Go to a builders round table where we discussed our all electric or electric preference options and it was robust and we had builders who were in support and not in support and It was great that our staff did that outreach to illicit The input from our building community Additionally, I had the opportunity to go to the climate strike here and I would be surprised if it wasn't the largest Demonstration by youth ever in the population of the world. So it was quite an honor to be able to witness it Great anything else from anyone? Seeing none. All right on to the approval of the minutes August 27th. Were there any adjustments? To those minutes from anyone Seeing none, we'll accept those. Mr. Glenn consent item Item 12.1 motion Contract award coffee neighborhood park item 12.2 resolution Second amendment to the professional services agreement with hagarty consulting ink Item 12.3 resolution first amendment to general services agreement number f 00 1 0 2 1 with ECS imaging incorporated Okay council any questions on the consent calendar? Seeing none. Do we have any cards on the consent calendar? Seeing none. Mr. Rogers All right, mr. Mayor. I will move items 12.1 Through 12.3 and waive further reading of the text second So we have a motion and a second your votes, please And that passes unanimously. Thank you We're not yet to five o'clock. So we won't have the public comment yet. Uh item You'll be actually mean. Thank you item 14.1. Mr. McGlynn Item 14.1 report an ordinance of the city council of the santa rosa amending the santa rosa city code Adding a new chapter 1 0-46 housing anti-discrimination code David guine and rebecca lane presenting Good afternoon, mayor and members of the city council. We're going back after an extended outreach effort to present this item to you again I want to go through the purpose of the ordinance Summarize the conversations we've had with many stakeholders on this topic Review the fundamentals of the housing choice voucher program because if you recall last month there was some comments made about the Program that may be misleading or misunderstood We want to also compare our local ordinance with senate bill 329 You may know that that passed and is on the governor's desk. He has until october 13th to sign that And close with our recommendation So the purpose of the ordinance is really just to address affordable housing Crisis by increasing the housing opportunities for families using rental assistance and have further fair housing for those families Using rental assistance Here's an example of our extended outreach with the time we've had we met with some of these groups some of them multiple times And we even held a facilitated meeting with different viewpoints to see if we could find some common ground And we'll go through some of that right in a minute Here's a summary of the stakeholder feedback If you were representing property owners the industry Realtor industry You would this message is very clear and strong that santa rosa does not need to pass local ordinance Especially with the expected passage of sp 329 there's also The feedback of using a promotion campaign to really promote the program in ways we never have before because it was so misunderstood There was discussions about incentives yet. There wasn't consensus on what an incentive should be So for example a leasing bonus some members of the apartment owners association said that creates a red flag for me Why do I need a bonus to lease to a voucher holder? There's also discussions of a risk mitigation pool Some were in favor of it others were saying well that implies there's a risk if you Leaves to a voucher holder and we had to use that opportunity to clarify that whether you are a voucher holder or a non voucher holder You're still paying your full security deposit to the property owner There was Feedback that this if you pass this ordinance, it should only apply to units of three or more units And if you were representing tentatives you wanted to allow for third party discrimination claims and that basically came from Fair housing in northern california where they do Discrimination investigations all the time race creed color sex and they include source of income and if they found Discrimination of that they wanted the opportunity to pursue Correcting that matter They wanted to apply to all units They strongly urged the council to adopt your own ordinance and they also provided feedback that if there was a violation They'd like to see strong penalties for that And where we showed common ground was again the marketing and outreach of the program Promoting it in ways we've never imagined before and we have some ideas to do that regardless of your action tonight And the feedback for enhanced customer service for owners and renters some of that was based on How long it takes to lease and i'm sorry to inspect a unit and things of that nature and rebecca will be going through that As we go through the program Okay, thank you jave. Uh, good afternoon. Mayor schwedhelm and members of the city council My name is rebecca lane, and i'm the manager of the housing choice voucher program for the city of santa rosa i'm grateful for the opportunity to be here today To answer questions that arose at the august 13th meeting and provide information to council To the public and to our stakeholders regarding the fundamental mechanics of the program, which is where I will begin my presentation So the housing choice voucher program is the federal government's largest affordable rental housing program The program was enacted in 1974 and is an efficient cost effective alternative to government owned housing The program is often referred to as section eight because its authorization appeared in section eight of the united states housing act of 1937 There are a variety of programs under The section eight umbrella of which the housing choice voucher program is the most well known The program is funded by the department of housing and urban development and administered by local public housing authorities In santa rosa the santa rosa housing authority is staffed Out of the department of housing and community services and overseen by the housing authority board of commissioners The program in santa rosa maintains a seven to ten year waiting list Because there are simply not enough vouchers to fill the demand Once a tenant has reached the top of this waiting list and is determined eligible for the program They are issued a voucher to search for housing in the private rental market The family identifies housing that meets their particular needs and ultimately will pay 30 of their monthly adjusted income towards the rent With the housing authority paying the balance of the rent directly to the owner There are minimum requirements that must be met in order for this transaction to complete successfully First the rent must be reasonable when compared to similar units in the neighborhood Or comparable neighborhoods The rent must also be aligned with the average rents for the overall area because that's how the program is budgeted Once a family finds a property that's within the budget range that they've been provided and has completed the owner's application and tenant screening process The owner completes a request for tenancy approval provided by the tenant This request triggers the housing authority's analysis of the rent reasonableness on the unit And the scheduling of the housing quality standards inspection These standards are to basic health and habitability and can include local variances Such as our requirement that a gas water heater Has is equipped with seismic reinforcement straps As soon as the unit passes inspection the tenant is free to move in The owner will then sign their rental agreement with the tenant as well as the housing Housing assistance payments contract with the housing authority The HAP contract largely allows owners to treat their How the voucher holder tenancy in the same way as all other tenants with a couple of exceptions The housing authority must review and approve any approved any proposed rent increases based on rent reasonableness And that requires a 60-day notice to complete the process Also in california if the owner wishes to terminate a month-to-month rental agreement for a voucher holder without identifying cause The tenant is entitled to a 90-day notice I believe it's also important as we're discussing the mechanics of this program To talk about the households we're serving through this critically important resource By federal regulation Eligible families are at or below 50 of the area median income And we must target the majority of our assistance to families at or below 30 of the area median income In santa rosa, that's 32,400 for a family of four Currently of the families we serve the majority 93 percent are elderly disabled or have children in their household 73 percent of families have social security ssi or pension as their main source of income 29 percent are working The average amount that families contribute to the rent is $441 in santa rosa Program-wide the per household contribution from the housing authority is $1028 Families on this program have completed a comprehensive income And asset verification Criminal background screening and attend mandatory orientation to the rules and regulations of the program They complete at least annual recertifications of their income eligibility And annually recommit to following the rules of the program which include but are not limited to Following all the provisions in the rental agreement such as paying the family portion of rent refraining from disturbing the peaceful enjoyment of the property refraining from damaging the unit beyond normal wear and tear And providing information necessary to determine eligibility for the program One of the questions that came up on august 13th was how many participants on the participants on the program violate these rules and expectations While we track the number of Families on the program who leave the program we do not generally need to track the why behind Someone's leaving the program But for the purposes of answering these critical questions and sharing the information requested with the public We analyze the terminations from the last fiscal year and determined what you see here 40 percent of families voluntarily withdrew from the program this includes People who made personal decisions to leave such as an elderly family who moved into a residential care facility In the last fiscal year We also saw a number of lower wage workers who left Sonoma county or the state and chose not to take their voucher with them 28 percent of the program attrition is from the death of the house head of household when there are no eligible household members remaining 14 percent of families left the program because of an increase in household earnings A family is considered over income for the program when 30 percent of their monthly adjusted income Equals the entire rent 11 percent of families left the program due to a violation of the program rules Because this information was of particular interest. We did dig into this category a bit further The 11 percent of voucher violations you see here are things like not completing an annual recertification Or moving a person into the household without prior permission from the housing authority And many cases these families choices did not negatively impact the owner because the change in the participant circumstances Corresponded with a voluntary move from the unit To answer the questions we received from council and owner representatives during our outreach We separated out the number of families Who were terminated from the program because they were evicted Which was six percent in the last fiscal year One percent of terminations from the program which was two households were due to damage beyond normal wear and tear We take these violations seriously and believe that this data demonstrates That when the evidence is clear the housing authority does act to terminate assistance for those who violate the regulations If we failed to do that we know it would harm our relationship with landlords Which is critically important to the success of the housing choice voucher program The information on this slide is an attempt to answer a variety of questions that focused on the same issue Which was barriers to participation by owners We pulled the information from the records of 361 move-ins that were completed in the last fiscal year to analyze these key points These household moves could be families who were called from the santa rosa waiting list and receiving assistance for the first time Or families who are transferring from other jurisdictions Or families who are already residing in santa rosa and moving to new units within santa rosa I'll start from the bottom of this slide and work my way up to explain these numbers The days to lease represents the number of days between when the owner requested that the lease begin and when the lease actually began And that number is 3.6 days What this means is that if an owner requested that the lease begin on october 1st We were generally able to execute the contract by october 3rd or 4th We believe this data point helps answer the question about the potential for lost rent The majority of the time the reason for the delay was because the housing authority does not overlap payments between units For example If a tenant gives a 30 day notice to a landlord and finds a new unit in two weeks The program fulfills the obligation to the owner of the unit the tenant is moving out of Before it can begin the payment to the new owner When we isolated the prohibition against overlapping payments the delay in the days to lease dropped to two days As we move forward We will be tracking this type of information and study our processes to determine how we can bring this number down even further Or through a loss mitigation fund Help help offset this type of loss for owners It is also important to note that in 40 41 percent of the cases we were able to execute the contract on the day it was requested The middle of the chart Represents the number of days on average that it took our staff to inspect the property Which was about five days in fiscal year 2018 2019 Again, there are many variables that influence the scheduling of inspections and it's important to remember That scheduling the inspection doesn't necessarily correlate with lost rent, which is why we also analyze the days to lease Most owners who have participated in the program know the inspection requirements But if the owner is new to the program and the unit is ready We will work with the owner to inspect earlier than would otherwise be necessary To provide additional assurance that the property will pass inspection prior to the requested move-in date The top bar of this chart represents the number of days between the move-in date And the date when the owner received the first rent payment from the housing authority This number is high. It's about 15 days and we want to improve on this as much as the owners that we talk to Property owners obviously want to receive the payment when a tenant moves in Likewise, it is in the housing authority's best interest to make these payments as soon as possible Because we are not paid the administrative fees to run the program until families are leased Retroactive payments also introduce challenges to financial reporting However, as stewards of federal funds, we are obligated to collect and verify certain information from owners who will be receiving these dollars The most common reason that we are not able to pay Make our payment closer to the move-in date Is because we have not received a signed contract Our copy of the rental agreement or been able to verify that the person or entity that is requesting to receive the payment is authorized to receive it Again, we hope to continue these conversations that have been started with owners and find ways that we can reduce this number and make the payment process more efficient Circling back now to the proposed ordinance that brought us here today We want to focus on the state legislation that is pending with governor Gavin Newsom and identify the differences between the state and local proposals As a reminder about the timeline When council first heard the proposal for the local ordinance on august 13th Senate bill 329 had not yet been approved by both houses of the california state legislature Several local jurisdictions in california had also moved to adopt local ordinances that paralleled the intent of sp329 during the 2019 legislative session Including the city of san ose which heard and passed a local source of income ordinance protection covering voucher holders on august 13th Both sp329 and the proposed local ordinance do the same thing They make it unlawful to discriminate in rental housing based on source of income And define source of income as any lawful source of income or rental assistance from any federal state or local public assistance The intent of the state legislation and the local ordinance is the same which is to prohibit discrimination based on means of payment Where the local ordinance and sp329 differ Are areas where we worked with local owner and tenant interest groups in finding ways to address their concerns about the proposal The first is the scope of the ordinance The proposed local ordinance includes a more narrow definition of an aggrieved person who can bring a complaint The proposed local ordinance also includes Specific definition of reasonable occupancy a change which was made at the request of owners who are concerned that if the ordinance lacked this clarity It could lead to confusion for owners applicants and the city The state level legislation does not include any reference to an occupancy standard Finally the third key difference between the state and local proposals is with regard to enforcement If the city adopts a local ordinance, then the city may bring an action on behalf of an aggrieved person Under either a local ordinance or sp329 the aggrieved person has a private right of action At this time the department of housing and community services recommends That the city council consider introducing an ordinance adding chapter 10 46 To the santa rosa city code prohibiting rental housing discrimination based on source of income Including section 8 housing choice vouchers and other subsidies Alternatively, we acknowledge that the city council could also allow sp329 to apply which provides for similar source of income protections This concludes our formal presentation and david and i are both here to answer any questions that you might have Great. Thank you for that presentation answering all the questions that we brought up our last time So with that council any questions for staff Mr. Vice mayor Thank you so much. So much. Mr. Mayor So I asked uh, both of these questions in our last Study session. I'm still looking for kind of a clear answer on it as a renter How do I know if i've been discriminated against under this program? well, uh, the city attorney may be better able to answer that question but the um, I think the consensus is among All of our conversations and in other jurisdictions that are moving forward with this is that yes discrimination is hard to prove That's correct. It's very fact-based So you would be looking at obviously if there's an advertisement that that indicates No section 8 that kind of behavior or that kind of advertising also any things said In the interactions between the landlord and the potential tenant We would also be looking at patterns Of practice, but it is going to be very fact-based and not necessarily easy to prove And have we had a discussion around metrics of if two if if john and i both apply For the same unit How does the landlord make the determination on who they're giving the unit to if we're both qualified? Have we talked about metrics around that? Uh, we don't and it's me by the way. That's more qualified than john The landlord still has um the ability to the landlord has to consider the two applications equally But can still look at other factors. So credit history Things like that if you've had issues in prior rentals if you've been evicted before for bad behavior So can look at those other elements, but simply can't base it on Where your income is coming from Okay, thank you There question mr. Sawyer now you're side of the story Thank you, mayor Regarding this the same basic topic is selecting a tenant Is it true that that if there were two let's say two two applicants And they were looking one of them. It has a voucher But also but the second tenant had a They were co-joining their income sources One had a Has been at their job for 10 years They happen to have a voucher the other person Um Yes 10 years As opposed to 50 but that's that's beside the point The other person has only been at the job for six months But is but is showing their their income as part of the That which will make it possible for them to move into the into the unit What under those circumstances and you are one person is more more What viable than the other and you say no Um, the no is is that is that is that no reasonable because you can't Because the other person has only been employed for six months at their current job I mean what really what i'm concerned about is it puts the landlord in a difficult position if it's not crystal clear As it currently is whether or not they want to to rent to a to an applicant Um The landlord still may again look at credit worthiness employment history other standards of Kind I was going to say credit worthiness credit worthiness is probably not the right word But you can look at other factors in terms of deciding Which tenant you're going to accept Um, but You simply can't base it on the fact that the source of income is of uh, a program that's of governmental or nonprofit housing assistance, right? Okay. Thank you. Um, and if if they were to If the if the applicant were to feel that they were discriminated against and they went to a third party And said I feel like I've been discriminated against. What's the process? That that third party would would fact find to decide whether they were going to to file suit So the third party suit in our with our ordinance the third party Could file on behalf of the applicant What was the what would be the process by which the third party would? Acquire the information necessary to decide whether they would go forward with a suit A subpoena. What's the process? I don't know if you can answer that the I don't I don't know that there would be any discovery Formal discovery process under our our ordinance if you Files you do have a private right of action. It's only the aggrieved person individually that has the The right to the private right of action under the ordinance Foreign injunction though that could be done if you filed suit under either Provision, then you would you would have discovery rights Through the through the courts Let me let me clarify to your earlier question and this does say Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit a requirement for a grand tour guarantor or co-signer Based on amount of income or credit worthiness So those are the You know those are some of the elements that can be can be considered So what is the what is the purpose? When there was when the when it was added I'm going back to the purpose Hold on just one second sit that far down. Maybe I can just state it so in our Yes, so If we the third party the third party action is what I'm looking for an explanation of what was the purpose of the third party Action why that was so important to be added to our to our ordinance, which is not in the state And how would they go forward as a third party with that third party? What would be the process for them going forward and which is what I assume would be a suit against the landlord For discrimination I'll begin trying to answer that one and maybe get some help from the city attorney Is that was a request that came from Northern california fair housing group because they investigate all kinds of a discrimination And they claim that they have discovered some income discrimination source of income based on people holding vouchers And they wanted the ability to work with that person to pursue whatever legal remedies were available to them So what would that process look like so they go so that the aggrieved Tenant goes to the organization and says I believe I've been discriminated against They they have a conversation. They state their they state their cases. I believe this is a discrimination What is then the next what is the next step for that organization to bring suit against the landlord? What's the what's the discovery process that that would be Really up to the ordinance itself does not describe the process by which the third party entity Would take on the representation of an aggrieved person Or the process they would go forward it simply gives the Those third parties the ability to file a civil action foreign injunction against the discrimination So as as dave mentioned it is specifically Was requested and is is looking to organizations that help low-income tenants In their search for housing and in their search for Fair treatment and I will I will say too that in the audience and I believe people who are planning to be The submitting comments on this item are from fair housing of northern california. Sonoma county legal aid We have representatives here in the audience who might be able to speak to that or incorporate that in their comments but the the difference that We were that we made in the local ordinance Is to more narrowly define the aggrieved person as the individual that's directly subject to the discrimination And that's different than the state Orgments or the state law And if I may add one one other element that under the state law The California Fair Employment and Housing Act Is Enforced Also through the department of fair employment and housing and so Could be seen to be playing that role As a state agency assisting Individuals and families that feel that they have been potentially discriminated against and they will do an investigation And take the matter to court Through a settlement process and then and then to court if necessary We don't have a our ordinance does allow the city to Enforce the provisions of the chapter and it does allow in terms of an injunction for the city attorney to get involved But we don't have the same structure that That that that the state has for enforcement of this of the state anti-discrimination Ordinance which is a very well Well established, you know state agency that has those procedures In place thank you Other questions miss fine Thank you. This question. I believe is for the city attorney I'm curious to know in my understanding of how this comes to me and how I explain this to you know Family member with rentals about why they shouldn't be worried about it I'm wondering if it's similar to when you engage in hiring practices where We it is illegal to discriminate against individuals. However, it is really difficult To prove it and I'm wondering if this there is a similarity in practice where The onus and I think you might have said this but I want to hear it again That the onus is on the applicant and not the the provider Or the landlord in the situation to prove that they're being discriminated against That's correct that in any action under our ordinance that it would be the burden of either the grieved person or the third-party organization or the or the city To prove the discrimination and again, it would be very fact-based And again not not not easy to establish Um, this question might be for you. I'm curious to know if there are any Restrictions I don't see any in the ordinance, but um any restrictions or limitations or exemptions on the size of the complex or Single family dwelling or duplex that might be in question You're talking about in terms of the applicability of the ordinance Yeah, does the the ordinance apply to units regardless of the size of the complex if there is more than one It does I'll read you the current proposed ordinance on in chapter 10 4 6 0 4 0 Under exceptions Exception d says nothing in this chapter shall be construed to apply To refusal to rent or lease a portion of an owner occupied single family house to a person as a rumor or border Living within the household provided that no more Than one rumor or border is to live within the household and that the owner complies With the other section of the chapter which prohibits discriminatory notices statements and advertisements So this language is is identical to what's in the state Um ordinance and it means basically that it applies to all units with the exception of an owner renting out a room In their household, so if I'm an owner and I occupy my unit I have discretion full discretion As you would in other fair housing considerations such as Renting only to a person of one gender or okay Thank you. I'm curious to know this is another question for the attorney Does the city um have the legal jurisdiction to differ from the state um if sp 329 were to pass do we have the legal jurisdiction to be More broad and who we allow to bring a claim Uh, yes, we can be um more liberal in our provisions, but we cannot allow for discriminations that would be Uh prohibited under the state law. Okay. Thank you very much This comes Thank you And thank you very much for your clear Presentation I I I don't remember seeing you much before but it's very impressive. Thank you Is it possible For an inspection to be scheduled by the landlord Prior to there being a vacancy so that if they anticipate a vacancy they don't have the length of time delay that they're concerned about Uh, it is possible. Um, it introduces a little bit of complexity uh around um Our right to enter the unit uh when another tenant is occupying it if the tenant agrees If the tenant agrees, um, it would be possible and again slightly more complicated than the inspection occurring when the unit is move in ready, uh, because then The other side of that would be that The tenant can't move in right away. We'd have to wait and make sure That the the prior tenant moved out before we can make payments on the unit There also introduces the possibility that something some damage could occur something could happen to the unit During the move out process. They break a window as they're, you know, trying to move the couch and uh, and that would then Cause the unit to fail. So It's possible and we have done What we sort of refer to as preliminary inspections or pre inspections Many other jurisdictions do the same thing It it's possible and will need to be developed in a way that we can ensure that we're still meeting the federal requirements Of inspecting the unit and ensuring that it meets HQS standards on the day that the family moves in. Okay. Thank you. And on slide 16 it talks about Occupancy and enforcement First let me ask the question about enforcement because it almost sounded like I was hearing from colleagues concerned that a third party could independently Make an action without there being an aggrieved person Under the ADA sometimes a third party can act Without being personally an aggrieved person, for example, you can observe something have happened And take an action under the americans with disabilities act. I think That's not allowed here. Is that right? The the third party has to be essentially hired by The city the state or an aggrieved person I'm just I thought that was the case and i'm making sure The wording that again The third party can get involved only in the case of an injunction and not not as a General civil action for damages. It's only for injunction. Okay, and the wording is By any person or entity who will fairly and adequately represent the interest of the protected class Okay That's interesting. Thank you We have other nondiscriminate we we hire We hire an agency we've hired more than one agency in the past but currently I think we have one agency that does Um fair housing testing and and Assistance legal assistance for us My understanding is that we have other nondiscrimination ordinances Discrimination against families with children is a housing discrimination Persons of color disability Those are all Nondiscrimination ordinances that exist now. Are those ordinances also difficult to enforce? I mean, are that is there a reason we would think that source of income is more difficult or difficult in some way other than those other kinds of disability Discrement non-discrimination clauses that we're looking at So I believe you're referring to the existing federal or state fair housing protections, right? So as a city we hire through Fair housing entity in order to Ensure that we are providing right right. We have a contract with Currently fair housing advocates of northern california. Yes, they do testing here. They also work For referrals that we send them or that independently from san erosa contact that agency and they're following the Other protected classes. Yes, because what we're doing is talking about Within the city of san erosa adding a protected class, right? So one of the arguments i'm hearing is this is hard to enforce And i'm asking okay. We've got other nondiscrimination ordinances Aren't they also somewhat hard to enforce? I believe personally it's still worth having them that we still want to have ordinances for nondiscrimination against Families which has happened Continues to happen Nondiscrimination against persons of color happens Nondiscrimination that's age related Happens It seems to me those though are all also very difficult to prove So we would we have an entity that does testing So is there a is there a specific element to the discrimination on the basis of voucher that makes it Somehow more relevant that it's hard Surely somebody understands what I have just asked I have to acknowledge the If you could repeat the the end it was more relevant than the other discrimination I mean More difficult that it keeps being brought up. Oh, it's hard to enforce this Duh So it's hard to enforce lots of things are hard to enforce including other anti-discrimination ordinances Is there an element here That you think makes it even harder than the other anti-discrimination ordinances because I don't see it I'm not aware of anything that would make this particular form of discrimination more difficult to prove than many other forms of discrimination And you know that may be something that uh our Organizations that work in this field on a daily basis You know may have us May have a clearer answer, but yeah, I think from our perspective. We don't see anything that makes this more Particularly more difficult than other than many other forms of discrimination methods that we would use for other discrimination Cases would be similar to the method. We would use in this if if I'm understanding correctly That would be correct. Okay, and so it Is it possible for us to Maybe not in this particular ordinance, but as we move forward To consider a loss or risk mitigation pool Right, don't we already have one for if we're working with homeless folks? It's it's possible. Yes What we find from other communities is they don't speak to Incentives in an ordinance, but it's a parallel discussion and or could occur before an ordinance is adopted or afterwards Thank you. I appreciate it I'm I'm not suggesting that we need a loss or risk mitigation pool But if it provides comfort to others, I'm willing to consider it Any other questions The ones I had similar to this and I asked last time It is my understanding of this council both last fiscal year in this fiscal year. We did pass the housing first Fund which was risk mitigation landlord incentive and rapid rehousing What's the status of those funds and could they not apply to this? ordinance So yeah, you're jumping over to our homeless services program and you're absolutely right the city council funds rapid rehousing Through our contractor catholic charities and of that amount $534,000 We set aside $100,000 as a risk mitigation pool To property owners who lease To formerly homeless individuals or families To date we have not had to access that risk mitigation pool Most of the rapid rehousing funding has been expended Especially because we use that resource to help displace tenants at the new wave of vista fire a few months ago And staff is preparing to come back to council You've authorized another round of funding in your budget foot for that contract execution Because we haven't accessed that risk mitigation pool It would be the recommendation of staff that the full amount for this year be going to rapid rehousing dollars Help with rent in other words so The decision to help with the apartments that was a staff decision, correct That was a staff decision. Yes when we informed the council that The property owner was dropping the relocation benefits In the moment a week after the shelter So we had to step in and helps prevent some folks from becoming homeless So is there any reason that funding could not be used because it's the same both of these efforts are out of your department, correct? Yeah, if it was the desire of the council to create an incentive There's several suggestions one is we could expand access to the current risk mitigation pool To property owners who are accepting a voucher as well as homeless I guess for me it was like just knowing that The apartment fire perfect Appropriate use if this is something else that we need to do to support I mean, obviously this is an issue in our community or we wouldn't be talking about the anti-discrimination ordinance I would want and if there are some ways that the staff is thinking let's incentivize it for those that may have This belief about who a section 8 holder is and isn't it might be a way to encourage additional participation I would completely want you to be exploring those options because if we're using for one population Why wouldn't we use it for all the populations who are trying to get people housed regardless where they're firmly homeless They'll ask their apartment in a fire or they've never accepted Section 8 vouchers so sure if that was the direction of the council when we come back with the rapid rehousing Contract for this year we could speak to that and so with the funding gives my understanding in june of this last year We authorized another 534 thousand dollars. So what's the status of that funds right now? That's the maybe that's the contract i'm recommending that we come forward to for execution with catholic charities In june, we're looking at whether we should seek proposals for other operators to operate rapid rehousing But now we see that they've expended the funds and we would be recommending that we resource catholic charities for another year with this And would because I think I asked this last time also because that that was my understanding There's three buckets of way you could do it. So you had mentioned 100k was set aside for risk mitigation It would be helpful for me to understand and see how those dollars have been spent You know again that return on investment because of these rapid rehousing dollars We've housed x number of people and I know we just got that updated report about you know last year We housed 301 folks it'd be great to know Did that source you know the rapid rehousing dollars that this council approved successfully Housed folks same thing with this land if we choose to go with this landlord incentive How effective is that is that enough to get more people participating in the section 8 program? Okay, any additional questions go ahead and explain Thank you. I do have one additional question Which is I'm wondering if you can give a really brief overview of the elements of the hqs the inspection Program about how long it takes and what an inspector is looking for Sure So the housing quality standards inspection is that those are the HUD standards for the program It's a it's a pretty basic health and habitability inspection So we're looking for safety issues Broken windows for example, I would have to be repaired We're not looking at cosmetic issues what we tell the tenants when we're going through our orientation is that If there's a you know a small stain on the carpet, we're not going to care about that so much You should care about that because you want to protect your security deposit But what we're looking for is going to be a tripping hazard a hole in the carpet that might present a danger to someone so it is a basic health and habitability inspection and the elements of the inspection are the same across the programs across the country the forms and all the standards are available online at any time Thank you And I did have one question for the city attorney is the way our The ordinance is currently drafted. Is it enforceable given the current state of case law in california? Uh, yes, it is there have been cases Recently that have affirmed very similar ordinances. Great. Thank you Okay, we have several cards on this item. So first up would be Sharon king followed by keith becker Thank you mayor city council My name is Sharon king I am the the property manager at the salvage an army silver crust residents 10 53rd street santa rosa And i'm here to share my experience with offering housing to housing voucher holders Silver crust is a 186 unit apartment community offering affordable and subsidized housing For senior households age 62 and above 36 units are subsidized through the housing choice and bash voucher programs 144 units are project based section 8 The remaining six units are staff housing and market rate units The arguments against running to voucher holders according to a recent article in the press democrat are It represents an onerous contractual relationship with the government agency Housing authority inspections cause delay and unit turnover and irresponsible tenants You know those people My experience This is my experience The contract The contractual relationship is really no more than a lease At least at least renewal time once a year I receive a letter from the housing authority telling me what I will receive from subsidy and what I will receive from the tenant Very rarely I receive a letter mid-year because the tenant situation has changed And causing a change in subsidy The housing authority is allowed If I want to change the amount of rent I give the housing authority 60 days notice and they pay according to their policies About delayed inspections. I have never had to wait more than 10 days When I get a 30 day notice to vacate I let the housing authority know it's coming down the pike And I never have a delay About voucher holders We accept applications from all section 8 voucher holders But they must be eligible to live at silver crest in order to be put on our waiting list This means in addition to age and income restrictions They must have 7 years of positive housing verifications No violent criminal conditions Convictions no current use of illegal drugs and no evictions in the last 3 years We have a strict and robust tenant selection plan which we apply to everyone without discrimination We have an appeal process which we apply to everyone without discrimination We have and the appeal process has a third party look at the Review the application Just because an applicant has a voucher. We don't automatically offer an apartment nor does the housing authority require it If we decide to terminate a lease due to residents bad behavior We advise the housing authority and they do what they do There's no difference in the behavior of silver crest tenants between those who do And those who do not hold vouchers. Thank you. Thank you. Keith becker followed by jenette mcfall Good evening my surprise surprise attorneys are disagreeing with each other And um our attorney does disagree With the concept that this is in compliance with state law because there is a question of whether it is compliant with Established case law that's item number one item number two is the concern that the passage of this ordinance could have foreseeable detrimental consequences That are not figured through in the way this has been written Lastly, this is never about the applicants or the tenants In terms of an owner's Property and private rights The idea that This ordinance or any ordinance is going to tell an owner that they are forced to engage with a governmental agency is Unfair and improper to property owners. Thank you. Thank you. Keith. Uh, jenette mcfall followed by marlina mark arano Totally you got a copy of the buddhal rights that I asked to be handed to each of you Um, my name is jenette mcfall I'm a realtor part of the oath of my license is I sort of protect property rights Forcing property owners to not consider source of income for rental property infringes on property rights Real estate ownership carries with it a complex set of rights and the bundle rights concept has been Traditionally been the way those rights are described the bundle includes the following the right of possession the right of control The right of inclusion the right of enjoyment the right of disposition Any council member who chooses to ignore the bundle of rights does not belong on the city council The property owners are all through your constituents property owners fund the city of san rosa. Please study the bundle of rights A close study of the addition of source of income to housing Antidiscrimination code clearly reveals conflicts with the bundle of rights The word discrimination is used over eight times whereas Websters defines discrimination as a distinction that is unfair in favor of the other side It is the city of san rosa who's proposing we discriminated against non section eight renters by granting a preference to section eight renters Unfair and favor the other side The ordinance would prohibit landlords from considering source of income including section eight vouchers and other rent subsidies What other to vey what else does the umbrella of source of income cover besides section eight are used interchangeably throughout Yet by definition are not interchangeable source of income absent consideration of source could include found money Money borrowed from a stranger gift money two party out-of-town checks the list goes on An unreliable untimely an unverifiable source of income could result in adverse effects Saddled solely by the property owner I argue that section eight is not income it is a grant it must you must be low income to qualify for this taxpayer funded gift This gift is limited by what can be squeezed from the property owner whose bundles of rights are being squashed The amount of this fund will decrease as property devalues inevitably as a result of this mandate The supply could shrink as owners choose not to rent out to avoid the risk Already supply is already scarce whereas from the loss of approximately 5,000 homes from the fire Instead issue housing unit permits streamline the rebuild for these folks that are trying to rebuild their homes faster See sunday's paper. It looks like the santa rosa officials Won over by an unique pitch to boost Stock thank you for your time Marlene um Followed by chad bola Okay, i'm just going to read this quickly just have my three minutes. Uh, hello mayor schwedhelm council members Thank you so much for allowing me to speak today. My name is marlene more toronto and i'm a voucher recipient When i first received my voucher i was thrilled who wouldn't be I knew discrimination in the workplace But the discrimination in attaining housing took it to a whole new level and it hasn't stopped there September 15 2015 council delayed a vote for an anti-discrimination ordinance june 4th 2015 pd ran an article about a disabled man His wife and nine-year-old daughter's difficulty in using their voucher He had had a heart attack and was on dialysis 95 horrible comments in august 16th 2018 similar article a 75 year old working woman Having difficulty finding a landlord willing to accept her voucher 73 count comments My voucher status was mentioned in a may 2017 article 96 comments i got the most 94 73 and 96 comments Things such as were called feral humans drug addicts mental hoarders prostitutes gang buyingers Personal attacks on me when all I had done was put my own housing on the line And made myself publicly vulnerable for my fellow suffering renters Actually feared for my personal safety. I really did And words have consequences To publicly advertise against a specific economic group No section 8 is a very poor reflection of what we've become We need to start turning back the rhetoric protecting the most vulnerable We cannot continue to normalize this discrimination We need not so much to know what is right and wrong but to be reminded That's what some of us are here today doing And some of us believe we are holy You are holy Don't damage your holiness For when one can harden one's heart Where empathy cannot be reached It's because it no longer exists We help Ourselves as much as our vulnerable citizens perhaps more so By passing this ordinance. Thank you so much for your time and listening. Thank you Chad Bola followed by Patty Goodwin Mayor council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak here today. So My name is Chad Bola. I am a tenant organizer with north bay organizing project And also a member of the newly formed Sonoma county tenants union And in my day-to-day work, I listened to tenant after tenant in crisis Fearful of being displaced So we're here today to vote on the source of income anti-discrimination ordinance Uh, I'd like to make an effort to To simplify it a little bit to me the gist of this ordinance is that if it passes Landlords will not be able to openly Advertise their discrimination against voucher holders. Let that sink in for a second. They can still discriminate Just not openly So it's not a lot to ask for in my opinion We hear every day that we are in a housing crisis We hear it from we hear it everywhere We go that california is in a housing crisis, right if it is true that we are in a crisis And it's true that there's 17 million some 17 million renters in california If it's true that we're in a crisis then I suggest that we respond with urgency Focusing first on our most vulnerable residents just as we would in any crisis situation The passing of this ordinance will at the very least Relieve some of the stress that families experience when facing the daunting experience Of searching for secure housing in the midst of a statewide affordable housing crisis Which is not a crisis for everyone. I recognize that it's not a crisis for everyone and perhaps that's That's why the road towards secure housing is a long one So I've urged iRG council members To uh to vote yes and pass this ordinance today. Thank you very much. Thank you patty goodwin followed by peter chairnoff Hi there, my name is patty goodwin. We currently have 145 residents on housing voucher programs A large number of them are excellent tenants, but when we have issues with a voucher tenant They can become very problematic I'd love to take more but with the current program it's burdensome In the 1980s early 1990s the section 8 voucher program was a great program for landlords The city housing staff were exceptional in working with the voucher tenants as well as us landlords For years now it's been tough We've experienced so many issues and the staff time needed to deal with problem voucher tenants has proven to be extensive compared to the non-voucher tenant problems Tenants would rather move out than deal with the stress of a bad neighbor or fear of retaliation if they put their complaint in writing The biggest hardship is placed on the good resident of our communities The stress on our on-site management team With problem tenants is also another big issue Managers want to know that they have the support they need and not constantly threatened with litigation They have tough jobs and it has been increasingly harder to keep good management teams because of the continual stress of layers of new laws negative press and lack of support Landlords don't ask good residents or tenants to move voucher or otherwise Landlords want to keep all the good tenants as long as possible They become part of the community and they look out for and respect each other Please focus on helping to make this program appealing to landlords appealing to me would be defined as Well staffed voucher housing Team because i'm i'm wondering if we just even have enough staff available Who work with landlords and residents on housekeeping nuisance issues and mutual respect To we want an education program to instill the importance of being a good tenant good neighbor and appreciative of the program Maybe involve current successful housing voucher residents and landlords and education educating new voucher recipients A mediation program that is really a neutral third party that works with landlords and tenants We used to have a local mediation organization scrims that really listened to landlords and the tenants and they were really successful at finding compromises Everyone could agree on I know a lot of landlords that would support funding for a good mediation program If the program was a partnership landlords would participate to courier landlords and subject us to lawsuits Would be a disservice to the rental property owners And especially other tenants. Thank you for your time and service to our community Peter Chernoff followed by caroline pd Nice to see everybody. It's a beautiful day Santa Rosa, it's beautiful And to be beautiful is to be spiritually dutiful I'm gonna share this begin by saying I have great respect for all law enforcement veterans That cherish the u.s constitution For we're under martial law dominated by military industrial complex The hierarchy of the catholic church Usurious bankers and minions of bar association lawyers that run all three branches of government That's called tyranny Our right Is to strike this system into submission And as king once said one man wrongfully incarcerated. So are we all Leonard Peltier has been down 44 years And I say any sentient Is wrongfully incarcerated. So are we all as is the u.s constitution All sentient slaughterhouse bound and the earth under the oil industry I am Peter. I am here commanding action in truth Now to blow the lid off mammons roof Welcome to the reservation Russell means highly recommended to view Russell Russell's welcome to the reservation And so taking into account our current station fires plagues earthquakes and more the vials poured out as found in revelation Have we been given even a clue as I speak from my heart to the hearts of you Unto great spirit. Have we been true? Russell means start in the last mohicans as the last Biblically speaking the last shall be first. That's how it's been cast John Trudell spoke to be careful in this place as the demons will eat your spirit Just who runs this world? Is it the one who now does sear it as Leonard's been down 44 years? The whole world walks a true trial of tears As king famously stated one man wrongfully incarcerated. So be we all the mother of all boy cuts Yes, she be the call those who genocide america's Indigenous also killed most all the buffalo. So who among you supports this ongoing slaughterhouse status quo? So are you among those complaining and gnashing your teeth? So who do you serve? Who be you asking for direction and relief bob dillon? You got to serve somebody be at the devil or the living lord for only the living lord has the authority to be laying down the sword I am Peter. I am the brother from the east the 40-day prophetic economic strike and all corruptions be ceased I choose to serve almighty Veterans rocket red glare bombs bursting in air proving now That they could never heist the true power and authority of christ as american warriors be now commanded To cease the freeze frame and freeze frame the system till every knee and to the earth be remanded And the u.s. Constitution is free and so to the children and the animals and the likes of you and me Thank you. Caroline. Caroline pete members I'm carolin pete with fair housing advocates of northern california We provide fair housing counseling education Investigation and enforcement services to the residents of santa rosa and Sonoma county We submitted written comments both on august 13th and september 17th laying out our thoughts about the proposed ordinance I believe this ordinance is one step to addressing santa rosa's housing crisis preventing displacement of existing residents And preserving affordable housing in the city of santa rosa as part of its comprehensive housing strategy We wholeheartedly support such a fair housing ordinance and believe it's a crucial step to preserving affordable housing for the most vulnerable populations in the city Who are protected under federal and state fair housing laws? We receive calls from santa rosa clients who allege discrimination in housing But express fear in raising their concerns or permitting us to intervene intervene for fear of retaliation It's particularly true for individuals using housing subsidies because they're aware of the difficulties Based in locating new housing in santa rosa, particularly finding a landlord who's willing to accept their subsidy Earlier this year. We conducted a systemic audit Looking at the prevalence of race and source of income discrimination using housing choice vouchers Our agency only tested properties whose advertisements did not make any reference to section eight However, despite that fact, we uh that we tested properties with seemingly neutral policies Toward housing choice vouchers only two of the 10 paired Investigations in the county included housing providers willing to consider vouchers Eight of 10 housing providers responded. They were unwilling to consider them and their comments ranged from We don't take section eight never done it before and don't want to have to deal with the government To no section eight, but I don't know why to we don't take section eight because we looked into it but discovered the complex doesn't qualify On applicability, we strongly urge the city to have broad coverage That includes all rental properties with the exception of owner occupied single family homes Where the owner is renting a room in the house to one individual, which is the only exemption from state fair housing law coverage Broad applicability will have the greatest effect On santa rosa residents and is consistent with the majority of similar ordinances enacted in recent years On third party actions if agreed parties who can bring complaints are limited to the individual applicant who has alleged discrimination This precludes the small number of non-profit fair housing organizations to conduct testing to bring any enforcement action Enforcement of this ordinance will be limited and necessary policy changes Unlikely to occur and renters with I just want to say we've been hearing discrimination is generally very difficult to prove And someone who alleges discrimination May have no evidence that a violation has occurred aside from their word Which would not be sufficient evidence in court to bring a successful claim And renters with vouchers are under extreme pressure to find housing quickly so as not to lose their subsidies When they're told by landlords, no section 8 many do not have the time or the will to litigate Especially if the unit is already rented to someone else. Thank you. Thank you for your time followed by kevin connoissec Is this on I guess it is okay say again No, I'll liner first. I'll liner Then then kevin First of all, I would like to encourage really highly encourage The the city council to take up your staff's recommendation and pass this ordinance your staff recommended that Please take that into consideration. I would also like to address something that councilman Sawyer seemed concerned with and that is the third party You know as as a tenant and being a tenant for the last 48 years Um, I have had no third party On my side Unless I go and get an attorney or go to fair housing on the other hand Landlords do have a third party and it's called law enforcement The law protects the landlords If they want me to leave my landlord wants me to leave they can get the police to come in and remove me I don't get I don't have that luxury Also, there seems to be a financial concern And I understand that I completely understand that that landlords have a financial concern They want to be able to and the governor just signed a bill That they can raise the rent five percent a year plus the cost of inflation, which is about two percent So they can raise up to seven percent a year as a disabled veteran. I personally Cannot afford that. I'm living. I live on a fixed income By the way, I also want to say I've heard many landlords talk about how great they are to their tenants and I'm sure they are I have no doubt about that that there are some really really really good landlords out there Nevertheless, they get to raise the rent at least five percent a year every year Every single year That that doesn't take into concern my financial burden I understand that the landlords have a financial burden, but but a renters burden is never taken into consideration All we're asking you to do is take up Just a little bit our side. The other thing I want to say there's 48 percent of Sonoma county residents Our renters 48 percent that's almost half. First of all, that's a lot of votes second of all If if this doesn't pass if we keep discriminating against poor people You're going to have a lot more homeless Not a few more homeless a lot more homeless Anyhow once again, please please please pass this bill take up your staff's recommendation and pass this bill Thank you so much. Thank you. Kevin connoissec followed by sylvia gaigo Mr. Bearer members of the council. Thank you very much I Michelle Zeromsky and I have a law firm here in santa rosa. We do real property law Including the landlur tenant law We're not taking a position on this one way or the other, but it's just informational here And we do what litigation, you know, that's trial law We do a transactional law that's stuff before you say avoid trial stuff and I'm just telling you Ms. Gallagher, I think we're going to have a problem with this thing with the sabi Sterling case and you know, I'm talking about so we're going to advise our clients to that We have a great relationship with rebecca and dave In the house and we deal with them all the time, but it's it's something Section eight we recommend to our clients all the time Our landlord clients we say go for section eight But what they're telling us and I think if you listen listen to patty good one She said well, if it's so great, why is why why are everybody saying no, I don't want to do it And and rebecca what i'm going to say is we need to administer this a little better It needs to be a little stricter Now because that was the idea it was a conservative idea with jack kemp Did this it's a great idea, but we need to administer a little bit Transactional site. I will tell you we have clients have millions tens of millions of dollars who want to invest in Sonoma county And with the state rent control and this sp 329 They're pulling out They're pulling out read the press democrat editorial You guys are advocates to our representatives in sacramento Please tell them this is counterproductive It's all counterproductive if we want housing i've seen all these nice people here holding up their signs They want housing housing to ride all this stuff and everything, but you're not going to get housing If you don't have investors to do housing Kevin just respond to your you're talking to the council. Please continue No, that's it. I think that's it. I just I just think My comment is I think we're being counterproductive I know we don't agree Some of us don't agree on this council, but i'm just i'm just saying If you want housing what you're doing here with the rent control and this thing You're not going to get it because my clients from danver from new york from elsewhere. They're all pulling out so That's it. Just a little piece of advice Great. Thank you. Sylvia Gallego followed by jamie mitchell Is Sylvia In the house Oh guess no Jamie mitchell followed by anita lafellette. Hi, i'm jamie mitchell Sylvia Gallego decided not to speak Thank you for your time this afternoon It's a really important issue for everyone And I guess I just want to approach it From a different perspective Then if we're talking about Investors pulling out and this and that There's more than just the profit motive. There's people that need help and You know having been a resident of sunoma county and santa rosa largely For 40 years I've seen a lot of different anti-discrimination Resolutions policies whatever you want to say That wouldn't get passed and wouldn't get passed and wouldn't get passed You know Gay rights, you know different kinds of things some of the things in housing that julie combs has Spoke about in her time and I understand that As a as a former business person i'm retired now That landlords need to make a profit a reasonable profit And I don't think anybody is against that But when almost half of the people are renting in sunoma county And a lot of those people can barely afford the rent Um Some things out of whack and we know that's happening in pretty much every city in the country that has any kind of a More thriving economic Temperature So I want to urge you to pass this because it's really the very least That we can do and I know that your staff wouldn't have recommended it If the and if they thought that it wasn't you know The right thing to do and that it didn't protect some of the very The ones of us who have the very least protections And I don't think we need to be as afraid if we're the landlord Or if we're a developer Of being able to make a fair profit obviously that hasn't been a problem in housing in sunoma county The problem is on the other end I also had a sex and age Sex and age tenant in my home And it was someone I knew and they did the inspection very quickly the agency You know, we knew what we had to do there were there were no problems And there were no problems when it was time for you know, this tenant to move on And so I just would urge you to do the right thing here and not give in to Um All the overly cautious statements and fear mongering. Thank you so much. Thank you If you want to hold up Anita, um, call first Irma Garcia who needs some translation services first and because our translator has some time Challenges so Irma Garcia followed by Anita Lafellette Thank you all of you for having an interpreter But no solo eso sino por también respetar los seis minutos But not all of that also So throughout the respect for the six minutes When you do this I feel like you open the door for me you welcome me Documentada que tenemos en el condado de Sonoma Not just me but all the immigrant community and in the undocumented that we have here in the Sonoma county Mi nombre es Irma Garcia. Soy parte de immigrant defense task force My name is in Irma Garcia and I'm part of immigrant defense task force Immigrant defense task Immigrant defense task force Thank you mbop No tengo palabras para decirles la avergonzada que me siento ahorita en esta reunión I have no words to tell you that i'm very shameful here at this meeting I cannot believe that all of you that represent all the citizens Cannot care of all your citizens Que se espera de nosotros los inmigrantes indocumentados What do you expect from us the undocumented immigrants? For two years during the fires you have no idea how the undocumented community lives Pero creo que sus ciudadanos y ustedes están peor que nosotros But I think that your own citizens are in a worse place than us I feel sad for all of you Nuestra comunidad inmigrante indocumentada no les pide nada solamente quiere respeto dignidad Our undocumented immigrant community We're not asking for anything from you just asking for respect and a decent place to live Pero de la manera que tratan a sus ciudadanos creo que mejor voy a ocupar ese lugar que tú tienes But the way you're treating your own citizens I think I would have to occupy the place where you are But since you don't accept undocumented immigrants I guess I'm gonna have to stay here That's why sometimes it's better to be quiet But it's not just it's not the solution It's about time to take responsibility It's time to take care of your own citizens Y nuestra comunidad inmigrante indocumentada está aquí para ayudar And our undocumented immigrant community we're here to help There is a lack of money what's more important money or your own citizens Que estás haciendo ahí sentado es tiempo de cambiar el sistema What are you doing just sitting there it is time to change the system It is time to become responsible If we take this seriously we all together can make lots of money Están de acuerdo conmigo do you agree with me Raise your hands if you are agree with me We all together can make that change This is the time let's not wait And this minute that is left I need to take it in silence Because in my heart I don't know who to trust Thank you. I need a laugh a lot followed by paul carol I wanted to uh talk about you said That we're to define an aggrieved person as one that's uh discriminated against And um I think this issue is really about Our inability to in fact enforce the discrimination that's already been going on Discrimination is a human rights violation we've heard from people here today Who have evidence of it Maybe you could go to the source And just follow through on a couple of discriminations that you've heard about And get to the bottom of what that would mean for our community to actually no longer discriminate Their housing is not in our town. I think it's the offices in san francisco So you could have gotten a better review even if you had Ask cdc to Come in and tell us how they're doing with those vouchers. I understand there's 50 percent given out That means that's only 250 left And there's 3 000 people on the street That are homeless So it's kind of a spit in the dark. Isn't it Um what good are you going to do to take up all of our time as a matter of fact It seems to me that we have a leadership committee an attack committee The people on the attack committee are very informed about homelessness And housing situations also They can probably tell you the numbers Of people who really do have vouchers and the numbers of people who are really discriminated against And then you'd get some real information To make your decision on instead of Trying to leave it up to us who you're not going to listen to anyway So I suggest that you do some research actually you're on the leadership committee, aren't you? Mr. Sweatham Yeah, you are on the leadership committee and I think Ms. Combs is on one too so You are have you have a lot of people around you that know the answers to a lot of these questions But discrimination has been going on for a long time You're not going to solve the housing program By following through on this It's a shot in the dark Thanks for your time Paul Carroll followed by Daniel Weinswig Mayor Schoelthelm and members of council The the you know a lot of the property owners here don't want anything to infringe upon their rights The concept of Putting any kind of strictures on property Didn't really start until probably the 1970s And it came about because a lot of people who own property were doing things that impacted society You know like the love Now like the toxic bloom on sabbatical road the toxic bloom under the building on airway drive that Packard left to us Those are the key kind of things that property owners thought they had the right to do And I and what occurred was politicians like you Got the political will to put controls on what people could do with their property And what you need to do now is have the political will To take this small step and it is a small step Because right now a property owner would probably take a client Or you know a potential tenant who's paying 50 percent of their income towards rent Rather than a voucher tenant who would be paying 30 percent of their income towards rent Because they have this bugaboo about dealing with the government And it's a bugaboo On some of its partisan So you have to have the political will The other aspect is you're not asking the landlords to take less rent You're just asking them to not discriminate against people who have vouchers and other sources of income You know like ssdi and various other things that that matter So You know again, this is not that big a lift It's not going to throw You know Property owners under the bus. It's not going to stop development Because you know the whole rent control the issue that they talk about doesn't apply to new construction So it's you know, it's not a real valid argument And this isn't a real value are you know, it's not a real argument as well. So Please move forward with this So that More voucher people might be able to get housed and at least get screened As tenants it's not going to make make them get the place But at least the people will be screened. Thank you. Thank you. Daniel winds egg followed by mike mullins Daniel's still here Looks like he's left mike mullins followed by Irene Nichols Good afternoon, mr. Mayor. Good afternoon council members My name is mike mullins. I'm representing legal aid of sonoma county today miss rubenoff Asked me to express her desire to be here, but she was unable to be here We serve Every year about 600 low-income clients Who have disabilities and many with section 8 vouchers who find it very difficult To obtain housing with those vouchers I'm probably stating the obvious So I'm going to digress from my prepared remarks and try to answer council members combs's question Which I believe if I'm correct wise whether or not the discrimination under this proposed ordinance Would be more difficult to prove than discrimination under other ordinances And the answer is no it would not be more difficult in my opinion However We must Be clear that discrimination of any sort is not easy to prove Rarely do you have the smoking gun of the person who says oh no your section 8 Or no no your color. I simply won't rent to you It is difficult to prove And a lawsuit under the strictures of this ordinance would not be Easily brought And nor would it not be done without forethought and consideration Litigation is expensive As I'm sure mr. Connick would tell you And therefore we don't want to do it willy-nilly if you will But it is a tool a tool to be used Frankly, I think most business persons represented by the people I've heard here are as I I believe business persons are which is risk averse And that means you don't want to take a chance on discriminating under this particular ordinance and therefore Perhaps perhaps more people could use their section 8 vouchers Thank you for your time. I appreciate it Thank you Irene nickles followed by Kate grope bell tazar This is not a shot in the dark This ordinance will help people like me who have been on section 8 since a health crisis Before that I was earning income paying rent teaching in your school system And then I applied and eight years later. I got my voucher I've used it for just several years It has been extremely easy and all the landlords have loved it the few I could find to accept it But I can't get my foot in the door I had to leave the fall of the fires because my voucher was running out and I couldn't find housing here I've been back Since may 28th four months. I can't get my foot in the door This is me with my voucher another landlord another landlord another landlord All of them They want cash. They don't want to pay the government I've been given something by the federal government that the local government. It's tying my hands with I am so grateful for it. I do need it now in my life But I can't use it craigslist and everywhere No section 8 allowed I just want that phrase to be gone so I can get my foot in the door I know they could still discriminate against me, but let me get my foot in the door These are the new homeless people on the street and in one month my voucher will end and I will be on the street too Ex-school teacher Plenty of income to pay until a health crisis Section 8 has been wonderful. I can't use it I don't want to go leave like I did when the fires came and go to another county Just because I could find a great rental and fortunately a landlady who would take it But I had no friends there. No activities. It's not my home there I have one month left There's a lot of reasons they say no to us They will still discriminate against me. Perhaps they'll take someone else But let me get rid of that phrase. I read No section 8 taken I've watched those ads stay on craigslist. I could have been in there. I have great references It's sure discrimination I don't know what i'm going to do in a month I don't even look in the city. I look in the county my voucher is for the county I wish the county would pass a law, but i'm here today because I know all these other potential tenants on the city voucher Need support from you and eventually hopefully the county would pass something too. Thank you Thank you. Kate grobel tazar followed by lisa badenfort. I'm Kate grobel tazar I own my home I own two other properties I volunteer on two HOA boards As many of you know Nowadays well, it seems to me that if I want to buy a house that I can afford in sonoma county It needs to be mass produced Because to buy a house that isn't mass produced is probably a third as much money again of the same size So I have bought my homes in HOA's and on the board that I serve On on both of them What I constantly hear from the neighborhood is there's people who are renting out their houses And they're renting them out to so many people That it's making it hard for us to park our cars is making it hard for us to have reasonable quiet during certain hours And it's hard for the board an HOA board in that context To keep the neighborhood nice I couldn't disagree with anything that I have heard other people hear saying about discrimination in human rights I don't disagree with any of that But I also feel like as a homeowner and also as a landlord of two two small properties That it's hard to keep those properties, which I care about It's expensive to keep them nice My tenants love me Because I'm willing to go into debt To reside the house And I can promise you that the rent that I get Doesn't cover that I'm willing to put in a new driveway One of my buildings is quite old and that's the building that I'm thinking of and this is a complicated issue and Landlords are not mean people. I'm a very nice person And I've worked hard to be where I am and I feel like the rights on both sides of this equation need to be protected That's all I'm saying. I don't disagree that these people have concerns that are valid But I think that the landlords do too And it made my heart bleed to listen to the previous speaker. I'm almost like I almost started crying listening to her But you know, I'm also somebody who has um an interest and who The community expects me as a landlord to try to keep the neighborhoods nice And I can't do that for nothing. I can't do that for free. I'm not opposed to section eight vouchers If if the money were there, I've never had an applicant who was a section eight. I've never turned any one away I've never been in that situation But I think that it needs to be clear that the landlord matters too Thank you. Lisa batten fort followed by alex colfin Good evening. Thank you. Lisa batten fort Public affairs director north base association of realtors representing 3600 real estate professionals home owners property managers and housing providers In sonoma county Thank you for your ongoing attention to housing availability and affordability and for an engaging the owners over these past weeks The task before you is not simple And we appreciate the engagement This proposal does however return to you with very little change And as you consider next steps, we hope that you can help address questions in a couple of primary areas Many of you who have actually already inquired about them and recognized How can owners clearly and confidently select amongst tenants given the almost unlimited circumstances That they consider it does remain murky and it feels risky, especially when we have a very tense Tenant landlord relationship in the city of santa rosa How can the city Help monitor and safeguard owners from unwarranted litigation? Please revisit any program That you develop here today or in the future To look at trends in litigation that might come a lot of it is Is assumption and fears and what is the reality data is our friend There is a loss of income even if it's 15 days if it's three months if it's two if it's 15 days It isn't nothing. I think that there's an assumption that anybody who owns property can easily shoulder an extra $200 a month an extra $400 a month At 15 days for a fair market rent three bedroom unit. It's $1320 of no rent Just to put that out there Throughout this process staff has acknowledged the need for landlord education and engagement To address to address the concerns that are very clear that that still remain With ordinance such as these the arguments are the same and other jurisdictions who have passed ordinances that look like this The partner the landlord partnership programs that result from them look similar because the concerns Not based on tenants and the morality and the value of human beings But of the real consequences and costs that accompany this kind of public policy Unfortunately approaching this issue with a murky policy And enhanced litigation exposure will not take us to the tenant provider relationship. We all are looking for Thank you very much Thank you. Alex Kauffman followed by Adrian lobby Good afternoon, mr. Mayor and members of the council. Alex Kauffman with the california apartment association Thank you for the opportunity to be here and speak to you on this item again Um, I first would like to acknowledge staff and their effort in reaching out to stakeholders During a last meeting one of our main concerns was the lack of Outreach and um, I assure you that that was Done this time around we got to know them quite well You know as i'm standing here listening What it really comes down to is this idea that it's all about profit and quite frankly It's not really about profit What this ordinance does it it mandates Acceptance and participation in the program without quite frankly providing the resources that really needs to be successful You heard from a couple of our members today who actually participate in the program. They have Serious concerns legitimate concerns, and I think both sides have issues that need to be resolved Um, but to say that it's all about profit. It's not Really helpful As lisa mentioned this ordinance came back and while to be truthful it did address some of our concerns The majority of it is quite similar to what you saw last month It still lacks what I think um a really important incentives and risk mitigation measures I do think that you've you've heard some reasons to have those programs I understand that that might be outside of today's discussion But I do encourage you should you move forward to really consider coming back and having a serious discussion What that may look like some of the fears may be addressed if you have a Robust program that will help landlords to that will that will participate To my last point really has to do with sv 329 And as we're sitting here discussing this today This bill is on the governor's desk, and I'm not sure there's anyone in here that things it's not going to get signed There will be a baseline protection from the state that is going to reach santa rosa And I think if you really want to assess how How this ordinance or this bill will impact the city You you can still do that assess it in six months assess it in 12 months bring it back look at what's working Look at what's not working There could be an opportunity to have an honest discussion and say well These are some serious concerns that the state did not see let's address that I think i'm running out of time here Looking forward to working with the city Whichever way this decision goes tonight. I think this is a Relationship that is going to have to continue to improve There are currently many policies in play at the state level that have significant impact on housing supply And I think we should take that into account. Thank you. Thank you adrian lobby followed by judith. I am My name is adrian lobby. I'm a co-founder of homeless action I was looking for an apartment And I called and the person on the other end of the line said are you calling for your father? Are you are you calling for your husband? No, we don't rent to single mothers. We don't rent to single women You have to call for your son You have to live with your son if you want to live here Or then I was calling for an apartment and they said No, we don't rent to jews And then they said we don't rent to negroes And I went through the centuries and I went through the countries and I found all the ways That people find to be mean to each other Based on some perception Oh, I had a tenant who was poor They were terrible tenants So then I decided I won't rent to any more poor people This is just discrimination And I'm really rather shocked at the number of landlords who are willing to come up and say Yep, I do it I discriminate I take some experiences I had and I lay them on top of a bunch of people And I advertised for it. I put it in craigslist I put it in the press democrat when I advertised for my rentals This is kind of embarrassing really We're not asking this ordinance is not asking people to join anything To accept particular people. It's just saying don't discriminate Look at people's references Talk to them decide whether you want to rent to them or not But don't in fact you can't discriminate On the grounds of where their income is coming from Maybe wouldn't be here tonight Except that we have homeless action meetings and people regularly come Like somebody's some of the people you've heard tonight who say I have a voucher This could make such a difference for me And I'm going to have to turn it in because I can't find a house And whether this is a homeless person or someone who is home but paying 60 70 percent of their income for rent It's just heartbreaking Over and over again a wide variety of people People who is obvious would be good tenants So I just want to urge you Our organization wants to urge you past this ordinance. Thank you Judith I am followed by thomas ells Good afternoon Mayor vice mayor council people fellow citizens I have been both a homeowner In sonoma county and a renter And there is no doubt in my mind Which is easier Despite what it takes to keep a property and possible renters in it Nice and in in a good way It is nothing Compared to what it takes to find a rental that suits you Or that suits me The supply and demand has gotten outrageous the prices and the affordability are daily in the news The crisis has been mentioned by previous speakers So What your task is here tonight is whether to support One side or the other Political will Needs to be with the people who need it the most It's a pretty low bar because we've established that discrimination is challenging To uh To come to a judgment on I I want to finally just say that The HUD numbers were in the tens of thousands. I believe it was about 23 000 people We're on that list All Now gone and down to 500 And I'm I I understand that of the 500 actually there will be only 300 vouchers granted So the discrepancy is almost laughable 300 versus 23 000 people And we're asking for support For 300 people surely That should be granted without much more airtime or deliberation Thank you very much Thank you Thomas Thomas Ellis Thank you for the opportunity to speak and for addressing this issue With the council. I just wanted to remind everyone again We're talking about discrimination and this is discrimination. I think that uh, adrian mentioned quite rightly is The landlords are acknowledging That they are doing And I wanted to remind you that Kathleen kane was here the last time we were talking about this and and she talked about the income discrimination Aid to families with dependent children and all those kinds of things that were income That were corrected by the law And those are corrected. You cannot discriminate against those kinds of income an income that comes from another source of a Of a divorcee for instance that comes in Alamone and those kinds of income They cannot be discriminated against and they have to rent to that person who would have otherwise been rented to I mean, they have not discriminated against that person for some other reason And What we're talking about here is that just the definition of what income is because The section 8 doesn't count as income itself if it counted as income then then you couldn't discriminate against it already be Against a lot to discriminate against that and I hope that you Do add the section 8 as a definition of income here. You would have to do that. I think Otherwise they could say if you just said you can't discriminate against section 8 Income it's not income. So they couldn't be discriminating against it because it's not income So you have to deal with that definitionally there. I want to point out that there's Normally within the market as we know we've talked about it here before 5% normal vacancy rate 5% that would be That would be a full 10 weeks. I think is that right? No, it would be a full it would be uh, excuse me Uh, 10 10% would be five weeks. So we at least two and a half weeks of vacancy In a normal renting period at least two and a half weeks of normal vacancy And and I think people are saying they can't stand that Well, the reason they don't want that is because they want to price the properties without any normal vacancy rate in it Which would increase the amount of income that you could count towards Towards the price or value of the property and they don't want to do that And when we return to normal vacancy they'll complain about that No, you can't have those houses because we can't have a normal vacancy rate of 5% and I wanted to point out also that for the The risk mitigation pool that you have for the for the rapid rehousing is that if you were to Align those two programs if you would for this and that there's so many more people that have the large amount of vouchers Is that uh, you would have to increase the size. Thank you Thomas. Thank you. All right bring it back to council any additional questions for staff Mr. Sawyer Thank you, mayor. I just want some clarification on that risk mitigation pool Mr. Gawain, is it did I hear you say that it would not be those sums would not be available until fiscal 2021 No, I'm sorry if I was confusing that risk mitigation pool exists today It's in your homeless service program if you wanted to include it to be for property owners of vouchers We can certainly do that We're going to be in front of you within a month on the new round of funding and so we can make that adjustment then Okay, and that's what I had what I was what I was missing because I think that is It having being able to offer incentives. I think is is um Really important to mitigate some of the the concern and the fear of um of our landlords. Thank you Any other questions? Okay, why don't we then uh start with mince combs. You have this item Let's get a motion in a second and we'll have discussion. I have this item and I am Pleased to bring it forward. Thank you for the opportunity to bring this Um we've been working really hard as a community on the three p's on preservation protection and production With housing you have to work on all three p's Uh, I think we've done a remarkably good job on really moving production elements forward And I appreciate my colleagues who have really worked hard on production issues Um appreciate that we are now talking about the some of the tenant protection issues um And I'm hoping that before I make the motion I can add Um, I am interested in having the risk mitigation pool come back Um with the you'd mentioned that it might come back in about a month. I think that's a good idea There were there's within the documents. We've gotten for public comment The fair housing associates of northern california have some suggestions with regard to Penalties or consequences It might be reasonable for us to look at what they're recommending there, but I am not moving it with this item It's thinking that that might come back in the future also So let me move The ordinance of the council of the city of san erosa amending title 10 of the city of san erosa code By adding chapter 10 dash 46 housing anti-discrimination code Prohibiting housing discrimination based on source of income Including section 8 housing choice vouchers I'd like to insert here that to make it clear that we are including bosh the the ash vouchers So comma Bosch vouchers Comment and other rent subsidies and waive further reading of the text second Okay, we have a motion and a second Who would like to make some comments? Ms. Fleming Thank you very much and I do appreciate everybody who came out to speak on this issue One of the reasons i'm in support of this is that it benefits our city when our resources that come in through The federal government can be deployed in a timely fashion before they're disappeared and it also benefits our city when we can get people housed And in a stable manner it is a drain on our resources when people cannot access housing Just because discrimination is inconvenient to enforce does not relieve us of our duty to try to enforce it Landlords at present have many things that they cannot discriminate against and i'm not convinced that this change This additional thing that they could not discriminate against is so onerous as to outweigh the benefits of passing this ordinance No one is compelled to own property It is a choice to be a landlord. It is not a choice to need housing housing is a human right All investments carry risk When a landlord decides that they want to be an investor in something and commodify something that is a human right They accept this risk and one of the risks and this is true of both populations that receive housing vouchers And the rest of us who don't is that there are crappy tenants all over the world And i'm sorry for the landlords who have to deal with that and i'm very interested in a mitigation pool I want you to be supported in your provision of housing in our community and I do thank you for that However, I do believe that the Overwhelming good to our community outweighs the risk on your investment Anyone else like to make comments Mr. Oliver's Thank you mayor. I thank you to staff for the presentation and thank you for reaching back out to stakeholders and getting the information that you can It's sad when we see this as coming to coming together as sides because there really isn't about size We're talking about real people here and I don't believe that section eight vouchers define who people are But and it's also not a small step in my eyes Having dealt with discrimination in the past I think anytime we take some kind of an action to eliminate discrimination of any kind is a big step Is it easy to enforce? Absolutely not and I know that it will be difficult But I think that we we can't do something with this. We can be a leader in this. This is again. This has to do with discrimination This is actual Somebody thinking about saying no, I'm not going to rent to you because of your source of income Landlords will still have choices. They still have the ability to do what they've always done as far as doing the background checks that they've done To try to approve the best possible person for that for that spot But I think it just kind of even things out when people have an equal opportunity to be to be considered for rental housing Especially some of our most vulnerable families But I think with this is going to come more education. There has to be more education even to landlords and property owners to really understand what what rental assistance is not I don't believe that everybody really truly understands what it is and what the processes are It's like other things when we talk about it becomes a dirty word and we're afraid of it Sometimes because we don't know what it is And likewise, I think we also Need to educate our community about what this ordinance is going to be about as well Because we have seen the no section 8 in the ads And I think it's part of our education We need to counter with that with our own ads as far as providing information about what we've done here in san rosa Hopefully other communities in the county will begin to consider this Off the bat. I think some easy ways for us to start reaching out to some of our residents is The advertising inside of our city bus, for example, I think there's other places where we can provide information about This new ordinance to educate the community that it does exist But I I wholeheartedly support this This this new ordinance. Thank you Mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor. So two of the striking comments that I heard during public comment One was from mr. Mullen who talked about how risk averse business folks tend to be in particular landlords and the other one was from Lisa with the apartment association talking about the tense relationship that we have in san rosa right now That's between landlords and tenants and one of the things that I Where my question was was a little bit of clarity because I do feel like a lot of the landlords that I talked to Are trying to do things the right way And so the only concern that I have in this is some of the Landlords who are trying to do it the right way and end up finding themselves in this situation Where they are in litigation for having made a determination that they thought they were giving the unit to the correct person Not making a judgment based on their section eight So i'm going to be supportive of the ordinance going forward But I do want to make sure that we do have an opportunity to come back Maybe a year from now to look at what the actual practical impact has been both on getting folks into their actual Housing and utilizing the vouchers as well as what has happened on the litigation side To see if there's a way that we can provide a little bit more clarity or if that ended up being a non-entity So I am going to suggest if I can Um In addition to the motion to bring back some of that data a year from now for discussion from the city council As well as I am also fully in favor of expanding our risk mitigation pool to Incorporate some of the lost Income potential and whatnot particularly as it pertains to the city's side of trying to get these units Approved and up and running because that is an actual practical impact Even if folks are doing it the right way And I feel more comfortable if we could have the whole motion because I do think that it is a package Overall on how we're trying to both release that tension between landlords and tenants While also trying to make sure that we have a package of tools that actually get people housed when they need helping house May I clarify what you're asking? Yes Um You are not asking for a sunset, but you are asking for a review in a year. Yes with data Okay, I don't have a problem incorporating that in the motion Are you asking that the risk mitigation pool not wait the month? I'm asking for us to we can have a more broad discussion about that in a month But when this ordinance goes into effect until the council makes them the decision Not to go forward with that change if we could that it's a permissive at the moment that it's we'll do this for now And if we choose to change it later, we can change it later But for now I'd like to make sure that uh once the ordinance is active And landlords begin to to go through that process that they have access to the risk mitigation pool I have some concerns about the details of the risk mitigation pool Um, which is why I was happy to wait the month Um, I don't have a problem saying that we want to move a risk mitigation pool forward But I would like us to have some review of the details of the risk mitigation pool Absolutely happy to still have that discussion in a month. I just want to make sure that in that meantime I don't have a problem with saying yeah, we're gonna we're gonna move forward a risk mitigation pool Is that all right with my second mr. Oliver's? It in under those circumstances, then I think we should also bring back the uh questions about the Um consequences of not moving of of being found to be discriminatory Um Would you have a problem with that? There was a discussion in the materials we were provided that we haven't gone into in detail So I would expect either within the month or within the one year period that we would bring back discussion about that also Does that make sense are you trying to include that in your original motion or can we handle that as a separate motion? If he's including a bundle of these packet things, I'm saying, okay, let's go ahead and do the whole packet So I'm saying let's review again The the sort of penalties just as discussed and uh from my perspective I'm I'm fine with that It seems like the one-year review period is an opportunity for us to look at this What the data is and see whether or not the enforcement tools were sufficient and I think that's well and I'm happy for this this penalties conversation at the FHA of northern california has a paragraph in their materials Where they make some recommendations with regard to changing penalties What I am suggesting is that when it comes back in a year that we've done a review of core issues and other things that we include their discussion with regard to penalties based upon their letter I wanted to say that I'm not sure if if this needs to go as part of the motion I think giving staff correction and just come back to us with an update on the ordinance because there's so many other things That I would want to know or may want to know as that year comes up For for example, how do we do on education? How you know, there's so many other aspects of there's many elements So I think that just giving direction that we get a report back in a year on how this The implementation of this ordinance has gone and all the other things that I think that they heard tonight related to concerns So what I'm hearing is that we're separating off mr. Rogers items and they are not part of the Ordinance moving forward, but that they are staff direction Right My preference would be to be staff direction to come back with some updates on that Then I consider any of the items mentioned by mr. Rogers To not be based upon the conversation with my second to not be a part of the ordinance itself But to be staff direction I believe that when The new council gets the information that this is coming back That you're going to want to give direction to staff about some of the things you want to see Because there may be new things that come up along the way that you may have an interest in I and I'm I agree with you. So I would go back to my original motion And uh encourage that staff bring back the pool in a month and the The other two items the data about How it's going on how it's working out in court and in the penalties in a year, but that's recommendations As direction to staff well when council always has the Where processes get thing on the agenda and next year I'll still be mayor and this would be of interest to me too Whether it be a year or at some point as things are evolving. So I think it's the I think you're hearing the intent Um, so let me first go back here. Are you okay? Are you okay not including that in the original motion? My preference is to have it in the in the motion In particular the risk mitigation pool portion of it I think that there is a strong intent for us to do this review in a year I'd like a little bit of certainty around that But certainly the risk mitigation pool I want to make sure that folks who are especially out there doing this In the beginning do feel like that they are covered as well I'd like to ask the city attorney a question If we mentioned today that we want to include the risk mitigation pool um, what's the time frame for Having that be available is this ordinance takes another reading and then 30 days correct and Within that time period we have the conversation about the risk mitigation pool if we amend the risk mitigation pool Within 30 days anyway Is does that amendment take place immediately or does that amendment also have to be delayed? It depends a little bit in the way that you craft the the risk mitigation pool, but Currently it has been established by resolution. So if you amend that Program to expand to Landlords in this situation that would also go into effect immediately So, um, it depends on if you're able to Before able to schedule it really if what i'm hearing is that it there isn't really a time gap We we can say it now, but it doesn't happen tomorrow But right it it would not happen. You can direct staff to come back with those with that resolution At you know another time I can't speak for staff as to workload Workloads and timing and when exactly that would be able to come back But whenever it did come back you would be able the council would be able to act on it At that time and it would go into effect immediately I have no problem supporting the risk mitigation pool. It sounds as if The fastest way to do it is to have you bring it back in a month The way that you had suggested you would be because we can do that immediately The reason I used the term month is Kelly kike and dollar program manager and I were planning a consent item for your consideration renewing catholic charities contract with the budget authority you did in june And in that we could expand access to the risk mitigation pool to incentivize property owners to accept vouchers And that the workload impact would be if we we could put that on consent And you can always pull it if you didn't like the language, but that was the track we were on In the 30-day time frame if we do that now If in this ordinance I say I'd like to see it come back And we vote for it in this ordinance. Is it okay for it to be on consent? It's okay for it to be on consent even if you simply as a council give direction to staff to come back in a month And again as director quine mentioned It could be placed on consent and it could be pulled by any any council member And I I'm making this this suggestion in lieu of Knowing exactly when this is coming back as we've seen earlier today In fact, we're not always the best at planning when things coming and what I don't want to have happen is I don't want to both either delay the implementation of the ordinance Or also end up having that discussion get delayed for whatever reason and not having the risk mitigation pool as a part of it So that's why i'm trying to make sure that we link the two of them together So what language do I need to give you to link the risk mitigation pool to this ordinance? Let me um, let me ask a question. I'm not sure I understand exactly what you want to do if you want This ordinance to not go into effect until a risk mitigation pool is Ready and available We can craft the ordinance To provide that the effective date then would not be 30 days after the second reading But it would be At such time that a mitigation pool Is established for landlords alternatively you can simply Proceed with your emotion to introduce this ordinance and come back for its second read And direct staff to come back within the Within the 30 days after the second read And then you would have the opportunity that the risk mitigation pool could be in effect When the ordinance goes into effect, I like the second choice You have a third choice a third choice would be to have the Second read come back at the same time as the risk mitigation pool item But you would then maybe have the risk mitigation pool ready And the ordinance wouldn't go into effect until 30 days thereafter. And so I apologize. I didn't mean for this to become such a Sensitive Topic what I'm looking for is understanding that we're going to be having that conversation Making sure that in the event that there's a gap between when we have the risk mitigation pool A conversation and when the ordinance goes into effect not delaying the impact or the the implementation of the ordinance But if there ends up being a gap that the default is that the risk mitigation pool is available Until such time that the council deems that it's not or that we change that program And and I'm I'm having some uncomfortableness with Sending out a risk mitigation pool without a discussion of what it means Right and the risk mitigation pool is not specifically on the agenda tonight You're certainly it's certainly within the realm of for you to give direction to come back with that program Or the expansion of that program at a minimum you would want to come back Even if you're going to if even if you're going to provide that just simply the existing fund could be expanded That will need to be agendized and And Have you consider it quite frankly so we had this discussion a month ago Where it was very clear from the council's perspective that we wanted to have both of those conversations at the same time Or in conjunction with one another so my reading of the item Is that because we have talked about that that there is an opportunity for us to have Both conversations simultaneously because they're the same conversation and again, it's all about how we get people actually into these housing units So what that I think the second option that you gave us Miss galler I think the second city madam city attorney. I think the second option you gave us meets all of our criteria Can I ask a question today and I'm going to use the example of the apartment fire Council gave you no direction to ever use that risk mitigation fund to support people who lost their apartments due to the fire, correct? That was a staff decision. That's correct. Giving this feedback now. Is there anything that you could not If you're hearing what the concerns we have that would prevent you from using those existing funds To support the motion that is before the council. I hear you loud and clear. Okay, that's As my second mr. Oliveris, are you good? Okay, so i'm recommending the I think we've made ourselves clear and i'm recommending the second option that you offered us As part of the motion so to clarify the ordinance the motion is to is to introduce the ordinance to direct staff to come back with a risk mitigation fund within a month and in the meantime to Authorize either formally or informally The director to allow use of that fund in the meantime Again, this ordinance won't go into effect until 30 days after the second read So that interim period May or may not in fact occur, right Okay, are we okay with that? All right, that's the motion Ms. Lemony did you have a question or I had one additional thing that I was hoping this I don't think we'll muddy the water So you don't have to get too nervous when staff does come back in a year It would be my request also to hear about A delta in the percentage of our vouchers that have been able to be used It would be nice to see if it um if it does work in that regard as well Thank you for not muddying the waters and mr. Sawyer Thank you. I have a question for clarification as well. So there was a mention of of um Not fees but um That's where I'm looking for consequences. No, um penalties. Thank you That's already in the ordinance as it's been stated So there's no there wouldn't be any Any further conversation about penalties because you did mention that in your I ask that when it come back in a year that there include information about the effectiveness of penalties and review of the recommendations of FHA of northern california So the so the so what's included in the in the ordinance that's not in the ordinance That's just a recommendation to staff. Okay. So just a conversation that you would be right to have Okay, thank you This has been a real struggle for me as a as a um as a landlord Um my my 93 year old father is a landlord. He has a duplex I know this is this is going to be very difficult for him to To deal with um, I believe That's he was his choice uh to be a landlord that is true But it wasn't his choice to be forced to be a part of the government program And that's part of I want I want to give a voice to the landlords That are concerned and fearful about being forced into a government program that has pitfalls It is uh, it is a little bit scary There's a lot of there's a lot of fear out there about section eight and I think that we I've I've grown up with that fear Um, and I think that it's part of that a great deal of it is is because we don't really know um the how it functions necessarily and There are there's a lack of clarity and there's there there are unknowns and it does take you have to navigate and and become a A partner with the city and a partner with the federal government to To implement or to be a part of a section eight program There's no one in this room. I I don't believe there's anyone in this room that that is That wants to discriminate against anybody But being but there are people in this room who do not feel comfortable being forced into a federal program And I am one of those people I don't I don't like the idea What I what I would like to replace the fear with is knowledge and to replace the fear with education And have a really really comprehensive educational program to start to replace the hyperbole And and and that fear that I mentioned because I think it is mainly fear-based And we've all heard the horror stories. It doesn't matter whether you're on section eight or not We hear the horror stories as landlords We know it can happen if you get the wrong tenant and the wrong tenant can come from anywhere And I and I you know, I I've seen it happen But it is there are when there are delays and there are when if there are delays And we are hoping that there won't be and we've heard some averages about how long the delays may take I know that a reason to repair on I have a home with a granny unit the granny unit required Some repair and that repair Took out three and a half months of rent In part because we keep our rents so low and that was and now we're now we are Because of the restrictions placed on on our our rentals and we have we've we've had a tendency of late to add A lot of sticks as opposed to carrots when it comes to landlords And I'm concerned about the cumulative Result in in those sticks It does it does concern me So I'm I'm looking for the carrots. I'm looking for the the educational program I'm looking for the risk mitigation pool. I'm really thankful that the council is adding that because I think it's really important My my red light tonight is a reflection of my concern about the the the predictable and unfortunate consequences of of the Of this coming forward at this time by the city I do and I'm glad that you've defined the number of residents that can be in any one rental and the state neglected to do that I think it's important to have that definition in place And the wheel in probably in 72 hours. We will have the protections that you seek And and the we can always and I like the idea of of reviewing this in a year I think the vice mayor's recommendation is a is a good one and I think that the entire council's it would be seems to be Willing enable and in fact to Wanting to support that that review because we don't have we can rarely come up with perfection in our ordinances Lord knows the legislature has very little perfection in their in their legislative actions And I think this is probably one of them as well And there there will be changes in the future And I think that we it's great that we might have we will have an opportunity I hope to make changes to improve The the ordinance But I think that that that educational program is Is is vital because there will be a possibility of landlords to go to work around this ordinance And what I don't what I would like to happen is that they embrace the ordinance that they embrace section eight That they do replace that fear with with with the with knowledge And that hyperbole starts to fade away because that's really when we'll have a functioning Ordinance is when people are are embracing it as opposed to trying to run in the other direction So even though I will be voting against it tonight. I know that we will be faced with with with a With this the state action In the very very near future And I hope that we are Capable of making those changes to our own ordinance in the future To make it function even better and to have those landlords Embrace it as opposed to want to run in the other direction. So thank you And Won't rehash everything I agree with so much what's been said here today and this coming back to council My interest was not to have an adversarial conversation You know not not to pick sides and I think when I've met with both tenant groups and with landlord groups It is about the city of santa rosa needs that skin in the game and that's why you know We've got that risk mitigation and I really think the landlord incentives and risk mitigation show we're serious We're just not going to bureaucracize every single thing to do with housing in santa rosa We're trying to get these end results here by getting people housed And I don't think it's right that someone doesn't accept that and we're willing to actually work with someone with that It's also you know, I think all of us on council still got a lot of cards and letters About forcing someone in the government program and I just don't see it that way all's insane. You cannot not Process that person whatever process you have used historically to decide who you're going to rent your room to So I I don't think we're forcing anyone into it. You just can't eliminate them from consideration So I am supportive of this and with that Um We have a motion and a second Could we have your votes, please? And that passes with five eyes one no by mr. Sawyer an abstention from mr. Tibbetz. Thank you So what i'm planning on doing, uh, do we have any cards for item 13 We'll take public comment and then we will be taking a break Because i'm making the assumption the pgne situational briefing is ongoing. We'll get updated from that After we do item 13 So item 13 first up Daniel Pablo followed by Peter Chernoff Everybody, uh, I just wanted to thoroughly introduce myself I'm the new student trustee of the junior college And I just wanted to openly invite the city council to attend our meeting at 3 p.m. Next monday Recently, uh, you guys have the new minimum wage increase Next week, uh, and that's an issue that I specifically fought for at the junior college So it'd be great if you guys could just show up there Talk with the city council not the city council the student government and our student body president as well But I also wanted to ask if I could go down there and give you guys my business cards so we can stay into contact But yeah, that's really much it and thank you for the time You can give your cards to the city clerk and she can get them to us. Would you repeat the date and time of the meeting? date excuse me Would you repeat the date time and location of the meeting? Yeah, so it'll be next monday at 3 p.m Uh at sr jc burdolini center Uh, I'll give you my contact information so we can just keep into contact and I'll tell you specifically What room we can meet in Peter chernoff followed by bill kelton. It looks like peter's left Is bill kelton here, uh, thank you, uh mayor and council members The reason i'm here today Is to something that came to my attention after um My girlfriend took a walk in howarth park Now, I don't know if you're all realizing this but there is a problem up in howarth park with some sexual attacks That I feel that need to be addressed For the safety of the women that do go hiking on these trails. My girlfriend being one of them She doesn't go out there anymore I won't let her if i'm not with her. She's not going to be on that trail So what i'm trying to propose here um When a woman goes into a bathroom in a park or any type of a public place like that, they're basically a trap There's one way in and there's one way out Now in the past on campuses you would see, uh, the blue lights Phone booth type of thing in an emergency call I think we need something a little bit more advanced than that those have kind of gone away because of the advent of cell phones We need something that's more debilitating to an attacker Much like a strobe light blue lights somebody's coming in there. They feel that they're about to be attacked They can punch that thing and a disorienting light you've seen even on Flashlights that are made these days, but it is something that needs to be addressed Now I will be reaching out to all members of the council regarding this To start the ball rolling on this, but I do need to start something on this because Women and children are the most at risk in these types of situations and It just reminds me of a similar incident that happened in my neighborhood down in southern california where a woman went into A bathroom to use it She never came out She was stabbed and killed and these are things that really you know You've got to remember these things because they don't stop. We need to address it I'm sure the police have been informed that are doing recurring more prominent Patrols, but I feel that it's something that can kind of go by the wayside I think that's pretty much all I've got to say on it But I will be reaching out to every one of you regarding this and start the ball rolling and see what Can be done for the safety of people that are on these trails and on public properties. Thank you for your time. Thank you Kate grow bell tazar It's kate still here Justin foresight followed by thomas ells Justin, yes Hey there. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me today My name is just in foresight and I'm here today regarding a very large homeless encampment That is building by food max on the joeward otter trail and other encampments along the trail I live on the other side of the wall 591 east jasmine circle inside the costa del sol community complex right next to food max And we have had continuous problems with the homeless over there The yell and fight all night So loud that my three-year-old often comes crying to a room because he was scared of the people yelling outside They constantly throw garbage over the wall including heroin needles Rain on trash and just last week a raw egg was thrown on my hood Which now needs to be painted. They're causing stress to my family and now they're causing financial stress too Just today At 1 p.m. I got some pictures. I tried to give them to you to show you the size of the encampment just today At 1 o'clock. I went to go take some pictures to bring to you to show you the size of the camp Which I was unable to get the whole size of because I was threatened and almost attacked so I turned around and ran off I then called the police to report the incident and nothing happened as usual This is beyond unacceptable. How can we just stand back and just let this happen allow them to make large 50 person encampments allow them to start fires and then let them stay in the same spot. They started the firing Uh allow them to harass people such as myself and nothing happened We need real change. So whatever policies got us here must change and we're going to end up like la or san francisco With this homeless problem Santa Rosa will lose its value and it will get a bad name for doing nothing Don't allow this to happen stand up and face the problem because too many people Don't see it and so out of sight out of mind. So nothing is being done The areas that are affected by this are largely latino and are being taken advantage of In these areas, there's more children and they are being exposed to this problem and it's unhealthy for them I don't want to raise my children somewhere that I can't take a walk And worry about needles being thrown over my wall and my child grabbing them I'm here today asking for your help to break up these large camps and at least try to spread them out So they don't gang up in areas and make them unsafe If we can't control the trails only option is to close them down Because right now they are just a homeless highway for those openly do drugs and live on I've spoken with the police security my hoa and I've done everything possible and nothing has helped everything has just gotten worse So I'm here today as a last resort Because I've tried everything else. Please don't let this ruin santa rosa If nothing is done, this will not stop me. I will do whatever it takes to expose the problem To Be a social media to the whole country. This needs to be this needs to be known. This can't end up like la like all these other areas Anyways, thank you for your time. I'm not going to give up on this. You will hear from me again You'll see me again If there's anything else you want to add, thanks for speaking with us Thank you. Thomas Ellis Hi, thank you. And uh, I wanted to address my comments to the climate crisis and Greta Thunberg and all the great kids around the country in the world who Spoke to the crisis and and uh, they speak to our heart and ask us to engage to protect the the world for their future and I don't think it's entirely different from this band's concerns right here and Those are not inconsistent with actually increasing the amount of housing stock that we have Increasing the response to the homelessness and so on. I mean There are people who are out there who are who are errant and They can impact the environment and Exacerbate the climate crisis. So uh, these are not completely separate issues A great deal of the climate crisis as I explained to to uh folks at homeless action recently was that Is that the refugees that are coming from South america and central america are frequently uh economic refugees and the climate itself Is an economic refugees that economic externalities are placed on the on the environment and that's a very same issue Is that the environment is just the weakest one of the of the Things and people that we have to place externalities on it's the same thing that's happening with the homeless and the same thing that's happening with the with the Underclasses and and the people with low incomes and so on And I would ask you to consider those and and really think to To the climate crisis itself. What can we do here? There's more than just Let's put solar panels on something No, in fact, I've spoken before about rooftop gardens and when you're going to consider the the city and county facility that you're you I I think we all hope that that the encouragement For the downtown development here with more housing and everything that it really occurs that you could be a catalyst for that And one part of that I think is is rooftop gardens And and there can be vertical gardening along the sides of the buildings that change the perception of of what it means to be in downtown We should make it so that it's a toss up, you know, you move to sit on the county and you want to live in the in Sort of the rural areas Why not make it A hard choice Whether or not people live out in a rural area or live in downtown santa rosa I think these are both great. These are such great choices. I have Why why they could have a house in both. I mean, you know potentially Thank you. Thank you. All right council. Take it 10 to 15 minute break or recess Okay, a lot of moving parts here Just so you know, we are going to take The public hearing first after we hear an update from our city manager And then we'll go to 15 1 and then come back to 14 2 and 14 3. Mr. City manager Could you give us an update, please? So I'd like to follow up as a continuation on my city manager report from earlier We just received news from PG&E that the city of santa rosa Is no longer forecast to be in the psps event overnight What I will say is that That there are areas of the county that are impacted by the psps and I would refer folks Back to the their their website so that you can track and make sure that you are Outside the area of forecast because there will be overnight Potentially psps in sonoma county in napo county And in the seara foothills and so there are some folks that are going to experience power outages We will not We still need the community to remain vigilant Make sure your cell is on tracking because we still are in a red flag warning While the eoc is no longer going to be hot for the rest of the evening It will be in a warm status. We will continue to track And monitor the situation because again we are in a red flag warning and to repeat those are high wind events with low humidity The other good news is on the horizon There had been some concern that there would be For our area Some potential For psps considerations over the weekend that weather report is now coming in very very favorable So it looks like over the next 24 hours the significant events will Will have worked their themselves out What I will say is that based on earlier conversation We will continue to have a state of emergency because this is one of the most difficult periods of our calendar Going into october and once we get a feeling that We're through the worst of it We will bring back that for consideration for council to relax that that state of emergency So just wanted to finish that report out And make sure everybody in the community understood that the city of santa rosa for this evening We are not in the forecast for a psps event, but we still are in a red flag warning So we ask you to remain Vigilant and and prepared because it still is A Potentially Challenging situation Great. Thank you for that And if I'm excuse me, if I may clarify I'm with respect to the declaration of emergency. We will be continuing to monitor and we will bring it back to you Under state law we need to Keep it in effect only for so long as the emergency Is it we're in a state of emergency and those conditions are met? So we'll continue to monitor and we'll bring it back to you as we need to great. Thank you very much Okay, mr. Gowan are you going to be replacing mr. McGlynn and let's go item 15.1 Great. Thank you. Item 15.1 is a public hearing pre zoning 4200 and 4224 Sonoma highway for annexation and presenting is Susie murray our senior planner Y'all have had a long day so in the interest of time I'm going to try and expedite this as much as possible The project before you is the recess storage um Sorry about that the project before you is the recess self storage. It's a mixed unit or a mixed use development Proposed out on Sonoma highway The project description includes annexing two parcels into santa rosa um the the project will also subdivide to um Only one of those two parcels into three new parcels and develop a 124 000 square foot four-story self storage unit and two residential structures each containing multiple multiple units 14 units in total um the entitlements required um a mitigated negative declaration A hillside development to develop on a slope greater than 10 percent a tentative map to as I said The property at 4224 Sonoma highway into three individual properties and a conditional use permit for um a self storage facility and for multifamily housing those four Entitlements were approved by the planning commission contingent upon The the pre zoning for annexation, which is what is before the council tonight Pre zoning is the first step to um To annexation after the pre zoning is complete assuming it's approved The project will go to lafko for annexation After annexation or actually concurrent with the annexation process the final um Entitlement design review will move forward to the the design review board. So the crux of this meeting is really the pre zoning The property the two properties are located here an aerial view you can see that um There's a couple um a residential structure and some other structures On the larger of the two properties. That's one proposed for development And the other property located at 4200 Sonoma highway is completely developed however the entire um the the scope of the annexation annexation boundary and mnd Um included both properties Um And just pulling back for some neighborhood context here You can see it's it's located adjacent to santa rosa creek. So the waterways advisory committee was pulled in on this one And um, it's right near the intersection of mission and highway 12 It's got a longer history. We first were introduced to development at the site in november of 2016 some of the highlights again The design review saw the project As a concept item in july of 2018 And then we received the applications for the project a couple of months later Let's see the mnd circulated for a 30 day public period in july of 2019 and in august The planning commission as i said earlier approved the first Or i guess four entitlements The site The two properties are located in an area designated as a retail and business services on the general plan land use designation They're being proposed to be pre-zoned into the cg General commercial zoning district, which is consistent with the general plan land use designation Properties surrounding the um the site are generally consistent with the general planned land use diagram The property the or the project is designed very thoughtfully designed in um In that just to orient you here the uh, sonoma highway is on the left side of your screen And santa rosa creek is on the right. Um, the the self storage unit or the self storage facility will be placed adjacent to the highway and there's a six unit residential building on the bottom that's adjacent to the residential neighborhood along stream side And then there's uh, there's an eight unit residential structure that overlooks the creek path, which will put eyes on the creek Oh, there we go. Ah, and I missed the big highlight. Um, this the the property or the Property owner project applicant has agreed and in fact given us a Given the city an easement Um on the property to build a well site My understanding is this is one of several sites that were considered For an emergency water resource and this the site ranked the highest so we're getting a well there The project has been found in compliance with the california environmental quality act as I mentioned earlier the planning commission has approved a mitigated negative declaration The um, so here's a rendering from sonoma highway what um What the project is Planned to look like. Um, again, it has to go to the design review board before that's finalized And then from the creek path both looking east and west The um once vegetation is established They these are the eight units that will be overlooking the path So with that it is recommended by the planning commission and the planning and economic Department that the council introduce and approve an ordinance to prezone the properties located at 4200 and 422 force Sonoma highway Into the cg zoning district to allow the two parcel county island to be annexed into city limits And on the applicant is here I Don't think he's Planning on making a presentation, but he's available for questions as am I great. Thank you council questions for staff Miss combs Can you describe the area that is not? Uh city that is county that is being annexed, you know part of this is being annexed is the whole property Uh currently county property that we will be annexing And is there any adjacent properties that we are not annexing that are County properties. What's the what's the diagram of the county there? That is a two parcel county island everything around it is city properties And the state prohibits us from annexing only one of the two parcels Both property owners are very much interested in coming into the city. I'm delighted to hear that answer. Thank you very much Any other questions Okay, this is a public hearing so I'll open the public hearing. Do we have any cards on this item? You don't have to fill out a card if you'd like to address the council on this item. Is anyone interested in Mr. Ells Do forgive me. Uh, I just happened to notice that There was a transformer a pole mounted transformer in front of the property And it might be a good idea if it could be encouraged to underground that Those transmission lines or that or that service to that property It might be a good place to start doing that thinking about the fire hazards. Thank you. Thank you Would anyone else like to address the council? please Identify yourself and go ahead. Hi, my name is Renee Amore and I am the property owner of 4200 Sonoma highway And I fully support this and I'm looking forward to both the properties being annexed into the city Great. Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the council? Seeing no one else rise. We'll close the public hearing Ms. Fleming you've got this item Thank you I'd like to move an ordinance of the city of the council of the city of Santa Rosa pre-zoning the properties Located at 4200 and 4224 Sonoma highway also identified as assessor's parcel numbers 032-010-023 and 032-010-005 respectively To the general commercial zoning district file number prj18-050 and wait for the reading of the text second We have a motion to second any additional questions or comments Seeing none your votes, please And that passes unanimously. Thank you All right, we'll go back on the agenda to item 14.2. Mr. Gowan Yeah, item 14.2 It's a report additional homeless service investments capital and programming improvements at samuel l jones hall homeless shelter And presenting is kelly keckendall and dave guine Good evening, mayor schwaith-halman members of the council I'm going to jump right in here and provide you an overview of tonight's presentation I'll provide background on sam jones hall Also the state homeless emergency aid program and the city's application for funding for both sam jones hall and the bennett valley senior center site And also the homesonoma county funding recommendations that came out of that application process And then we'll cover the proposal that's before you this evening, which is to seek Your authorization for the expenditure of funding for capital improvements and programming improvements Including the activation of a navigation center at sam jones hall So to provide some background on the shelter, it's been an operation for more than 13 years Actually in november it will be 14 years In august 2017 with the city's support catholic charities launched a housing focused program The current capacity at the shelter is up to 213 beds 138 are set aside for vulnerable individuals coming to our system of care through coordinated entry Plus an additional 75 beds for the homeless encampment Assistance pilot program. This is the city's heat program not to be confused with the state's heat program Beds are also set aside. So in addition to heat dedicated beds, we have beds available for emergent conditions The shelter provides year round 24 seven support Including case management services and housing Navigation location and stabilization services as well as financial resources to help individuals find housing The shelter is funded by the city the county and the community foundation Our current operating agreement with catholic charities for this fiscal year is approximately 1.3 million dollars Catholic charities also gets an allocation of funding through homesonoma county In the approximate amount of 175 000 bringing the budget for the shelter to about 1.5 million for the year Moving on to the state heat program If you recall in february Earlier the earlier this year council directed staff to submit an application To homesonoma county through the sonoma county community development commission, which is the lead agency For 3.6 million dollars in funding We asked for 1.6 million for the replacement of the roof at sam jones hall An additional 2 million dollars for the activation of the santa rosa navigation center at the former bennett valley senior center In april homesonoma county, which is our new continuum of care Keep going. Sorry. Okay Through its leadership council awarded the city of santa rosa 1.2 million dollars And those funds have been prioritized for the roof at sam jones hall The sam jones hall navigation center so Following the leadership council homesonoma county's leadership council decision to award funding Which i said is prioritized for the roof at sam jones hall staff began brainstorming ways to Improve the shelter both in terms of programming and Capital improvements and this is sort of in light of the fact that we didn't receive funding to activate the bennett valley senior center so we worked with catholic charities, of course our partner we worked with transportation and public works Building and fire to look at the capital improvements and programming improvements and we identified a potential source of funds through Uh an affordable housing NOFA from 2016 so there's a balanced remaining of approximately 1.6 million dollars that was previously allocated I'll go into how we're proposing to use these funds in the next couple slides so capital improvements The estimate to replace the roof at sam jones hall and that work is underway, which is great and we have a timeline to be done with that estimated by december Which is good news So the estimate for the roof is 1.6 million as i mentioned We received an award of 1.2 million in state heat funding So that leaves us with a gap gap of approximately four hundred thousand dollars We're proposing to use these NOFA funds for that purpose The balance of the NOFA funds approximately 1.2 million dollars We're proposing to modify the large storm and I have Some visual screenshots of the the shelter to show with you in the next couple slides In that large storm we're proposing to subdivide it into three Areas one would be a 38 bed navigation center And then two smaller dorms Both 15 and 18 beds This would provide us the ability to provide increased Privacy and accommodations for shelter clients particularly those with disabilities seeking reasonable accommodation And would further the city's efforts to align With the preliminary injunction related to the recent lawsuit Additionally Through these improvements we could in we can improve or promote both client safety and staff safety at the shelter And subject to your direction this evening We would return at a future council date with a contract And a budget for these capital improvements for your consideration Here's the existing floor plan of the shelter the highlighted Section of the shelter is the dorm that we're proposing to modify with the capital improvements Here is this redesigned large storm So the 38 bed navigation center and then the two smaller dorms with 15 beds and 18 beds Moving on to programming improvements So After the capital improvements so after the roof and after the capital improvements to redesign the large storm We're proposing to use the balance of these funds to provide enhanced services to promote retention and housing placements at the shelter And to better serve highly vulnerable individuals coming to our system of care with the implementation of coordinated entry And the implementation of a housing focused program at the shelter This includes specialized staff behavioral health specialists to better serve these individuals We're proposing a one-year pilot program At the conclusion of one year we would come back to council with an evaluation of the program and recommend next steps We would ensure this pilot program would align with housing first coordinated entry and our regional efforts through home Sonoma county Similar to the the capital improvements being proposed tonight for the programming for the pilot program We would return with a contract scope and budget for council consideration at a future date These modifications do Reduce the capacity of the shelter the current capacity is 213 beds and with this proposal would be 208 beds 138 would still be set aside or preserved for coordinated entry We would have 38 beds as I discussed for the navigation center and then 38 beds or Cots would be activated for a heap for the The encampment program or during emergent situations Okay in terms of outreach that was conducted related to the request before you this evening We did reach out to ian d'jong. He's the president of orc code consulting to Solicit his feedback on what we're posing at the shelter He supported the idea of creating safe spaces in the shelters particularly for individuals With complex needs that are vulnerable and have potentially having behavioral health crises He also suggested or supported that improvements for safety for both clients and for staff that The installation of security cameras cameras would be a good idea And we also talked with him about the staffing model At the shelter and if there's ways that we could potentially improve that to improve a shelter outcomes And retaining clients the shelter. So catholic charities is working with orc code right now To to take a closer look at their staffing model and see if there's any improvements that can be made I presented may I ask Is it possible for us to get a copy of his response or his report? On the recommendations that he made based on what he saw We spoke with him on the phone. So i'm just relaying that information If there's any written communication regarding the staffing proposal. I'm happy to share that with council. Thank you So I also presented to the community advisory board and the downtown subcommittee that this Requested me coming forward to council We did outreach to the neighborhood. I did send emails to My neighborhood contacts to let them know that this would be coming forward. They've also been made aware of the construction project And we pushed it out via social media. So a post went out on next door to the four neighborhoods surrounding the shelter I did get some feedback from one Neighbor that i'm in regular communication with that she also without me prompting her Would support the installation of security cameras at the shelter to to potentially improve neighborhood safety and concerns And advocacy and community groups I did share this information that this will be coming forward to council with homeless action I met with a representative of homeless action. I think adrian might still be here Hi She might have comments on this, but i'll i'll share what we what we discussed during that meeting Seemed that general support for the the capital and program programming improvements at the shelter Especially around the you know trying to provide for reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities Did express some concern that additional funding could be going to catholic charities for programming without an official request for proposals process And then I also presented to santa rosa together last week. So that sums up our outreach efforts around this effort With this I'll move forward with a recommendation It is recommended by the housing and community services department that the council by resolution authorized the expenditure Up to 1.6 million 1.6 million dollars remaining from an affordable housing pilot program notice of funding availability for capital and programming improvements associated with replacement of the roof And modification of the large dorm including activation of a navigation center at the samuel l jones homeless homeless shelter This concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have thank you great Thank you for that presentation We're going to put do a brief pause before we ask any questions because the city manager has some updated information to share The information is not a change from the information I presented before But it is apparent that pg&e has posted something on their website that suggests that there are 700 Customers within the city of santa rosa impacted the area is actually north of that it is Porter valley To calistoga. I think it's probably an error in terms of zip code allocation We've informed pg&e of the error error and they are investigating that That error so I just wanted to make sure You heard it from us that We've made pg&e aware of an error in the press release. They just put out I've also informed the press democrat That that that pg&e is looking for the sourcing error, but I wanted to make sure we close that loop. Thank you Great. Thank you Okay back to the presentation questions I do have one regarding the um behavioral health specialists Would they be city employees or would we contract with beccaloo or the county somewhat? How would that work and I had the same question for janiel in earlier today Well, I was preparing for this and my understanding is that that work would be contract Contracted out because catheterities does not have that expertise in house And so what would that role be? It would be a subcontract and we have a similar arrangement right now with our host agreement Where catheterities does some subcontract out some of the work stay with social advocates for youth They've also subcontract subcontracted in the past with beccaloo programs. Okay. And so again, it's um And you may have already said this sorry if I missed it But it's more to support the more vulnerable population that we're now serving out at same jones hall versus what had been done in the Past because of our engagement with coordinated entry Absolutely in our shift towards housing focused or housing first, you know model at the shelter where we're prioritizing more More vulnerable individuals with complex needs And including, you know persons with with disabilities. Great. Thank you. Okay Seeing no other questions. I have one card on this item adrian lobby. Thank you I do appreciate that Kelly I kind of reached out to me. We had a really interesting and I hope useful conversation for both of us We don't oppose fixing the roof at sam jones Move checking Making one of those dorms into smaller dorms seems like a reasonable idea There's a lot of problems at sam jones with overcrowding And I think uh if the staff there feels that they can Monitor people in these smaller rooms. It's probably a lot better for the people who are in them So that seems good. I am a little concerned about well two things one is Again a big chunk of money going towards catheterities as I have said repeatedly We would like to have all these things put out for bids and not just kind of automatically Assume that that they have to go to catheterities We also would like to call for an audit of catheterities. We think it needs to be done and should have been done quite some time ago In terms of this particular item, it's a lot of money. That's kind of Undefined that it's going to go for improvements at sam jones including some mental health workers Now mental health at sam jones is a great idea. It should really happen there. I agree But we do not have a plan for a winter shelter this year We we've been told that the armory is not available because there is just they're not going to rent it to anyone this year So we're trying to scramble around some of us to figure out if there's any way to At least get some people into shelter this winter But I suspect we're going to have some emergencies coming up and I'm concerned that um, there isn't I guess I would recommend that some of this money After you finish the roof, right? pay for the roof Have some reserve funds in case the roof costs more because you know construction it always costs more Great, but I would like to see the rest of this money reserved for Further thought. Thanks Okay, thank you Did you fill out a card thomas Thank you I'm not sure if I'm right in this but I saw the I believe 1.2 million dollars was from the heat funds and then 1.6 million dollars was from the nofa That's 2.8 million dollars and it looks like right there. You're only approving 1.6 million So I'm just wondering if that's actually accurate and what you're doing or where the funds already previously allocated and and Uh, authorized so in which case this is just an augmentation of that. I don't know But as I was hearing the presentation it sounded like you were going to have cameras in these rooms and my question is first of all people do undress in those spaces and They're in various states of undress. There are all kinds of situations Which maybe seem like reason enough to have cameras, but There's a lot of stuff that goes on as far as with cameras cameras is a very difficult situation and then Would that be taped or could that be used any other way or you know, there's there's I'm It doesn't sound good Okay, thank you. Sorry Thank you. Do we have any other cards? Nothing. Mr. Alvarez. You have this item Thank you a little resolution of the council seat of san rosa authorizing the expenditure of up to $1.6 million remaining from an affordable housing pilot program Notice of funding available for capital and programming improvements at the San Miguel Jones hall Homeless shelter located at 40 20 fiddly avenue and wait for the reading of the text The motion is second any other questions Would that yes miss flaming I'm wondering what the nature of the behavioral health workers are what Do we have a specific idea in mind for who is going to be What kind of qualifications those individuals might have? We don't have a plan yet But we will be working on that when we bring back a contract and a budget and scope of work to council And so if you have input on that, please provide it to staff and we'll take it into consideration while we're We're developing that that contract and scope of work Am I right to understand that the the positions for those individuals would be part of the pilot? Yes, so Do we have any reasonable sense of if it were to be successful how we would continue to fund that beyond the year The sustaining is an important piece of this I don't have an answer for that this evening The idea is that we we would be evaluating that as we're coming close to that that year to see the effectiveness of the program And then looking at ways to fund it to fund it moving forward There are a variety of you know, there are additional funding coming funding coming down from the state Which might be an option to to sustain excuse me that portion of the program But we haven't evaluated sustaining it moving forward and it's a good question. Thank you This comes you have comments. I have a question. Thank you Do we have specific goals and outcomes? For this shelter yet is it Do we do we know what we're expecting to get? out of this shelter Yet do we have data or any anything metrics set up for the shelter for the pilot program that we're proposing this evening I don't have that tonight when we come back with a contract a scope of work and budget We will we'll have it at that time. Yes. Yes. Okay. I mean we have metrics in place for the existing program But for the pilot that's proposed this evening, right? I don't have those. Okay. That's what it's about This evening's pilot that I wanted to know if we had an idea of what kind of metrics we'd be looking at And one of our commenters mentioned some concerns about winter shelter It looks as if we're diminishing the number of beds at this site reasonably so perhaps but Have we do we have winter shelter plans to at least make up the difference in beds somewhere else So we used to operate a winter shelter program at sam jones hall for about four or five years We did away with that program when we increased overall capacity year round. So yes, we I appreciate that I'd rather have folks have year round And so, you know, we're not planning at the shelter to add a winter shelter component, you know, there We do have beds set aside There's the 130 accorded entry beds and they have beds set aside for the pilot program or for emergent situation So if we have free beds open and there's people out there that need to come in They can come in, you know to the shelter that way and then through home sonoma county The continuum of care they do typically fund winter shelter expansion I don't have details on that this evening But I can get that to you where shelters throughout our county do add additional beds during the winter months So were we thinking that there will be a we're not thinking there would be additional beds through the winter at this site though No, I don't see we've already got it I don't see how we could possibly add more shelter beds to sam jones hall And how many beds total are do we have fewer at this site? So there's currently 213 beds The proposal this evening is reducing it only by five to 208 so we did our best With the recon redesign of the the large dorm To spread the beds throughout the shelter within building in fire constraints with you know Sort of mitigating or minimizing our loss of beds. Thank you very much for that hard work. That's not easy to do All right your votes please And that passes with six i's. Thank you Mr. Gowan item 14.3 Thank you. I'm 14.3 as a report developers selection and authorization to begin negotiations To enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement for development of the former vinnett valley senior center complex And presenting is nicole rathburn program specialist for hcs Good evening mayor council members. I'm nicole rathburn program specialist for housing and community services This item tonight in front of you has three components to it so first is The selection of a developer for affordable housing at the former vinnett valley senior center complex With a recommendation from an ad hoc committee who reviewed the proposals to select free bird development as the developer for the site To authorize staff to begin negotiations to enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement And to appropriate 35 000 dollars from the general fund Undesignated reserve for the consultant fees associated for with entering into that exclusive negotiation agreement So for a brief overview The vinnett valley senior center complex Was reviewed in the 2018 facilities assessment and determined to be in poor condition at that time Uh, the services for seniors were subsequently Moved to the west steel location and the family location for senior services with the site being closed last year Uh in february of 2019 Council's direction to utilize this site for affordable housing and or permanent supportive housing in the long term So staff went out and issued a request for developer qualifications and proposals with a due date of july 15 While that solicitation was open there were significant outreach efforts performed by staff to engage with the community about the development of the site Uh, there is a bilingual postcard and flyers mailed out to the site Next door posts. There were several of them news flashes onto the city's website A collaboration with neighborhood leaders and local nonprofits an email mailing list Which is sent out numerous updates to interested parties in the neighborhood And lastly a community meeting Located in the neighborhood And from that community meeting We were able to collect the top tier priorities From the neighborhood on what they would like to see in an affordable housing development at the site With the top three priorities being active property management community involvement and adequate on-site parking So from the solicitation two proposals were received and evaluated For financial capacity developer experience property management experience Service provider experience for any permanent supportive housing units The depth of affordability and efficient and feasible timeline And alignment with the neighborhood priorities developed at the community meeting So based on a review of a joint ad hoc committee of city council and housing authority members Freebird development was identified for selection tonight and recommended by the ad hoc committee The proposal categories that Freebird's proposal was deemed the most qualified included their financial capacity Their property management and support services offered an experience And the conceptual proposal of half of the units being permanent supportive housing for formerly homeless Individuals or families and the other half for affordable housing without a preference Their proposal also included varied unit sizes between studio all the way up to three bedroom units Had a depth of affordability And inclusion of the neighborhood priorities in the site So this item relates to two main council goals To meet the housing needs and to attain functional zero homelessness through the permanent supportive housing units By acting on this item tonight, you would be positioning the development for future funding opportunities And creating permanent supportive housing units to help attain functional zero and homelessness So with that, uh, it is recommended by the housing and community services department Then the benet valley senior center proposal evaluation ad hoc committee That the council by resolution Select free bird development company as the developer for the city on parcels at 702 and 716 benet valley road in 921 and 927 Rutledge avenue Authorize staff to initiate negotiations to enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement with free bird development company And to authorize the chief financial officer to appropriate 35 000 from the general fund unassigned reserves to the real estate projects For costs associated with entering into an ena with free bird development company And with that, I'd like to open it up to the ad hoc committee of council and joint housing authority commissioners There's any other comments First open up. We have the chair of the housing authority steve. You want to make any comments about? right And we'll uh, mr. Story will be introduced in this item, so i'm sure you'll have comments when we get to that point if you want Very brief. Yeah and just for my participation I was really One want to thank staff for the information that was provided to us on both those proposals And what I really liked about this one is just the flexibility You know with both who it'll be serving and the size of the units from the studio to the three bedroom I really like the variety and the fact that feedback from The neighbors were factored into and basically are going to be one of those priorities for the successful development of it So that's from the ad hoc perspective. That's all I have So I'd like to open up for other council members. So let's start first. Uh, mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor just just a quick question. Uh, the dollars are coming out of the city's preserves Do we know where those currently are? The reserve levels Yeah, I don't know that I'll stop my head, but uh, we can get that answer for you Okay, if you could that be helpful because I know, um, we were trying to make sure we Reached our reserve policy of I think 15 percent and we were really striving for that in our last budget process $35,000. I don't think it's going to make the the big difference in in that impact, but I do want to see where we're at in the reserves Ms. Fleming Thank you I'm curious to know in the conceptual proposal where we have about half going to a permanent supportive housing And the other half going to and that's what it is permanent supportive housing And then the other half going to affordable housing Do we have a guesstimate about how many units we're looking at here? What kind of density we're looking at? Yeah, so as the site is currently zoned it could accommodate up to 46 units with the density bonus So we'd be looking at about 23 units of either And do you have a sense of the so the permanent supportive housing you touched on saying for being for Formerly homeless people and it says here that the affordable housing varied unit sizes, which is great Adept of affordability and inclusion of neighborhood priorities I do wonder Having worked directly with formerly homeless people and getting them housed and then also combining that with affordable housing if there will be a plan to Either design or execute this with some amount of Observance for the fact that raising a family on a permanent supportive housing site is A potentially difficult thing to do Yeah, and that factored into our decision to Recommend free birds development proposal They have proposed to partner with allied housing and abode services for the permanent supportive housing And they have experience in these type of developments where they are part permanent supportive housing a part affordable housing And they they have the experience in making those projects successful I'll just speak for myself in saying that when we go forward with things like Inclusionary housing and wanting to you know move away from in-loofees and toward a percentage of affordable housing within existing developments A big reason for me in supporting that is that I want to see Families be able to raise their children in environments that give their children really great opportunities And this is Not that I recognize that we need affordable housing and I recognize that we need permanent supportive housing It's tough for me to see that this is that this is a good idea to split them I'd rather see it be all of permanent supportive housing Any other questions from staff miss combs Is there any I have not reviewed in detail Any conceptual documents Um Is there any inclusion It says inclusion of neighborhood priorities would that include our need For child care throughout our community much less in that neighborhood in in particular So child care didn't come up as one of the neighborhood's top priorities for the site But they did express an interest in community space allowing the community to use portions of The site how it's developed and that was incorporated in the conceptual proposal to include community spaces community meeting rooms at the site Okay Do we have that document? The conceptual proposal document the full proposals were reviewed by the ad hoc committee And they are available. I could send it out to it's through a drop box because the file size is too large I would like to receive the document. I am concerned that Um, we have such a strong need for child care. We lost a lot of child care in the fires Seems like a good location for child care Any other questions from council? We have one carbon for the unique situation and tally's filled one out So we'll let you go ahead and make go ahead and make your comments Just since mr. Tibbet's off for you his seat go ahead just use it there. I'm not going to make a walk up there Thanks So, um, I'm a southmark resident, um And I appreciate you guys taking into the uh the into into account the july 10th You know information that we gave you Unfortunately, uh, I mean I I like proposal one too. I read them today. I appreciate I appreciate everything you've been doing Nicole I really do but um As a community, I think the the broader thing we wanted to address was Getting more support for the community that already exists there before bringing any more people in and and you know We can talk about the best way to do affordable housing or permanent supportive housing But having um something for the kids to do, you know, I was talking to danielle On community advisory board and she was out there at neighbor fest and she was talking to all the kids and they were complaining that You know Everything to do is too far away and they would really like stuff there too. So, um I don't really know where to go with that. I don't want to you know make this drag on forever Or sort of stop the the um the proposals, but if we could maybe even agenda get something on the agenda for um You know alternate usage for the space beyond Permit supportive housing. I I think our community would appreciate that. Um I don't know really where to go with that, but I just want to speak for the community Great, uh adrian lobby Because I also haven't had time to or taken time to review this carefully But I want to address First of all to thank the staff for and and anyone all of you for Putting some housing in that's very specifically related to homelessness It it's it's so important And in terms of councilman fleming's concern about children There are family member families who have members that need permanent supportive housing And so I think there's a kind of false dichotomy dichotomy or there could be Between the people who need that kind of housing and people who have children and families So I'm just kind of raising it as an as a discussion point and thank you so much All right. Thank you Mr. Sorry, you have this item Thank you, mayor and thank you for encapsulating the comments really well about the the subcommittee and and also the I'd like to emphasize the the hopes and the needs of the neighborhood were um Addressed and that's not always the case I think it's a a win-win in this situation So I'll introduce a resolution of the council of the city center Rosa selecting free bird development company llc As the developer of the city-owned parcels at 702 and 716 bennett valley road And 921 and 927 revelage avenue A in apns 009-333-014 009-338-009 038-151-011 And 038-151-004 In authorizing staff to initiate negotiations to enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement And authorizes the chief financial officer to appropriate $35,000 from the general fund unassigned reserves To fund the project and wait for the reading second Any additional comments And mr. So you you did get the enas with free bird development company, correct I just missed that when you were reading that did I not did I not include that line? Into Selecting free bird development company. Yes, I did. Thank you. Yes, ll. I remember saying llc All right. We have a motion and a second you vote split. Oh comments miss fleming Just want to be very clear that I am in support of affordable housing and I am in support of permanent supportive housing What I'm not in support of is siloing Affordable housing independent of mixed-use housing I believe that and the research bears that families raising children tend to do better when they have role models that In their in their mixed-use mixed income housing units It's not a commentary on affordable housing or public permanent supportive housing Okay, if I may mr. Mayor, I just want to clarify also that councilmember soire Did include an amendment to the title of the resolution as it's in your packet To add the authorization for the chief financial officer to appropriate the 35,000 so just in case someone is Looking at the resolution that is additional language and I do recommend that you add that so that it matches up with the recommendation and with the text of the resolution And madam city attorney, so we it is written on this page. Shall I just make sure this gets into your hands or the clerk? The clerk. All right. Thank you. Thank you So we're good Correct so your votes, please And that passes with six eyes and mr. Tibbet's abstaining. Thank you And it looks like we have For our second public comment period Thomas ells Thomas did you already comment during the first? Public comment period Yeah, i'm sorry bud. You're only allowed one non agenda items public comment So are there any other additional cards? Okay meetings adjourned