City Council - Regular Meeting

Do we want to kick off?

Yes, please. Okay, I will call to order this January 12 Council meeting at five o'clock. Beth, can you call the roll please? Council Member Cooper?

Council Member Burke?

Here.

Mayor Wilkinson?

Present. Council Member Mark? Here. Council Member Carpiette? Here.

Okay, we are going to be going into closed session. And I, Beth, do have any public comment on those closed session items? There are no attendees. Okay, in that case, I think we can adjourn to go into closed session. Adam. Okay, I'm going to call back to order this council meeting, nothing to report out from our closed session. Beth, do you need to do another roll call or we're fine? No, okay, perfect. Okay, we are going to move on to item number 3A, city council reports. Does any council member have a report?

I have a quick report. I attended the January RBRA meeting and I'd like to report that the anchor routes in Richardson Bay are down to the number five. And three of those five are currently actively in the process of getting housing on land. So the numbers are dwindling and they do anticipate having everyone out of the yield zone by October of this year. Thank you. Anybody else?

I didn't really have a council report, but I know that we're planning on placing Mr. Snyder back, I'm assuming, back on the Mosquito and Vector Control District. And I was just going to remind everyone that we decided at one point we'd love to have our agencies come and speak to us at some time. And I think it would be nice if we could also hear from him, whether over Zoom or in person, and also Larry Binkley, who's our representative to the Marin County Commission on Aging.

So Beth, can you think about that in terms of the next few months agendas to get these people scheduled? Anybody else? No, I'm going to give a quick update on Roaring Clean Energy. I'm not sure if people are following, but PG&E has made some pretty aggressive moves as of January 1st, so they are both cutting their generation rate, and they're also... there's effectively an increase in the charge to MCE consumers. It's in a different charge to charge consumers for the ongoing cost of PG&E from the shift. So the result is that MCE rates right now will be pretty uncompetitive compared to PG&E. But MCE is just going into its budget and rate cycle. So over the next few months, those decisions will get made. And hopefully we will be able to bring down rates for consumers as well so that we will be able to be close to competitive with PG&E. In that case, with no questions or comments from council, I'm going to open this section up for public comment.

We have Dr. Rothman.

Mr. Rothman, good evening.

Yes, thank you very much. I'm so glad that Mayor Wilkinson is keeping a very close eye and a close hand on what's happening with MCE. I know that when I read the explanation in the IJ, I'm sorry to say it was too complex for me to understand, but When MCE, as it was announced at a previous meeting, that although the costs of electricity were going down, our rates were going up, And Sally intervened to get an oversight committee. I think that's just so wonderful. I don't know whether the correction that she's hoping for can be made. As I say, I acknowledge it's a very complex issue, but I'm so glad that she's doing her best in that respect. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Dr. Rothman. Any further comment, Beth? Hands raised. Great. Okay. We're going to move on to the city manager report, Robert.

Yes. Thank you, Mayor Wilkinson. I have a few updates this evening. I'll start off by mentioning that over the next couple of months, you may notice a new face around City Hall. Alex Oliveria will be helping out on a temporary basis at the front desk while we work through a position vacancy left by Christina Cook. We'll be advertising an opening for an administrative aid technician this week. So if you know someone who would be a good fit, you'll be able to find details on the position, including job duties and salary on the city's website. Shifting gears to public works, I'd like to announce that the structural and seismic update project for Beach Road is in its final design stage. This project will strengthen the failing seawall on Beach Road, particularly in locations where the seawall's foundation is undersized and would fail during an earthquake. Notably, this project does not increase the height of the seawall. Even still at $4.4 million, it does represent a large public work project, one of the largest that the city has tackled in several decades. So with that in mind, we want to ensure success. We've been working with the mayor and director Boyd to establish an ad hoc working group This group will be asked to assist staff in auditing the final project plans, financials, contract bid documents, and ultimately the contractor's proposals over the next few months. We're looking forward to having the extra eyes and expertise on the project before we ultimately bring it back to City Council to approve the final project and the contract. We anticipate the majority of the ad hoc group meetings will be open to the public. For continuity, some of the project's EIR review committee that met in 2022 will be returning. We're also looking to pull in volunteers from the Finance Committee and Disaster Preparedness Task Force. We'll be publishing a work plan and agenda, so keep your eye on the website if this project interests you. Moving on, there are a couple of important dates I don't want you to miss. First is the annual town meeting, which will be held on January 27th at 6 p.m. Please join us to celebrate our 2025 Citizen of the Year and CIS in the Merita. And the second date to remember is in February. We'll be hosting the annual council retreats in the community center. We'll be discussing a variety of important future planning topics for the city. That date will be Monday, February 23rd from noon to 4 p.m. You can keep an eye on the monthly newsletter with the Belvedere Breeze, or you can check the city's website for more information as the events get closer. And then finally, please be aware that the Special Planning Commission meeting, which was originally scheduled for tomorrow, the 13th, has been rescheduled to the 2nd of February. On the agenda is the topic of Mallory's request to amend two conditions of approval regarding the expiration of the entitlements and when the certificates of occupancy will be issued for the project's build sequence. In parallel, city staff continue to meet with the developer's team to work through required information for the demolition and bulkhead permits on that same project. That's all I have now, but I am open for questions.

Do any council members have questions?

I'm curious about the ad hoc group. So do you, or is that open for people to join at this point? Or do you feel like you're pretty set on... who you want to have given that you have certain groups?

That's something that the mayor, myself and public works director Boyd have been talking about, you know, who's the best group of people to be on there and looking at backgrounds and experience. We've made some initial outreach to see who's available and we're still working on that. But if you have recommendations, we'd certainly take them.

Okay, great, thanks.

A couple, a question and a comment. First of all, on the Beach Road stabilization project, do you have a sense of the timing, meaning when the next milestones would be reached?

Uh, ideally we'd be going out to bid the project sometime in February. There's a few things that have to happen. Of course, the schedule with this ad hoc subcommittee has to align, uh, and give the committee enough time to review the documents. Like I said, we'll be, we'll be looking at final project plans. The RFP, which is the kind of contractors bid package that ends up being published the financials. And then finally, after a couple of months. of the project being bid out, then we'd be returning back with those bids and reviewing those with the working group as well. So between three to four months is what we're estimating before we get to that final point where we'd be able to bring it back to city council.

Perfect, thank you. Yeah. You mentioned, the second question has to do with ancillary or additional staffing, both for this project, the Be Strong Stabilization projects and potentially, not potentially, but Mallard Point as well. And I'm just curious, what's your thinking or what's the... not the algorithm, but your calculus to when you would bring those people in for those two various projects. Because I understand that, especially with an outside project like Mallard Point, there's ultimately a fixed fee that this would go against. And the longer we have that person, the more we spend for that person out of that fee. So we want to be efficient about how we do that. I'm curious about your calculation for both those projects when you think you would need the additional support.

Yeah, absolutely. It's a balance between, you know, what we can afford necessarily and, you know, whether we actually need. I think for both projects, there's a benefit in bringing somebody on sooner than later, particularly with the seawall project, knowing how complex that is and getting that person to integrate it early.

By seawall, you mean the beach road?

Beach road, seawall project, yes. TAB, Mark McIntyre, with bringing them in and getting them integrated with the project and the stakeholders, is a good thing. TAB, Mark McIntyre, I think there's also benefits in doing that with mallard point all you know, to your point, though, we do want to make sure we're collecting fees and revenue from that to to fund that position we're not getting too far ahead of ourselves. TAB, Mark McIntyre, director. Rebecca Markwick has been working on doing some outreach and she has a few names on her list of consulting firms that do that type of project management and oversight work.

As the, I know you mentioned that the potential review what those conditions move to February, but as that gets resolved or whatever the subsequent steps might be, it would be great to let us know specifically your timing and the type of person and when they would, you know, come on board to support the staff that you already have.

Yeah, of course, I can keep you updated.

Any other questions for Robert? Robert, I know we talked about this separately, but I wanted to raise it again in public. Obviously, with all of the flooding that we saw throughout Marin over the weekend, there's been questions raised about the extent to which the Beach Road Stabilization Project may or may not address any of the potential flooding issues related to that seawall. Can you just elaborate on that?

Yeah, like I mentioned in the report, this project and Chris Wanner, Truthfully, that the EIR that was done to study this project did not contemplate any increase in height of the sea walls. Chris Wanner, we're looking at that as a separate phase really we're focusing right now on structurally improving the sea wall, so it can withstand an earthquake event. Chris Wanner, And not topple over just over a long period of time it's a costly project at four and a half million and to integrate increasing the height of the sea wall would require would require more engineering. and more costs. That's something that we need to plan for in the future, and it's kind of on a long-term outlook.

I think there is some nuance there, though, however, in that there are some areas of that stretch that are being contemplated to be worked on where there's clear settlement. So at the end of the day, I can't imagine you're going to leave it settled. You're going to probably restore it to the elevations of the you know, immediate area. I don't mean raising everything, but if something is noticeably lower than other places, it'll probably at the end of the day be consistent in height with the rest of the wall. I'm talking about like the lower curve. I'm not talking about anything higher.

Right. Yeah. And it's a, the more you dig into that topic, it's actually fairly complex about how the water enters through those areas and ultimately could get trapped even if you build up a small segment. So We originally contemplated a passive seawall that didn't have any breaks, a continuous height. That's something we have to think about. And it's something I've asked Tony to look into with our engineers. Is there some kind of an intermediate phase that would give us some real flood protection while we're working on this project? So it's something we'll look into.

OK, I'll open this to public comment. Do we have any public comment, Beth?

Yes, we have Dr. Rothman.

Hi, Dr. Rothman. Thank you very much. With respect to the Beach Road, there seem to be two aspects, and you've alluded to them in your discussion this evening, and Mr. Zadnik did in his introduction. One is strengthening the location. When I served on the Flood Committee, whatever it was called, they said there was no foundation under Beach Road, that it was just big rocks and small rocks, that there was no intentional foundation in a sense of resisting the water, and that that was the problem. And I'm glad that's being dealt with. The second, though, doesn't seem that complicated to me, and that's the height. Anyone who goes by there knows that there is a seawall. It's about four, four and a half feet high. The only trouble is it's got holes in it. I don't mean holes from deterioration. It was designed with openings in it. Now, whatever may be the need for some long-term thing, if those holes were simply filled up with concrete, It seems to me, unless Mr. Zadnik has some reason why it's not true, that that would keep the water, the waves, and the spray from coming over Beach Road. So I don't know. Sometimes when there's a project, people want it to be a big project. And maybe sometimes it does have to be a big project. But now if you look at the wall that's along there, you'll see that it's more open with those holes then it is closed with the stanchions. So I would like to know whether someone on the council could say why the simple measure of filling up those holes isn't being done. Thank you very much.

I have asked the same question. I'm going to ask the same question to Robert if you'd like to comment on it.

And like I said, it's a complex engineering discussion. When you start looking into it, whether or not it could reduce the amount of wave action, that's one component, if you recall what we studied in this project. That might be true. The more significant or severe condition is the still water action. I think traditionally when agencies look at providing real protection, that's what they're trying to focus on is how do we keep the still water out? And that's where the engineering complexity comes into play of how that water with enter that, you know, kind of a hole with a seawall with holes in it and how it would evacuate afterwards. It works great when you have a full project. It doesn't work so great when it's just piecemeal. So again, that's something that we're looking at with our engineers and hopefully we'll have an answer soon. Okay.

Thank you, Robert. Okay. We are going to move on to item 3C, our police chief report from Jason.

All right. Good evening, Mayor Wilkinson and council members. Tonight, I'm pleased to present the police department's fourth quarter report for 2025. Starting it off with the department policy manual. During this quarter, we updated 19 and implemented two new flexible policies in alignment with a minute laws and best practices. And these updates are detailed in the staff report. And during this quarter, the department handled 801 incidents, which included two part one offenses and nine part two offenses. And they're all highlighted in bold. And the remaining 790 incidents are generically classified as all other incidents. In another snapshot, the department conducted nine traffic stops, made one arrest and referred one case for prosecution. We received the multiple citizen appreciations and zero citizen complaints. We also assisted Tiburon PD on two occasions. One applicant for the vacant police officer position successfully met all post pre-employment requirements. Meanwhile, we are continuing to recruit for reserve officers. Regarding ARIPA data, officers detained 13 individuals stemming from nine traffic violations, two suspicious activities, and two mental wellness checks. The perceived racial compositions consisted of nine Caucasians, one Hispanic, one Middle Eastern, one Asian, and one Pacific Islander. Of these 13 contacts, nine were officer initiated, while four were related to calls for service. In all, nine warnings were given, two citations were issued, and one arrest was made. And during this quarter, PD personnel attended in-person and online training that were either mandated or for knowledge and skill enhancements. During this quarter, Sergeant Clark attended week two of the post-supervisory school, which he successfully completed. And as part of our ongoing community policing, we always take great pride and joy in participating in community events. And with that, I am available for questions.

Does anyone from the council have questions for Chief Wu? No questions? Okay, let's open this up for public comment.

We have Dr. Rothman.

Hi, Dr. Rothman.

Thank you very much. I'm sorry if it seems like I'm monopolizing things, but these are all very interesting and important things, I believe. You know the saying, it can happen here. Well, sometimes the things that can happen here do happen here. And I'm hoping that with the recent events of the killing of the woman in Minneapolis, my own opinion is that these ICE people are irresponsible, many of them. And I do hope that if it does happen here, I don't mean that somebody gets killed, God forbid that that should happen. But if there is a coming to Belvedere of ICE, to arrest people, to deport them. I do hope that the police department will have in place a policy about how to deal with such circumstances. I don't know what the policy should be, and I'm not knowledgeable enough to make a suggestion about what it should be. But I do think that, and it doesn't have to be broadcast or something, but I do hope that Chief Wu has considered that and will have a plan to convey to the officers if, God forbid, ICE comes to Belvedere. Thank you very much.

Jason, would you like to comment?

Yes. In short, the Belvedere Police Department, along with the rest of California law enforcements, are governed by SB2 with regarding to ICE activities, rendering assistance to ICE. It is not our job. In fact, we're prohibited by law to assist ICE in immigration enforcements.

Okay, thank you. Okay, we'll move on to item 3D, which is swearing in of police officer Tyler Preston. Jason, I think the floor is yours.

Thanks again, Mayor Wilkinson. It is with great pleasure that I present Officer Tyler Preston to the council and to the community as the newest member of the Belvedere Police Department. Accompanying him tonight is his fiance, Jasmine, and their one-year-old son, Atlas. Tyler was born and raised in Connecticut. While pursuing a college degree, he became a corrections officer for the state of Connecticut. Tyler's passion for the great outdoors led him on a journey to the West where he managed to visit 26 national parks along the way. It was at this point that he decided to move out to Northern California to pursue his dream job as a police officer. Tyler began his law enforcement career in 2023 with the Mill Valley Police Department, where he worked as a patrol officer. Tyler is a community caretaker at heart and has always expressed a strong desire to work in Belvidere. There is no doubt that he will serve our residents with dedication and professionalism. What he enjoys the most is spending time with his family and seeking outdoor adventures. So at this time, will Officer Tyler and his family please come to the front of the dais for the swearing ceremony?

All right. Tyler, please raise your right hand and be sure to take the oath of office. Aye. Do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance To the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of California. To the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of California. That I take this obligation freely. That I take this obligation freely. Without any mental reservation. Without any mental reservation. For purpose of evasion. For purpose of evasion. And that I will well and faithfully discharge. And I will well and faithfully discharge. The duties upon which I am about to enter. The duties upon.

Congratulations. And that's probably the youngest member of our audience that we've seen in a long time. Okay, we're going to move on to item 3E, which is, I believe, Adam, you're coming to present on the Homemade Film Festival and the Concerts in the Park.

Good evening, Mayor Wilkinson and council members. My name is Adam Gabser. I'm here first on behalf of the Belvedere Homemade Film Festival. I will be producing a third annual event this year, and I am asking for your continued support. keeping the ask as the same as last year. I think we had a really successful year last year. I ended up screening 33 films, had an audience of about 350 people. In addition, I ran a free filmmaking workshops at the library all summer, had about 200 attendees there, and that brought a bunch of films in. I also worked with the Redwood High School and closely with the library to get the word out and to receive films. So I won't go on any longer. I just want to say I'm hoping for your support again this year, and I'll take any questions.

Any questions? James?

Good evening. I wanted to know for people who weren't able to attend or couldn't stay through the whole viewing experience, is there ever a way that you have that available that we could either put on the city's website so people could see it or there's a link to it that we could put out in the breeze so that people had the opportunity? I think it would be nice since we participate that people at Belvedere could go back and look at it if they didn't have a chance and it might be great advertising for you for next time.

The short answer is yes, I have all of the films. The question becomes...

I don't mean those films. I meant the one you put together.

Oh, my personal films?

The one that you showed us. It's the films.

The curated films that you showed at the film festival.

There were 33 films. Is that what we're talking about?

Whatever you showed that night. That night, yeah.

So I do have all of them. Okay. The question becomes, have the filmmakers approved them to be posted publicly on a website?

Okay.

And I don't know. We could talk about that. I'm happy to provide a link to all of them and they could be posted on the website. But I think I should check with the filmmakers first to see whether they're comfortable with that. But my five films, you're welcome to.

I misunderstood because I thought you had created one film from all the individual ones, but you load up each one.

Correct. They're all loaded into a PowerPoint presentation, which generally speaking should work, but we had a little stuff there, but yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Well, if anything like that could happen.

Would that be something you'd want to post on the Citi website?

It might be.

Okay.

Or it might be a link that we could send out if that's possible. I would love that.

Promote, promote, promote.

Yeah. I just think people would enjoy seeing what happened last year and then it might entice more people.

We might consider maybe just the highlights of

or highlights up yeah okay anything along those lines i think great i would love that would be great um what one of the things that happened last year at your event was that be ready belvedere had their go bag giveaway and um those of us on the committee thought it was it worked out really well. I think there were some timing ideas that could change, but is that if the committee had another event, would you be opposed to joining up that same way, having it the same evening?

So I will come up with a double negative. I am not opposed to it. Okay. In fact, I think it was great. I was gonna talk to Pat a little bit more about this as we get further along with this timing, but I'm thinking of starting my event at six o'clock. So there's not that lag time because we have people like, oh, we're here. And then they came over to my event and was like, wait, we're not ready for you. So I thought if you start at five to six, then mine will start right at six. So people can just come straight over.

That would be great. Either way, either we start ours later or you start earlier. But I think it would be great to link up. Mm hmm. and have people come down. I agree. Yeah.

And I just want to add something to what Jane said is that I'm sure you must have some kind of agreement or something that all these people with their films sign.

When they submit on Film Freeway, I think there is a waiver there that you're giving me the right to screen them at my festival. I mean, we could also just do it and wait for people to say, wait, I don't want mine up there.

No, no, no, no. I'm not saying go to them and ask permission, but maybe in the future you can have a live there on anything that the city funds, since you do a lot of community events that, you know, we always have the right to use the content.

That's a great suggestion. And I will execute on that.

You might want to have some opt-outs there. People that have children might not want their kids all over the internet.

Right.

Any other comments?

No, just thank you. They're both great events. I love events.

I haven't talked about concerts yet. No.

Well.

PT, are you up next for the concerts?

Yeah. Oh, I didn't. My executive producer. Yeah. Yeah. Paige Peterson, Executive Producer for the Film Festival. Okay, now shall I switch hats? Okay, now we'll switch sides. Now I'm here on behalf of the Belvedere Concerts in the Park, and we are now planning our 29th event, 29th season, with four concerts, three concerts in the park. We met this past Saturday to start the process of selecting bands. We are, you're probably very aware that costs of things are just going up and up, but we are very conservative on our committee. We're really trying to keep it tight. So we're not increasing our asks this year. We're asking for the same amount last year, and we're gonna be living within that budget. So the bans are not finalized as of yet. Once that's settled, we will publicize it in the normal ways.

Any questions? We have a small but mighty committee. And we actually even probably got one or two bands figured out on one meeting. So we have a few more meetings. If you all have any, anybody has any idea of bands, now's a good time to put them to Adam or me. We can make sure they get considered. um thank you for i just want to say thank you always for supporting us and always for coming to the concerts because we love what we do and we're really excited to be a part of the community and be able to offer this thank you to both of you any questions from city council

Now, I just want to say that for the concerts in the park, I think that the community just loves the concerts and the word has gotten out. So now we're getting people from all over and but people really enjoy it. And I think that it's a great community event that brings people together in a very social, fun way. And I think the same holds true for the film festival. So thank you both and your co and directors and everything else and their committees for all their hard work. We truly appreciate it.

Thank you.

Anybody else? No, let's open for public comment. Mayor Wilkinson, there are no hands raised. Okay, thank you to the three of you for tonight and for everything that you do. Okay, we will now move on to the consent calendar. The consent calendar consists of items that the city council considers to be routine or council has discussed previously and do not require further discussion. Unless any item is specifically removed by any member of the city council, the consent calendar will be adopted by one motion. Council will take public comment on all items on the consent calendar when the calendar is called. So I believe here that we're going to separate out for E. So does anybody beyond that wish to have any item removed from the consent calendar?

No. No.

Nope. Should I seek public comment now? So let me ask for public comment on consent calendar items 4A through 4I, excluding 4E.

You have Dr. Rothman.

Dr. Rothman, welcome back.

I hardly left. I'm sorry, I don't know how to put up on my screen the agenda and the pictures of you people. So I would like to discuss or have discussed beyond consent the item, I don't know the number of it, but it's the one that involves the fine, the $300,000 fine.

So Dr. Rothman, that's the one that's been removed separately. So we can treat that separately.

Thank you very much.

Okay. So can I get a motion to approve 4A through 4I with the exception of 4E?

So moved. Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion passes. Okay. So let's move to 4E. And the reason this is separated is because...

Yes, I am. I'm not recused, but I was absent. So I won't vote on it. So I'll abstain from discussion and voting.

Okay, and so let's reopen this for public comment.

We have no hands raised.

Oh. Dr. Rothman, this is the item 4E, which is discussing 339 Golden Gate.

There we go. There he is.

Thank you very much. For the long discussion that you had, this being, I guess you call the second reading or something, it went on longer than I could be by the computer. So I didn't get the comment. And since the item is still open, I would like to comment at this time. I think you're making a big mistake by pursuing this huge fine. I look back over the cases. You've only had one success in court on these overtime fines, and that was back in about 2005, and that was the Lely case. And that case did not involve the same issues, and it was only a $100,000 fine. I think that's a very weak read on which to hang, any feeling that you may have that you're going to succeed against David Flaherty's situation. I spoke with Mr. Van Son and asked him how many of the big projects on the island itself get done in the period of time and in the last three years. And he said none. None get done. Therefore, it's just hard to construct things on the island. And the fines keep going up. From the lately of $100,000, you're now up with one of $300,000. And the bigger the fines, the more likely that someone's going to sue. You just found yourself out... approximately $130,000 with the case of the Lafouettes, if you consider the legal expenses that you had and the amount of money that you have to pay the Lafouettes. And that doesn't include the extra staff time that had to be put up. So I would imagine that that case is costing $160,000. And you obviously felt that there was something, or the lawyers felt that there was something weak about your case, or you wouldn't have given them $50,000. Now, it said that we try to be fair. We have to be fair, so we have to give the fines. And you say in the ordinances, each of them that have come up with the overtime, it states clearly, we consider these time limits to be reasonable. Well, if no one can get the jobs done in the time, then by definition, they aren't reasonable unless you consider that it's reasonable to make unreasonable demands on people. So instead of being fair to everyone, you're becoming equally unfair to everyone. And I would close by saying that who is it who feels that this ordinance that you're prosecuting under is a bad ordinance? You people feel it. And the reason I know that you people feel it is because you changed it. If it was a good ordinance, you would be standing by it and saying, oh, this is a good ordinance. But you know that it's no good. So what's happening is, in my opinion, you're being unfair to everyone. And I hope you're not going to go along with this. If you want to go over a financial cliff, OK, but please don't take the residents over the edge with you. Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comment. Okay, so we're going to move to item 4E.

Excuse me, Mayor, may I just offer a brief comment? Of course you can. All right, thank you. My apologies. So we certainly always appreciate public comment here at the Belvedere City Council, but I just do want to know for the record that Mr. Van Saan is not in attendance tonight. He cannot speak to the accuracy of Mr. Rothman's claim that no projects are completed on time on the island. I won't go into all the details here, but I believe that statement is untrue. Again, you know, Mr. Rothman has every right to make such comments at these public meetings. But again, I do just want to note that that statement is not verified in any way. Thank you.

Thank you, Andrew. Okay. Can I get a motion for 4E?

I move to approve.

I'll second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. And you're abstained. Okay. All right, we are moving on to item five, which is our public hearing, which is a second reading and approval of an ordinance adopting the 2025 California Fire Code and 2025 California Wildland Urban Interface Code as modified by Tiburon Fire Protection District Ordinance Number 133. Is there a staff report?

No staff report, Mayor Wilkinson. I'll just comment that this item was introduced and approved on first reading last month with the presentation from our building official. Tiburon Fire Protection District also attended to answer any questions. There were no requests or changes or edits, so we're looking for a motion to approve the attached ordinance. Ordinance is on a second reading this evening.

Okay, thank you. Do any members of council have any questions? Okay, in that case, I will open the public hearing. Beth, is there anybody online that would like to make a comment? Okay, in that case, I will close the public hearing and bring this back for a motion.

No discussion, I can make a motion.

Second. All in favour?

Aye.

Motion passes. Okay, we're moving on to item number six, discussion and possible action to approve allocation of fiscal year 2024-25 excess reserves. Hauga, I believe this is you.

Yes. Good evening, Mayor Wilkinson and council members. The item before you tonight is to review the allocation of the city's fiscal year 24-25 excess reserves and approve the resolution authorizing the budget amendment to appropriate these funds. At the completion of the fiscal year 24-25 audit, after accounting for all actual revenue expenditures and transfers, the city's general fund balance was $7.4 million. which becomes the fiscal year 25, 26 revised starting balance. Based on the city's reserve policy, which requires that unrestricted reserves equal at least 50% of projected general fund expenditures plus fire transfer, plus debt service throughout the five-year planning period, Staff have identified 1.38 million in excess reserves that could be reasonably appropriated and the ratio would remain above the 50% threshold throughout the five-year forecast period. Budget outcomes can vary from forecast and maintaining a buffer above the minimum is a sensible approach. Like past practice, staff requests that 350,000 of the 1.38 million remain in the general fund as unassigned. Leaving 1,030,000 in one-time funds to be appropriated. The finance committee held a meeting on December 2nd to review the audit results and approve staff's recommendation of the amount of excess reserves to be allocated. Before you tonight is the allocation of these funds for your approval. Staff have identified several immediate operational and capital one-time projects for the use of the 1.03 million. Staff are recommending an allocation of 830,000 for the beach road stabilization project. Construction is expected to begin in June of 2026 and conclude by fall of 2026. When the fiscal year 2526 budget was prepared, the project's cost was estimated at 3.8 million. However, due to increases in construction and construction management costs, the project estimate has risen to 4.4 million. The current budget includes 1.25 million in transfers from the general fund to the critical infrastructure fund over the next two fiscal years. With a proposed allocation of 830,000. This is anticipated to eliminate the need for further transfers from the general fund, assuming there are no additional cost overruns. CoB, Jean Gatza, Secondly, an additional 50,000 is proposed to advance the storm drain and retaining wall condition assessment to support long term capital planning 100,000 is proposed for required BC DC shoreline cleanup project on beach road. The project involves removing sections of an outdated retaining wall that has fallen into the bay on a city parcel known as the strip. The Bay Conservation and Development Commission has jurisdiction over the beachfront area and considers this unpermitted fill. They are mandating that the city clean up the site and the project must be completed within the next few months to meet BCDC's deadline. and finally 50 000 is proposed for police department facility improvements to better align the space with current operational needs any savings from the bcdc cleanup would be directed to this project in total the proposed use of the 1.03 million aims to address critical infrastructure projects that are already in progress meet operational needs and support priority community initiatives With the allocation of the 1.03 million, the city's estimated general fund balance at June 30th, 2026 will be 4.9 million and the budget will remain in compliance with its reserve policy over the five-year forecast period. And with that, I'm available for questions.

Does anybody have questions for Helga?

I have a few just simple questions, just clarification. So working backwards for the critical infrastructure fund, there's 2.2-ish in there now, plus the 830, plus the 125 over the next two years gets us north of the 4.4. Is my math generally correct?

Yes, it would be about 4.4.

I guess I'm asking what's in there now.

There'd be about 49,000 left.

So what's in there now is 2.2, 2.3-ish? 2.5. Oh, okay.

Yeah.

That seems a little higher. But the second question is relating to BCDC's demands to clean up the shoreline there. These are private improvements that fell from private property.

Robert. Yes, that's correct.

And I mean, were they... on private property initially. I mean, the improvements prior to their destruction or deterioration.

That's where it gets a bit complicated because these are very old structures that were built probably before revocable licenses were a thing in Belvedere. So it's on the shoreline band. They're private improvements on what is technically public land in that case, but without a clear revocable license.

No, no, no, I understand that. But were they originally installed in the strip? the strip correct yes okay so they were on our property yes okay okay thank you um uh and last couple months ago we we looked at the um snapshot at the 24 25 year end prior to the audit and if i recall correctly the financial surpluses, I'm sorry, the revenue surpluses and the cost, the less than expected costs were greater than the 1.03. I assume that's the difference of that is why it's not rolling all down to this, to this reserve fund surplus is capital improvement rollovers and some other things. Could you just comment on that briefly?

Right. So at the end of June, 2020, June 30th, 2025, the surplus showed 3.07 million, but that was based on the expenditures. The fiscal year, the reserve amount was... based on the 25-26 general fund expenses, fire transfer and debt service that was part of the 24-25 budget. And when you roll that 7 million forward and you account for the new expenses in 25-26 and the increase in expenditures, and then the reserve amount is based on 26-27s, general fund expenses plus fire transfer plus debt service, that number is higher than what was used as part of 2425. No, I understand. I understand.

Thank you. No, no, I think what you're saying is as of the end of 24-25, there was the 3.8, but that 3.8 doesn't drop to the general fund reserve. It's applied to the 25-26 budget, which rolls down at that point, but that applies to 26-27 expenditures.

Correct. Thank you. Any other questions? I remember Mark asking that question.

Any other questions?

I don't have a question. Do you want me to wait until after?

Let's open this up for public comment quickly.

Do you have a question?

No, let's open for public comment. Mayor Wilkinson, there are no hands raised. Okay. In that case, let's bring this back for discussion. Jane.

So first of all, it's always nice to have money left over, even though it's a lot. So thank you. Even though it's a lot.

Even though it's a lot. That's great that it's a lot.

No, it's great that it's a lot. And I think we're all really excited that the Beach Road project will actually happen and hopefully get done as planned. So definitely having the funds to get that done is a number one. So thank you for that. I noticed in going through everything, this is minor, but in the 24-25 budget, there's a nice big chart that compares all the different years. And in the 2526 one, there's nothing. It doesn't have that in there. So I'm hoping that in the next version that can go back in again because it helps people that aren't as familiar as you are with all the different line items. So I'm just suggesting that that could please.

Sure, we can take a look at that.

I've been trying to create my own and it's not that easy. And then, you know, I think this is, it's great when we have one-time items that we need funded, which we always do. So that's terrific. But I think, you know, planning, having our, when we finish that infrastructure process and, you know, determining what things in the city over time need to be looked at and need to be addressed and storm drains, retaining walls, et cetera, that that'll really help with long-term planning. So it doesn't just have to come from one-time funds because the one-time funds seems like we're cutting off long-term funding things by always having it be one time.

And that is, that is the goal of the long-term why we're doing these assessments is so that we can plan better.

Yeah, that would be great. That will be great. Thanks.

So my only comment was when I was looking over the allocations for all the funds, and I know this doesn't necessarily directly to you, but in general, I just want to say that I'm not quite sure 100% of all the things that the police department needs to have done, but the 50,000 seems a little skinny in these days with the cost of things. And it would be nice that they could have a pleasant, healthy space to work in.

Right. And so the 50,000 is basically just to get things started down there kind of design. And then as part of the next budget cycle, you know, we anticipate putting more money towards that project.

Okay. All right, good. So the 50,000 is just to get the project off the ground. It's not actually for the construction part of it. That's my understanding. Yes. Okay, thank you. Yes. Anything else?

No, I would just say I appreciate how the city continues to be very disciplined in managing the budget. I think we are very fiscally conservative. And as a result, we have these types of results where we can allocate money to projects that need additional funding. So I appreciate the diligence that the team goes through and how you operate fiscally. So thank you.

Thank you. And how can I just add in there that we, for the, at the retreat, we're going to bring back a much more complete discussion of long-term budget planning, correct? Yes, we can. But did you just get surprised by that? Because there's a lot of things in motion right now. And so there's a lot of pieces that will be slowly coming together. And so we can have a more strategic discussion around some of those items.

Yes, we can.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Unless there's... You have work to do that you didn't know about. Okay, so in that case, do we need a motion for this? We do now. Yes. Can I get a motion from one of the council members?

I can make a motion to authorize a budget amendment to allocate fiscal year 2024-25 excess reserve funds as noted in the staff report.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Okay, we'll move on to our final item, which is the open forum. This is an opportunity for any member of the public to briefly address the city council on any matter that does not appear on this agenda, but that is within the city council subject matter jurisdiction. Upon being recognized by the mayor, please limit your oral statement to no more than three minutes. Under the Brown Act, council members may not deliberate or take action on items not on tonight's agenda. Matters that may warrant a more lengthy presentation or council consideration may be placed on the agenda for further discussion at a later meeting. Paige, would you like to make a public comment? No. In that case, is there anybody on Zoom? We have Dr. Rothman. Dr. Rothman, welcome again.

Thank you very much. Council Member Mark, this is a process question or statement. Council Member Mark said that, I had said that no project on the island ever gets finished within the time restraints. Perhaps I don't speak clearly enough, but that's not what I said. What I said was no big project, meaning a two-year project, according to what I was told by Mr. Van Son, gets done within the time restriction. is on that basis. Now, if that stands as a fact, then it's on the tape. So please, I don't want to say disregard what Council Member Mark said, but it's on the tape. And I said the project, the big projects on the island where construction is more difficult do not get done. And I have been told that by Mr. Van Zandt. However, having said that, I'm so glad that council member Mark raised that question, raised that issue. Do they or don't they get done? Because if they don't get done, then the statement in the ordinance that the time limit is reasonable is actually an untrue statement. So what I would urge the council to do is to find out what the circumstance is. You certainly don't want to have an ordinance that has an untrue statement in it. So please, as council member Mark, alluded to, please have Mr. Van Son there and find out, do the projects get done or don't they? One other thing, I appreciate the fact that Councilperson Mark took such great care to reassure me that I had a right to make a public statement as a member of the public. I'm very thankful that he is so protective of me, but I really was aware of that. Thank you very much for your attention.

Well, thank you for the clarification. I think our legal counsel wants to comment.

Yeah, just very briefly. I do want to clarify, Dr. Rothman, of course, we always appreciate your public comment. I do just want to clarify the record that I was the person who previously spoke when you addressed this item, not Council Member Mark. Until now, I did not realize I sounded like Council Member Mark, but thank you again for your participation tonight.

Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else, Beth? I see none. Okay, in that case, we will adjourn. Good night. 6.30, look at that.