City Council - Regular Meeting

the city council meeting of February 5th, 2026. Calling the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Would you please join me in the pledge of allegiance? I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Uh, city clerk, roll call, please. There's no request under roll call item A. So, we'll go ahead with the roll call. Council member Davis, here. Council member Kern here. Council member Lent here.

Council member Okonnell here. And Mayor Mackin here. Move to adoption of the agenda. And uh, council, we are removing item N. That's continued discussion on proposed development impact fees that will be discussed at a future council meeting. Could I get a first and second to adopt the agenda as amended? So moved. Second. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? No.

City attorney. Uh we need a report out on close session. Actually, we have several dates. January 29th, January 30, February 2nd, and February 5th, please. Yes, madam mayor.

On January 29th, council met in close session uh and provided direction to the staff on uh the city attorney process for retaining a new city attorney. Uh on the 30th, direction was provided to the staff regarding anticipated litigation on a matter related to transit item and also there was discussion again of a public employment matter. on February 2nd, direction was provided to a consultant regarding the public employment uh matter and a performance evaluation that in that instance it was related to the city manager. And on February 5th, direction was provided to staff regarding the anticipated litigation item first discussed on January 30th. Uh this evening, we also beyond uh that direction, we also uh no, I guess it fits under both. website that the fifth is accurate with just the one item.

All right. Thank you very much. Next is oral communications and I'm going to read a very important caveat statement. We welcome speakers providing public comment but please be advised this is limited public forum. It is therefore important for speakers to stay on topic whether speaking to a particular agenda item or speaking during general public comment. On topic matters are those that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city. Speakers whether during oral communications or on agenda items will all have three minutes. Following these rules helps ensure the city council can get to all the items on the agenda, including hearing public comments on the items. If a speaker fails to follow these rules, they are disrupting the meeting and will be warned. If a speaker continues to ignore the rules or is otherwise disruptive, their opportunity to speak will be ended and they may be precluded from speaking on any other items tonight. That being said, do we have anyone who would wish to make a public comment? That's for any item that is not on the agenda. City clerk seeing none. Okay, moving on. Consent calendar. Could I get a first and second to approve the consent calendar? We have items B through J. So moved.

Second. All in favor? I I Anyone opposed? No. New business. First item, discuss and provide direction to staff on health peak contribution to fund a renewable energy project. Staff report, please. You want to switch up?

Apologies, technical difficulties. Uh, good evening, mayor, mayor prom, and council members. Christina Fernandez, your assistant city manager. Uh, tonight staff is seeking your feedback on a potential renewable energy project um in response to a $300,000 contribution that the city received from Health Peak, the developer of the shore at Sierra Point. Um, in 2008, the city entered into a development agreement with Health Peak uh for that specific project. Uh, the agreement required a $300,000 cash contribution for an off-site renewable energy project within the city of Brisbane. The contribution was to be paid to the city after we had identified a project. However, the city has does not currently have a shovel ready project such that we are seeking your advice on the types of renewable energy projects you may like to see within the city. Um, the Health Peak did agree to go ahead and advance us the $300,000 payment such that we do have that money and we are uh seeking your input on how you may want to see those funds used. Um, some potential projects could include solar battery energy storage systems, distributed energy resources, additional electric vehicle charging infrastructure, LED lighting upgrades, um, etc. So, if if you kind of just give us a general idea as to what you would like to see, we could definitely then take that as staff and explore that further, then come back to you all with recommendations. Um, it is also possible that you could direct us to then also work through the committee uh a committee structure um to go ahead and move forward with exploring some of those options. Thank you.

Thank you, Christina. Do we have any council questions? Council member Kern. No questions. Council member Davis, I noticed solar wasn't listed. Are there any buildings that the city owns that would be ideal for a solar project that doesn't already have solar right now? Uh well, we have our our public works director here in city hall would qualify as the building that may be a potential for solar.

Uh council member Okonnell. So, these are funds that we already have in our um we've received the funds and we're looking for a purpose. That's correct. Okay. I have no questions at this time. Okay. Council member Lent. No questions at this time. Okay. And I have no questions at this time. Madame Mayor, yes, I have a question. Okay. No problem. Council member Kern, go ahead. Um, two questions. And so it was for $300,000, but that is that come out of the total 1.5 million investment or is that in addition to the 1.5 million investment that I saw in the contract? No.

Uh that I am not sure of. I'd have to get back to you on that if that's okay. I was not privy to some of the details of the development agreement. Got it. Got it. I have the answer to that. I'm sorry. It's in addition to So we have a total of 1.8 million. Correct. Okay. Thank you. And then um council member Davis asked about the solar. Uh I did not see anything about solar as well and I was doing some research about uh the options of floating solar. Um and is that something that could go into the lagoon? I'm just curious if the lagoon is an area that we have access to to explore. That is my question.

I'm going to go ahead and let our director of public works answer that one. And while he's walking up, one factor that I would want to work with the attorneys on is um ownership issues in the lagoon. There's parcels there. Yeah. Hello. Uh good good evening, mayor, members of the council, public yes, Mosbi, public works director. Jeremy's right. Um essentially the ownership of the lagoon is would be the the questionable one. Um, is it feasible uh to have floating? Yes, absolutely. The ownership would be challenging. Um, a lot of Lagoon is not owned by the city of uh Brisbane. So, that would be the that would be the the only caveat there.

Thank you. I I will just add I've read about projects. I think there was one in Washington state they did on a a small lake. So, so all right. Any public comments? Members of the public, come on up here. Thank you. Publish Gal's main resident and um yeah, Frank, the floating structures or floating platforms. Yeah, the BCDC'd be all over that. I already tried that for the bay lands,

but there's an alternative. Uh, so I was thinking the the wall out at the marina would be a nice uh structure to be able to put uh solar on to to run the whatever the needs are, possible needs at the marina. That could be a possibility. So, thanks. Anyone else? Anyone online? City clerk. No, madame mayor. Okay,

Madam Mayor, if it's helpful for the conversation, um I think there's a is put together in the staff report that Christina did. There's a couple different ways of thinking about it. I think uh we we would recommend utilizing your your wonderful committees, subcommittees, if that's that's appropriate for this conversation, and that could be one of a number. Um if the council wants to limit the conversation to those committees, that's why we were asking which types of projects you may be interested, but that may not be the guidance that you want to provide. um a committee to on this on this topic. OC may be a great committee to to take a look at this, but there may be others or utilizing the subcommittee structure. Thanks. You know, madam, I do have one question. Okay. Where you have another for staff.

Oh, okay. Go ahead. Yeah. So, um the uh the $300,000 there's no time constraints. Okay. That's just the question. Okay. Thank you. And I I had one question.

Okay. in the $300,000 realm, what would be feasible? Are we looking at, you know, a small battery project? Are we looking at a um midsize solar collection area? What type of project would fit in that $300,000 realm? Is there any ideas or quantify how many megawws that might or might not be off the cuff? I mean, I'm just going off of memory of other projects that I've had had the um opportunity to work on over the last couple years. I would say um you probably enough uh some storage and solar would be would be feasible. Using city hall as an example, it's probably not going to be enough to provide both solar and battery backup for a facility of this size. But if you're looking at something smaller um like the size of the annex building for example, that would be probably feasible with that amount of money. Just just rough numbers off the top of my head.

Great. Thank you. Okay, we move to council discussion. Um how about council member Kern? You want to start again? Two in a row. Um yeah, I at this point based upon what I know in the research that um I've done and our onepage staff report, I would say that this is the appropriate thing to turn over to uh one of our subcommittees to take a look at and come back uh with a recommendation. That's that's where I stand. Um, I went down the the path today of renewable energy and I found probably 35 40 different types that we could potentially take advantage of and I don't have enough background on any of them to make a solid recommendation. So,

are you saying sub council subcommittee or committee like OAC? I'm I guess either way. Okay. Yeah. I'm going to just weigh in here before we get further down the road on this. Being the major proponent of PCE that I am, there's a gov PV program. There were two phases already. It's going to go into GOV PV3. Oftent times it pays for all the solar

at no cost to the city. So I would hate to see us go down a path of utilizing this money when we didn't have to. And perhaps then the money could be used to purchase a backup battery or other programs that are right now they're kind of evolving because gov3 has not been officially launched. They're trying to design it along with um a consultant. So I I would if we don't have time constraints recommend maybe first crossing off what possibilities we have with PCE. I I've mentioned this to them, the programs department, just to see what we have available to us.

That was my question to you is those don't typically come with battery storage or you don't get reimbured for

Well, but PCE is is changing programs and and and some of them may include batteries in the future. That's under consideration. If if I can make a suggestion, um whatever subcommittee it goes to and maybe it's an ad hoc subcommittee that will look into this. Um I would recommend that uh the mayor be part of that um because she has a lot of connections so to speak in the uh PCE world where she's you know subject to a lot of information and whomever would work well with that in whatever subcommittee that works well or whether it's a new ad hoc that would be my preference. So your suggestion is to keep it at the council level and not utilize Ozac.

I'm not sure OEC would be the right place for that. Um because it's it's I think in a different realm of being um open space and ecology versus, you know, working on a project for energy. Um, and maybe I'm wrong with that, but but I think it might be better either in an existing um, and it might be the infrastructure subcommittee, but it'd be something that I would be interested in having um, Mayor Macken on because she has a lot of the insights and connections in the PCE world. Well, and it and it could involve infrastructure or facilities or other subcommittees, but until we find out what's available, I'd like to just see us consider leaving this open.

Do you have any idea when that's I I actually asked them at the last meeting and they said they're easily looking at 30 days. It could be longer because they're they're trying to look at what they think is feasible for the third phase because they'll plan that for the entire year then as a program. But it's it's in this fiscal year. Yes. Yes.

You know, I know that there are a couple of members of OAK that are are very keen on uh alternative energy and battery storage and things like that. Uh, so I I think OC would be a great uh uh place to perhaps uh you know have them noodle on it, maybe give a recommendation. I do agree though that you're the you're the expert in this stuff and ultimately um you know be able to contribute greatly to um you know helping to find connections outside of Brisbane because you know like you said $300,000 maybe isn't going to provide a whole lot but if you partner with others then and maybe uh we as a city say okay you know we'll put in uh some money of our um to get us to a place where it's feasible to put in something that then provides a benefit in in this realm. So um you know since there isn't a timeline on this I think uh you know what if we just sent it to OSAC let them kind of noodle on it and come back and say three months and if they don't have anything that's you know feasible then we just keep it within the the council and until that day arrives. Well, I mean, OSAC works on work plans and so they they usually have things that they're already taking on as projects. So, I would hate to take up the time with the limited number of meetings they have per month on something that may change dramatically when we get more information. It seems like that's not a good use of their resources.

Should we just circle back when we get more and then decide? Right. And and if if in fact PCE doesn't have anything, if they delay or it goes further, then I'll just come back and and give you that report. We know you will. Well, yes, I will. And and and thank you for calling me an expert. I'm not an expert. Connected. I said connected. Okay. No, he said expert. I'm not an expert. No, we'll work with all of us. You definitely are. The resident expert through the chair. We'll work with the mayor as uh she's getting information and then we'll come back to the council. Is everyone amanable to that? Absolutely.

All right. Uh, next item we have is item L, parcel R, update. Consider approval of a contract amendment for CMG landscape architecture. Could we have a staff report, please?

Yeah, thank you. Um, Madame Mayor, members of the council, I'm going to be very brief because, um, I I anticipate this will be a substantive conversation. Um, as you know, uh, monies have been available to support a park or recommend at parcel R for some time based on previous development agreement development agreements. Um, the um, council received a report last year around this time regarding the remaining funds available and uh, what the deadlines are associated with next steps. um we received some feedback in the Sierra Point open space parkway park and open space subcommittee uh started meeting. So they've met a number of times over the last year and based on their input at a recent meeting uh the parks and wreck commission was tasked with coming up with a recommendation back to the council in a very short time frame. So that process has started based on where we are. Um the staff is recommending that the time is is ripe for engagement with our uh consultant through CMG to provide the type of um design work that is necessary to to complete this project. So, we're here tonight recommending that um the funds that are remaining um from the total amount approximately $200,000 um be made available to support um the project as you excuse me the work as you see in your attachments and I believe uh is Willlet here tonight? Great. Will it with CMG is here tonight to answer any questions that you might have related to costs or or his process. We're happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Is city clerk is he online? Oh, okay. I thought we were waiting for him. Okay. Um, council questions. Let's start with

council member L.

You know, uh, Frank and I have been working on this for a year now. It's amazing that it's lasted or has been that long. Um, you know, I don't have any questions, but I I I will say though that I think in the staff report, it just it really demonstrates um, you know, the the the time and the effort that we put in uh, to get us to where we are today. And it's been a very collaborative effort uh, not only amongst staff uh, but with uh, the community, voting community um, and others. So, if if council members have questions for for the two of us during uh our deliberations, by all means, I would love to uh answer that.

Council member Okonnell.

So, I'm not sure that the questions I have are more more of a discussion nature. Um, and so I'll refrain from asking or discussing my my comments at this time. Okay. Uh, Council Member Kern, please. No questions at this time. And Council Member Davis? No questions for me.

All right. Members of the public wishing to speak on this, I have a slip here from Michael Barnes. Good evening, mayor, city council. My name is Michael Barnes. I'm a Brisbane resident. In the staff report for the Sear Point Park, there is a timeline of the process going forward. This timeline ends with a a letter being transmitted to Health Peak. The letter will state how the park funds have been encumbered. That should not, however, be the end or goal of the process. The process must continue with a request for proposals from contractors to build the park. Then a responsible bid should be accepted and the park must be built. Don't allow this to be another process that ends with nothing being built. But first, please follow the staff recommendation to approve an amended contract with CMG Landscape Architecture for parcel art park planning. If you take no action on this agenda item, it is the same as denying the contract amendment and would be a missed opportunity to improve Sierra Point. Such a denial would betray your intentions when you negotiated the park financial agreement with Health Peak. A denial would also betray the public's participation in the park planning process you initiated in 2022. Staff has proposed an aggressive timeline to meet the deadline you negotiated with Health Peak for a CR point park. There is no need nor time left to delay this project any further without incurring tremendous risk of losing over a million dollars. All groups, voters, residents, visitors, and Sierra Point workers will enjoy a Sier Point park that is safe from sea level rise. Act to build something of benefit before the opportunity slips away.

Okay. Comments noted. Anyone else wishing to speak? Hello, Lisa Greenley, Park and Rex Commission and Brisbane resident. I would just like to say that I'm just very excited about this project. I would really like to see a park happen, not just be planned, but actually happen in my lifetime and getting started with this money. Um, planning it. I I think there's a lot of people in town and a lot of people on the park and rec commission that are just really excited about um putting something out there that we don't already have. maybe something new and exciting and useful, very useful for people, the people of the marina, the people of the city, and our visitors who are out there at the marina all the time. Anyways, I just like to put it out there that as a member of park and wreck, I'm just very excited and I really would like to see this built. Thank you. And I see another hand.

Hi, Madame Mayor and fellow council members. I'm so happy to be here today and I just wanted to kind of add to Commissioner Greenley's um words. We are as a commission very excited about this. Um I've heard from numerous community members who are really thrilled at the prospect of having a space that people can enjoy um and future proofing. So, I know there's some tension right now between like we have sea level rise. We've looked at the reports. This is very real and yet there's an opportunity to use this money to make some changes that will help protect the area against sea rise as well as create a wonderful area for people to enjoy. If you go there right now, I took two people there the last few weeks as we've been having our meetings and I literally have to pull them up because there's no neat path to go there. And so that's part of what we are envisioning is a path so people can get to this area and enjoy it. As someone who spends a lot of time there, I think there are some great ideas that are reasonable and would benefit the city a lot. And I I really would appreciate if you would um if you would approve the funding we need to do some more exploration and also come up with a plan that benefits the whole community. So, thank you so much. We have anyone else here wishing to speak? Paul Galver has been resident. Thank you. Uh, so I'm not sure what the design is going to look like, but we're going to have to make it ground squirrel proof. And uh no lawn so we don't have to worry

about geese otherwise we're going to have a a problem. So no lawns in the design and maybe concrete and steel and wood and then raised areas for planted areas so the ground squirrels can't get in there. Something real slippery on the side so they can't climb it.

Anyone else wishing to make a comment? Come on up here. Mayor, council members, uh, my name is Mike Chandler, Brisbane resident. I support this because even though I'm a recent res resident, one of the things I found is that, oh, I live in Brisbane and they go, what the heck is that, Australia? And I go, nope. And everybody drives by this place. But one thing about that crazy trail that goes around there is that people from other places actually use it. And I think it'd be wonderful for them, you know, a plat brisbane, you know, something like that to say, look, this is what we're about. And I think that would be a good idea. So, I really support this.

Thank you. Anyone else here tonight or online? Ingred, anyone wishing to comment? None online, mother. Um, Madame Mayor.

Okay. Going once, going twice. Okay. I actually thought of a couple questions here I would like to ask before we go on to discussion. Um, couple things. It mentioned in the staff report about references to the Brisbane lagoon watershed sea level rise adaptation plan and it was noted in the report which will identify strategies and if I could have comment probably from our public works director or city manager. Have we actually identified strategies to protect the lagoon and Sierra Point Parkway from sea level rise and flooding?

Um madame mayor u I I can share that the our that um sea level rise study that we're working on um this next step would be identification of some of those um items and that'll be something that we're working on separately as we get closer in. So this the the current sea level rise adaptation planning we're working on will um the next step would be uh sharing of some of those um uh concepts and and ideas. So it's coming up soon. Okay. So we don't have anything yet in place. No, it's being drafted by our design team and um it'll be shared with the uh different committees and public um in the next couple of months.

Okay. And also um there's a lot of references to losing money and I received emails from residents saying if we don't use this we're going to lose it and that's actually not completely accurate. So I would like clarification on that. We're referring to I believe the Quimby Act. Could I have a clarification from staff? I'm going to refer to our attorney who probably has the best answer. Tom. Tom, are you there? I am. I'm just trying to take the c get the camera on. Uh, I don't have the answer. I would have to look, Madam Mayor.

Okay. Well, I I am familiar with the Quimi Act, and usually it says if if you have some sort of idea what you'd like to do. So, if you said we're going to do a playground, we're going to do a building or a community center or whatever you do, and if you find that there's some incumbrance or problem, you have to site to the state and to the developer that gave you the money a justification for a delay. I'm sorry, Madam Moore. We're I was not I was not um Quimby Act threw me. I know it under a principation act though. Thank you. The uh Yes. uh you were already saying and I I just want to apologize for uh

for not catching the quimiac. Okay. So am I correct in you are you are okay. Okay. We frequently just well you you've heard we we frequently call it an excess test but that's not that's not in the statute but it's what you're looking for. Right. And and so it requires then regular reporting that you keep up to date on a prognosis of when you might proceed with something. And so it's annual reporting that the state requires that you keep both the person who expended the funds to the city and also the state informed what you're what you're doing. Is that correct? That's correct.

Okay. So, I just I wanted to clarify that because I I got a note a bit of panic from people writing emails saying you've got to spend it or we're going to lose it and that's simply not true. Can I ask a follow-up question to staff? Does staff feel that we could show a nexus and could explain the cause for a delay and the funds would not be at risk? Yes. Okay, Madame Mayor, I do have a question. If you're done, please go ahead.

Um, in a in the history of parcel R, um, the reason it's a big hump, my understanding is that when the original or the latest grading had been done at that site, um, one of the developers just sort of piled stuff up there and left it. and that's why it's a big hump. My question is, does the city know if that hump is an engineered hump or just a debris pile?

That's a great that's a great question. Um, no, we don't at this time. As part of our u due diligence, we will be doing some geotechnical work to see what type of material we have there and what we're working with. So, that'll be part of it um of our design. Okay. And and so because of that, CMG or whoever is ultimately engaged to do some sort of specific plan wouldn't know what that would cost to enact or build or bring to fruition because they don't know what the geotechnical of that is at this moment.

Correct. If uh depending on what that those findings are um that cost would not be part of the estimate for the project as currently proposed uh but it would be something that we would be identifying as we move forward with development of the construction documents. Okay. So any any project that might be proposed by CMG or others would be an overtop kind of project and not really uh uh a completely engineered project. B

yeah based on the conversation we've had with the ad hoc committee and uh parks wreck u the concepts that are coming up could be phased. So depending on what's u determined, but a lot of the improvements that are being discussed as part of this current uh phase that we want to move forward with uh would be more light um light touches. So um you know pathways uh you know uh seating areas, things of that nature. Um we're not talking about doing any structures at this point where you would then then you would be in a different position if you're looking at trying to develop a building at this current stage. So, so, so essentially, um, we would, uh, we're not thinking of heavy impacts to the site with some of the ideas we have. Um, but as we move forward, we will be developing that geotechnical report to really understand what we're dealing with. Um, and that will have some weigh in on what we ultimately decide to do over there.

Okay. So this is sort of a a a stop gap plan to use the that parcel R in silo from the rest of the waterfront sea level rise marina project. Yeah. Essentially, this this project, this current effort that's for the item before you tonight is to refine the concept design for parcel R specifically and then from and and some phasing options um as we move forward. That's what this

silo it from the original project because there was some concern from the city or from the citizens and from people that you know we had looked at this huge park project that was infeasible to build that there was no money for and that we've been just sitting on our hands ever since. Um and now we're trying to silo out that one small project. Correct.

Thank you. So dovetailing on what council member Okonnell said in the other part of the staff report um from CMG it mentions task to 65% concept plan development of a draft concept plan for parcel R and adjacent area. So what does that mean? That would be the I think that that's referring to the surrounding area like the streets and some of the other areas just right adjacent to parcel R. Um we are again we are using the same consultant that had worked on the larger plan. So the the uh what we're going to get and I think Willie can speak to that a little bit as well. Well, what our hope is to get something that is it fits with what the what's already been kind of discussed as the larger um uh project if you will for the larger area if that makes sense. I see bullets on here. Maybe will if you want to explain a little bit more about what

Okay, before we go there I have one more question.

Sure. So in looking at also staff report it shows a total of remaining funds as of December 2024 of $1,96 and I understand from what I see also that we're proposing $73,386 to CMG. That's the remaining encumbered amount. what is being proposed as the allocation to actually build this plan because the last time this came to us it was $52 million and I see no discussion of cost.

That's correct. We won't have that. That'll be part of what is developed as part of this um part of our uh uh of CMG's proposal for for this specific scope we're looking at for the parcel our area. we would get a cost estimate and I would not like to note that the costs could vary depending on what geotechnical information comes from that but essentially that's what we're going to that'll be part of the deliverables of this task is to get estimates of that of what the uh proposed improvements uh the concepts would would cost us and that also provides us with the ability to do the phasing of the project in different elements. So we really have no idea what the project would cost. Is the is the consultant being given a firm budget of remaining funds to actually do something on that or would we have to just come up with whatever is needed to build it? the the concept really is more about envisioning what the community wants long term, right? And so essentially, if you think of it that way, the planning um this planning effort would give us a blueprint of how we want to look this parcel art to look like um and the cost is always a factor. And so the then the consideration is okay, how can we build this in phases to meet the budget? That would be part of the conversations that we would be having with CMG. What can we do with the amount of funding that we have now?

And and are when you say phases, are you talking about parcel R and adjacent area as in the original plan that CMG came for the whole waterfront? No, this is just really specific to parcel R in the in the immediately adjacent areas. That's what the effort for tonight for for this item is going to be. Okay. So, there is no budget on we need a park design for X amount of money. I don't know if I'm following you on that one.

Well, if if I'm a consultant and you hire me and and I'm told we have $3 million, what can you do for what would you anticipate we could put there for around $3 million?

Through the chair. Um, I think the way that the staff has approached this is that we have a remaining amount that's that's from the uh from the development agreement. Um, and we've used that as as a basis for what is possible out there. But I we we're not trying to bind that either. If there's an idea that goes outside of um a cost uh goes outside of this number, we want to be able to hear that idea. And if the council wants to consider it, we can either make modifications to the project itself or we can find other funding sources. And do we have any other potential sources of funding if it goes beyond what is available?

Um, nothing nothing immediately has been allocated. So that would be through a council conversation. Um, there may be funds that we want to allocate out of our capital program that that could be available, but that that's a council decision. Council member Okonnell, looks like you have another question.

I hate I hate to throw one more question in there for staff. Um, and and when and I'm not sure where I saw it, but I saw a transit map of the Sierra Point area with a whole bunch of big old traffic circles for traffic mitigation and the future buildout of the hotel site and various things. In a meeting that we just had recently, um I mean within the last two or three months, does that traffic circle that is there um affect parcel? Does it overlay onto porcel at all? It appeared to be in the drawings I saw.

Not that I'm aware of, but I you know I haven't I haven't seen the drawings that you're talking about, but that's I'll take a closer look. trying to think where I saw them, but I'll I'll have to figure that one out. Yeah, I in in my in my due diligence, I haven't seen anything that would impact Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I do have a a question and I'm just trying to get a clarification. So, um and that was, you know, just I know you mentioned the Quimby Act and but I'm looking at the staff report here and and it says the mitigation fee act. So, is the Quimby act and the mitigation fee act are they the same or are they different? just just so that we have clarity. Tom,

I personally had never heard of it as the Quimby Act. I'm assuming it's mitigation fee act, but that you know probably depends on who you're talking to. Okay. Okay. So, I just want to just read what it says in the staff report just so that everyone's clear because it says um says by advancing the design phase now the city insulates itself against the potential forfeite of these funds under the mitigation fee act ensuring these private contributions remain available for investment in Brisbane uh rather than risk them being returned to the property owner after June 2026. So it maybe provide a little clarity on that Tom just so that

yeah that that hearing part of that is what made me realize oh we're we're probably talking about mitigation here. Um there there is no perfect uh fix to protect the funds but it is the case that as long as you follow the reporting process and I mean you can't just you got to be timely you have to keep uh folks informed properly etc. you can at least have a call on those funds for a longer period of time and in many instances I'm sure will know better than any of us. Um there isn't another call on so they will they won't be reappropriated. They won't no action will be taken but you want to be showing your interest in it throughout the process. And that interest has to be related to a project that has an access to the funding. You can't say oh we'll find something.

Yeah. And then, you know, I'm just kind of looking at what um is being proposed. Um it says here that the goal um let's see it's on page 50. Yeah, it's on page 50 that uh last paragraph um last complete paragraph, last couple of sentences um says the intent of the final concept design is to is to be shovel ready and built in phases based on available funding sources. So, if we're putting forth a plan and and making a good faith effort, that should keep the city um within the spirit of the mitigation fee act.

I think so. I um I now have a sense of thank God for the internet, right? Thank you, Jeremy. So, um, the the Quimby fee, the the mitigation fee act, uh, is the mitigation fee act, but Senate Bill 315, which I haven't seen yet, uh, does say that if you follow that the CRIBY fees, so subject to the Crimby Act,

would follow the same process as the mitigation fee act. That's why they're interchangeable. Uh, and I had no idea. Uh, and I will look tomorrow, but they are two distinct things. Thank god they're I didn't totally lose my mind. And um, it does look like we'll have to look at the actual statute and I will do that, but it does look like that's the confusion. It's one following the process of the other and it's just like it's recent. Okay. All right. Thank Thank you for that. Good clarify. Tomato and tomato, right?

Yeah. Yeah. You really threw me. Sorry about that. So, we were going into discussion, but I I went back to questions. Are there any other questions before we go into discussion? Yes, ma'am. Madam Mayor, yes, of course. I've always got the next question. Good. Bring it on. Hey, this question is for Tom. So, Tom, thank you. Yes. If we go home tonight, if this council goes home tonight and we don't make a decision and we don't move forward, tell me what happens in 15 weeks from now because in 15 weeks from now, that's all it is until the end of June, we're not going to be able to show any uh any plan of attack for this site or that money. So, what would happen? What do you honestly think would happen?

Absolute cander. I don't think as long as there's some communication channel open even if you're not meeting the exact expectations uh I don't think anything will happen negative. I think you know the money unless there is a purpose for which to repurpose those those monies which the timing isn't right at the moment. Um I would think that nothing will will happen. I can't guarantee it. The budget will be passed two weeks later so maybe something will happen but I don't think any of that's going to affect this. It's not that big of a sum of money in relative terms. It's a big number for us, but not for most. Exactly. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Council member Davis, do you have a question?

Then would you like to start the discussion, please? Thank you. Yes, I would. Um, first, I just really want to thank the subcommittee for all of your hard work. I know you've been having a lot of meetings.

We listened. And I also just want to thank everyone here and everyone who sent emails and um members of OSEK who've worked on this and park and recreation commission who I've known have spent a lot of time. So thank you to everyone for being so invested in getting a park here. Um, I think it's always important to kind of look back at where we started and how it informs where we are because I know some people are just kind of hearing about this um now and have questions about, you know, why we're here. Um, so as a little bit of a refresher, and Mayor Mackin mentioned this, um, city staff and representatives from all of our commissions and committees met with CMG, solicited feedback from the community, from the voters. Two, three concept plans came back. Um, there was an extended area beyond parcel R. the total cost to develop, you know, all three plans or, you know, all three plans came out to be around $52 million. And there was a big reaction from the voters because I don't, if you're not aware, there's a lot of infrastructure improvement that needs to happen at the marina. Um, so there was a lot of big feelings from our voters about spending $52 million on a park when there's a lot of maintenance that needs to occur. Um, and we got into discussions about sea level rise. This is something that CMG brought up. Um, which led us to doing other studies to really understand what's going to happen at the marina. And um that's looking like if I'm not incorrect $und00 million worth of

infrastructure repairs um just that the marina needs it and also to prepare for sea level rise. And so you know we we felt that we needed to have an understanding of what's happening in the area so that we can better plan for parcel R in the event that hey maybe we do need to relocate critical infrastructure there. So now it looks like, you know, we have the information that we need. We can move forward. The subcommittee's been working. Park and Reck's been working. Um, and so we are here today. Um, and I think ultimately, at least my perspective, and it sounds like at least Mayor Macken feels the same, um, the way that we're going to get a park here is that it's going to be um a park that we can actually afford to build. And so from my my concern initially is that we had a $52 million price tag and something like $2 million that um we were given by the developer. And if you create a plan that's that expensive, when you have just a very very tiny fraction of those funds and real no conceivable way to come up with $52 million for a park, what happens is that I think you you um don't set the right expectations with the public and people think and they're that something is going to be there and they see these renderings and and they're incredibly disappointed that when it doesn't come to fruition. So my goal has always been to actually get a park built and that means that we need a concept that is buildable. So I'm hoping that what will come back will be something that's much more digestible. I don't know that I don't expect that it's going to just be the cost of the remaining funds, but I

really hope that it's not close to $52 million because I don't see that happening at all. Um, and I'm really thankful that the proposal tonight is less than the amount of funds that we have set aside. So, to me, it's a no-brainer to proceed. Um so just you know encouraging the subcommittee to come up with something that's going to be beautiful that the community is going to enjoy but something that we can ensure is built and um that might be a little less snazzy than the original proposals but our community deserves an actual park that we can enjoy. Thank you.

Uh, Council Member Lince,

you know, um, if if if I may, I' I'd like to pass the the, uh, the honors over to to my colleague, uh, Frank, Council Member Kern, um, to to speak because I've, you know, sometimes you you work on, uh, a subcommittee together as as as council members And uh you get to really know someone through that process and um it's just been just an honor and um just and really um growth uh inducing for me to to work with you because you brought to the equation um you know different perspectives that I didn't uh you know that I wasn't grasping and it made I think the overall project complete you know to bring to the full council uh this evening. So Frank, if you wouldn't mind just, you know, talking about our process and and you know how we got to where we are because I think you're better saying it than me.

So yes, sorry. Um you have a lot to live up to with that introduction. I hope you're ready.

My So uh so thank you, Council Member Lens. Uh we have worked painstakingly over the course of the last year. This has been ongoing. Um, I spent more time in the last six months out at Zero Point with my dog as per usual. Um, but out there, uh, observing weather conditions, observing the tides, observing the wildlife, um, and really taking that all in. So, uh, and Council Member Lent and I, uh, took some field trips to some other parks as well to have a look at what some of the other, uh, neighbors were doing. I want to thank staff for all the time that you guys have already dedicated to this and the almost count countless questions that that we've submitted to you and you guys have flawlessly answered. You know, about two months ago, we came forth uh based upon a recommendation from our city manager that this is the right thing to consult with our partners on the park and rec commission uh for suggestions. Um, and so this project with many, and I repeat, many constraints has been turned over to park and recreation to come forward with uh recommendations to the full council. So, I am not privy to what they're working on right now, but those ideas are brewing and they're going to bring those back to the subcommittee. What I'm hoping they bring back is a really uh vast plan and that we have to do some pairing um to to keep it uh not only on footprint for parcel uh but within the budget. So hopefully they're going to be giving us some good options. I do want to clarify that some of the constraints that we have uh been working with are a very clear direction to our consultant at CMG that we need to stay within the budget that we have. So that's $1.9 million. We're asking tonight to unlock 73 I think it's $73,000 to complete that plan so we can actually have a full estimate and options of what we might do out there. At no point in my involvement here have I been a aware of

any ask that has gone beyond $1.9 million or beyond the parcel our footprint. Um I'm encouraging the council to approve this tonight because the money we've been sitting on the money for four years, five years, whatever it's been at this point and uh the future value of the dollar is just sitting there is going down and construction costs double every 10 years. So this money is becoming as we sit on it more and more invaluable. So with that being said, um I support this project. I have been looking at this staff report now for about two weeks. Yes, staff does do the reports that far in advance and um they've really been doing their homework and putting this in uh great shape. So again, thank you to our partners at Park and Recreation for all the work that you're putting in right now. We're really excited to see what you come forward with. Thank you.

Okay,

Council Member Okonnell. So, I'm I'm sort of hearing two different things from from council member Kerna and what staff said that they're looking that the CMG is going to be directed to look at not only the current use but the future use. how we, you know, a a more grandiose plan that can be paired down for what's going to be built first and then upgraded as time goes on. Is that what I'm hearing? Or they do have a budget of 1.9 that CMG is going to do a plan not including geotechnical.

So I Frank, you want to answer that? We have given very specific instructions to CMG that when they're looking at parcel R, they need to be considering any sort of development on any side of parcel R going forward and making sure that whatever plan we put in at parcel R is flexible enough for whatever could be built around it. But and built for 1.9 million on parcel R.

Just on parcel R. Because when we had the original plan for CMG and the $52 million um plan that they costed out and the costs were unfathomably low. They had building a seaw wall as costing I don't know 1.2 million and you don't even get Army Corps of Engineers to look at a project for 1.2 million. So a lot of the cost analysis that they brought to the entire park system was completely inadequate and also did not look at the geotechnical that was surrounding it. So, I I have concerns when we ask for a price um to build something um with how they came up with some of their dollar amounts from looking at their last product that they brought to us. Granted, that was an incomplete project, um, an incomplete product, I should say, because they still had lots of options and things that they hadn't worked out because they didn't get to the end of that process because it was sort of shut down at that point. Um, so I I worry that that cost analysis that is going to be coming from CMG is going to be inadequate. And I certainly hope that if we do move forward with with extending the contract for $77,000 that staff is willing to look at it and really get actual numbers instead of CMG numbers. And I'm just going to call them that because I don't have any faith in the numbers they brought in the last project. Um, so I'm I'm not opposed to seeing what might go there for 1.2

million, 1.9 million. Um, but I don't want to put the expectations on the public that this is going to get built because it could be that it's going to take more than that just to do do the geotechnical and to reroute whatever needs to be rerouted and do whatever needs to be done. And I think that some of the comments from one of our members of the public who talked about it can't have any grass, it can't have any water, need any water, and it can't, you know, it has to be rodent proof. Um, you know, those are all issues that I think we really need to look at and what the maintenance on that's going to be going forward before we promise a project to our citizens. So, yes, I think we can use the information. I think we need to use it with a grain of salt and we need to uh express to our residents that this doesn't mean in a year you're going to have a park that meets these visions that is everything to everyone because it's not going to be everything to anyone if it even gets built. And I think we need to be really clear on that because we need to be realists. And and I think that every time people are looking at building a park and building some more fun stuff, we're taking away funds in excess of what's already set aside for this park for the fun stuff that could be used for infrastructure and keeping police and fire on the streets. I just I think it's really important to know that that we don't have fund money in the budget necessarily. We may, but we may not. And so everyone needs to realize that this isn't a guarantee that all your hard work is for nod.

All right.

Okay. So, I'm going to ask a show of hands. Anybody here that doesn't like a park? Anybody here who doesn't want a park at parcel? I'd like to see a park at Parcel R. I walk out there, I walk up on Parcel R, I look at the view, I imagine it, I think, wow, it's too bad it's just been a bunch of dirt piled up. That being said, it's also my job to be devil's advocate. Now, let's imagine this. So, if we say we have 1.6 1.8 8 million. And we have storm drains out there that are not draining anymore. They're just backing up. And we have a lagoon in Sierra Point Parkway that you saw the last king tide and it's right on the edge of the road. Do you want a park or do you want to be able to get out there? So I I will echo concerns about money. It doesn't mean I'm against a park. So what am I trying to say? If we tell CMG you need to design a park that meets the budget, whatever that budget is, does that include geotechnical? Does it include storm drains? Does it include any what is in this report as adjacent area, which our public works director said there may be things on the adjacent property that need to be done. Those could easily be one or two million, three million. We don't know yet. That has to be part of the budget. And that's my concern. We say design a park within this budget and then we come to find out it's going to be more than that or double that to even do it. And

then we're back to buyer's remorse that that we've talked about a park, we all got excited about it. Parks and Wreck puts lots of work into conceptualizing and then what comes of it. And that's kind of why council member Curtain said four years ago we had a $52 million park. We didn't have $52 million. Now you might say in a city budget, what's one or two or three million? We get a list every year of capital improvement projects that we can't fund. What are those capital improvement projects? Sometimes they're replacing part of our decades old sewers when we see water manes break and we can't pay for all of that. So I'm very concerned at taking on new debt that's not within a a confined budget when we can't deal with projects that are pushed off year after year after year that are critical infrastructure. And yes, we can lump along and wait for another water man to blow up or the sewer to collapse, but do we want to do that? So, all I'm saying here is I'd love to see a park on parcel R. I think we need some cold hard facts and not just a budget to CMG of design it for all the money we have and then we still have to find two or three million potentially to make it feasible to even build something. I think we don't have all the information we need

and I I'd like to see something more tight on those parameters of what the budget is to make it feasible. Maybe then it needs to be scaled down, but I don't want our our hardworking parks and and wreck people to sit and come up with something only to be told, well, maybe half of that. Can I ask a question?

Sure. staff. What do you think is the likelihood that we could get a grant to help fund either some of the infrastructure thing may things Mayor Mackin is talking about or just the park itself if we because we have we could have matching funds or the city has a contribution amount it could put in. Do you think that there's anything we might be able to get? I think the short answer is yes. We're always applying for grants, particularly park ones. We don't always get them, unfortunately. But, um, this is why they're available is to augment and support cities that don't have the funds otherwise. Okay.

Yeah. I have a question for uh for Ma. So, um, and I appreciate um, Council Member McConnell, Mack, and your your comments. These are things that Frank and I have been talking about with staff since day one, right? because we know that these are important things to you and they're important to us as well, right? You don't want to build something and then or design something and then you don't have the money to to move it forward. We don't want to spend $76,000 on another plan to sit four years from now and say, "Well, there was another $70,000 that we're not doing anything with those plans." Exactly.

We already spent money on a bunch of plans. So, you know, one of the things that we had um we had talked about in the what we would bring to the full council was some um some infrastructure plans that MA said that that we would probably need and MA that those numbers were about 26,000 or 36,000 bucks something like that. Yeah, there w there was um we we had some discussions about having some civil work done as part of this current phase as well as doing some geotechnical investigations. Um you know, if we wanted to increase the budget uh to do those and at this stage, we can certainly undertake those. Um uh I don't know how much the geotech would be off the top of my head. It wouldn't, you know, cuz for the scope that we would be doing to identify what's what's out there, you're talking about a couple of core samples, um you know, having borings done. It's not, you know, we're not in six figures, so it's it's in five figure land. Um, and then, yeah, doing some topographic mapping and surveying to understand the elevations and where all the utilities are. We can certainly look at that and incorporate that. I think we were looking at 140,000 150,000

um with the uh CMG scope to do something that's a little more robust. And and if I if I if I could just finish and then so when um when we were talking about uh putting amenities on parcel art and talking about like infrastructure and grading and amenities depending upon the amenities, right? You know, and it's really important for us that that what we put forth is feasible and it says it in the document here. We we were staying within within that that $1 whatever million dollar budget for everything. And so that was I mean what you guys are all saying super important to us. And we knew that we couldn't come before you tonight if we didn't do our homework and make sure that we stayed within that budget for parcel R. That was super important to us. and you know, but we knew it was going to be solely on parcel. That's the focus by being at an elevation that's u uh higher than the 100year um sea level rise mark. We we could, you know, comfortably build on that without having to deal with sea level rise. We've seen the photos. We saw the king tide uh results and it was it was an eye openener. But thank goodness where we would construct this park and put in those amenities way above that that mark. I mean the likelihood of it ever you know having a king tide that would get to parcel R is just not going to happen just based upon the data that that is available.

Can I So sorry I also have something when we get around to it. So why couldn't we consider being prudent doing the studies first? Let's find out what we're dealing with. That determines what then is feasible. We know if there's more that needs to be done. We're going to have to do that anyway. It it may be that the the studies are going to be dependent on what the use is

and so the park may need to be sused out before we know what those impacts to the geological are. Again, it's the chicken and the egg

um and on how we're looking at that. Um, can I make a suggestion that maybe the council isn't thinking of and if we're worried about staying in budget? Um, lately, um, on public art, we're talking a lot about projects that serve dual purposes and recently we thought more, well, we've been partnering with public works, right? And the Alvarado San Bonito staircase is a perfect example of using public art funds that also um intertwine with public works in a city expenditure that was already going to happen and making that artful. And um Rosemary Slade sent uh an email with some photo examples of, you know, um shielded seating areas. And I could absolutely see public art, you know, um using public art money for benches, using public art money for um lighting. We're using public art money for lighting right now on Alvarado um staircase and also to make these sort of shade structures um that is you know you're going to want those to look beautiful and the perfect person to hire to do that is an artist. So, I actually think that, you know, if you a lot of the sort of structural things that we could put on that land, we could actually partner with um public art and maybe share some of the costs. The city contributes some out of the budget that's already allotted and maybe public art comes in with another 50% or whatever it might be to help that money stretch further. Yeah. and then you're getting just a a gorgeous park at the

end of the day. So to me knowing how much money is there and

I I'm not that worried. I think that we move forward we the we already have this money set aside for CMG. It's less than what we were planning to spend and the next phase of this. We need to be able to come back and have a conversation about something real. And we can't do that unless we see a proposal. From there, we can figure out, okay, if it's way out of budget, what needs to be tweaked? Then, as council member Okonnell mentioned, we have kind of a scope of work which would inform any studies. And at that point, we could see whatever the deficit might be. And if it's appropriate to supplement some of those funds through public art, I really think that we could get this done and in a way that is responsible is fiscally responsible but also, you know, meets the um aspirations of the community and revitalizes the area. So I think that we just we should move forward now. So before I call on Council Member Kern, I I need a clarification and perhaps you can provide it. Council member Kern, you said that the remaining funds would be the amount that you told CMG they have to work with as no.

CMG is aware of the funds that we have left. Okay. So, they've not been given any sort of budget. They have not been given any sort of budget to work with. We are here tonight asking to unlock $7,000 to allow them to put together a plan in which we will get budget numbers from the result of that plan. Okay? Because council member Lent said that the remaining funds would cover the infrastructure and building a park. They could correct. We we went forward again. I'll repeat it again. We will not be stepping outside of the parcel R foot footprint. At no point

did we discuss doing that and we took the direction from this council to stay within the parcel our R foot footprint.

Number two, we worked with public works and park and recreation staff very closely and CMG and we said with $1.9 million, what could we have? I read those items to you uh in the meeting. I believe it was November, one of the November meetings. Ideas that came forward that are within budget and don't require any general funding. They do not require any grants. These are this is something that we could do with the money that we have. a multi-purpose lawn, a plaza, an amphitheater, overlooks, picnic barbecue areas, wind and shade canopies, some form of earthwork and BMS, a playground, gardens, or a dog park. These were ideas that were brought forward that are within budget and doable today. I approached the city manager and I said, "Jeremy, is it possible to reserve some of these funds for future maintenance?" So, general funds did not need to be used. And I was told we can put that in the plan and use some of these funds for that. I don't know how far we take that. I don't know whether we take that 5 years, 10 years, or for an entire generation. I don't know what they cost, but we are looking at using those funds as well for future maintenance.

Okay. So to restate the the funds available would cover studies, CMG fees, and the actual building of a park potentially augmented by, as Council Member Davis said, public art potentially augmented by public art money potentially. Thank you. Anyone else? you know um so Ma had mentioned that um there would be some some costs right for and and could you just explain what those costs would be ma

sure so um I there if we if we utilize some of the money that's associated with parcel right now we can get some geotechnical work done as well as some civil engineering topographic surveys to really understand the the topography over there um as we're designing the elements of the concept plan that really does help us figure out how much the um the overall project would cost. Um so yeah, that that's would be the that would be additional and the fund that we have. I mean, we wouldn't be spending, like I said, it's not we're not looking at six figures for these types of studies. It's um you know, I think reasonably uh 150,000 with the CMG amount uh with the 78 for CMG for concept planning. Um, so included in that 150 figure that 78 the additional would help us flush out the rest of the design elements.

Yeah. So the reason the reason I bring that up because I think that we should from our concerns that we have we should um also um give approval to not only to CMG for the uh the concept planning but then also for the infrastructure um requirements and geotechnical that to ensure that it is feasible. you know these the funds that are in that are allocated to parcel art they have to be spent on parcel art that's part of that agreement that 5

$527,91 so you can't spend it on anything else right that's the agreement so um if if it's okay I mean I I would like to make a motion to we have a council member still wanting to speak I I did just want to ask one question of Ma. Um when you talked about doing the geotechnical studies um and now you're saying they're going to be in the 75 $80,000 range to to do um studies. Is that parcel R entirely out of the landfill cap area or would that be penetrating through the cap

when we before we start? I mean that would be I would I would review the maps to make sure where we are where we are because yes we don't want to um cause any impacts with respect to that um that cap. I don't believe that the cap is in that specific location but I I would verify that beforehand. Okay. So that's an unknown. So at this point, even if we go ahead with the CMG, I would think that any contractor allotment to um do geotechnical, we'd want to wait and we'd want to hear those discussions whether it's going to be impacting the cap. Yeah, I would I would refer to MA to do the right thing. So So is that a motion? Yes, it is.

If I if I may, before the council votes, I want to correct something. Um, as I'm sure there's experts out there, uh, 3 the the Senate bill is 315, not 350, and it did not become law. Uh, it died by rule on Monday morning. So, uh, the intent was to have Quimby Act funds follow the same transparency that uh, the mitigation act, the mitigation fee act follows. Uh, but that did not become law. Was not uh, passed by the legislature. just I don't think it changes anything you've discussed, but I want to make sure it was corrected before you vote. Okay, thank you for that. So, a second.

I was I had one member of the public has Are you okay? Has asked me several times to speak. You'd have to come to the

podium, please. I would just like to say and reassure everybody on this on this council that at least park and rack and um neighbors that I have discussed and everything are not looking at this as a big cash cow to do something outrageous. Something that the public can use in our lifetime, a park that's that just beautifies a blank slate out there. um not a building but a park and something that can change over time. Um anyways, I just want to reassure that we're not pie in the sky going to build something huge and pretty um but something that's useful and fun and can last for you know at least I would say 20 years of of useful use. So anyways, just wanted to reassure that we're not we're not looking to build the Taj Mahal there. Thank you.

Thank you. Are we reopening public hearing? Well, it's it's not a public hearing, right? It's not a public hearing. Public comment. Okay, we'll take one more comment.

EMTT County citizen. Uh I'll be very quick. Uh cost overruns in California running 20 to 30% for construction. Uh Bay Area is a little bit higher. I may I suggest that you take 40% buffer for whatever you do. So the 1.9 million take 40 make sure you have 40% to spare. So make it 1.2 1.3 as far as your directive and guidance for for expenditures to CMG as well as through uh staff so that they can actually make sure that they're able to do this. Uh the point that council member Okonnell made was that um their estimates were uh woeful in the past. Um uh Councilman Kern, thank you very much for your clarification on the money. It was very helpful. But I do think we're we're still looking at spending $1.9 million. Exactly. And we're going to miss it if we try to do that because the cost overruns are everywhere. Um I can attest to that from recent personal experience. Thank you.

Okay. Last call. Anyone else? Okay. Now I'll entertain a motion. Uh okay. So you want to give it Frank? make a motion to accept CMG's proposal and the uh the money that uh for the geotech that oh and the money for the geotechnical studies for that okay that mod can we even do that if it was not agendaized Mr. attorney.

I do think it steps out. It goes beyond what was discussed. So I would not uh allow that for this meeting. It can be agendaized for the next meeting if you care if you wish to. Okay. Okay. Contract amendment. So I make a motion to approve the contract amendment for CMG architecture concerning the Sierra Point R concept plan and estimate cost thereof. Second. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none, the motion passes. Great. Thank you. Oh, well, thank you for coming and I'm looking forward to seeing what the park and rec commission brings forth. Excited.

Okay, moving on. We're under old business. Discuss agenda setting and placement of items on council agendas. Could we have staff report, please?

Yes. Thank you very much, Madame Mayor, members of council. Sorry if you can't hear me this evening. Um, very straightforward. This is based on conversations the council has uh recently had related to a broader set of um issues. Um, the council in its meetings uh in the fall discussed um opportunities to um create procedures around the agenda setting process um and how items are brought to the council for um for discussion. Excuse me. Staff is recommending based on those conversations um couple ideas. Um let me start with the future agenda items. I think that that's a little more straightforward that we would have on a future on future council agendas. an item called future agenda items or something similar that would allow the council to discuss whether or not there are items that individual council members would like to bring forward. In order for it to be agendaized at a future date, we would be requiring two votes of the council to do so. On the agenda setting, uh we're proposing there's two potential tasks that you we could take related to setting the agenda. Currently, the mayor um has the sole responsibility for approving the agenda that comes out. Uh we're recommending either the mayor and the vice mayor meet uh with staff to have that discussion as a Monday morning meeting or something of that ilk um just for a few minutes. Another model would include the city manager um in that. There's a reason I put that be. I think it makes more sense for the mayor and the vice mayor to have that conversation and not include the city manager in that. um that could be fraught with favoritism and other things that I I don't think are necessary to bring bring forward. So those are our suggestions and we would love to hear your conversation. Thank you.

Okay. I have a question. Council questions. Council member Davis. Um can this be done via email or are you really envisioning like an in-person meeting every time we need to set an agenda cuz that could be hard for council members that are traveling. It doesn't require in person. And I think we can utilize telephonic tools, Zoom, other things just to have that quick conversation. I wouldn't I wouldn't suggest it over email just because email does lose some of the immediiacy and understanding, but a five-minute conversation usually in my experience in previous places I've worked, a five-minute conversation is usually all you need to set an agenda. Thanks.

And could we dovetailing on that question if I may, Madam May? Well, yeah, go ahead. So this includes telephone, Zoom, any sort of communication that you want to have to conduct this meeting is acceptable. Yeah, there's no issue there. Okay. Thank you.

So So it's my understanding and when I've been mayor um usually the the city manager will bring a list of items that need to be addressed um in a topical order. um some that are state laws that we need to um agree with. Um some are things staff has been working on for a set amount of time and are ready to bring back. And I think that when I was involved in the process, um, there would be a list from staff um, on what needed to be brought forward. And sometimes there was a a discussion on whether there was going to be time for an item, if it was going to be contentious where we wouldn't want to have two or three long discussion items. and the mayor would work with the city manager on saying, "Yeah, I think that's doable." Or maybe we want to put the library project before because there'll be parents with children there. And so it was a collaboration, but it wasn't as if the mayor was bringing all their own projects or ideas into that meeting necessarily for that upcoming meeting. And and so I'm wondering if we're trying to change that process that will take away the city manager's voice, so to speak, on what needs to come before this body because the city manager really knows what needs

to come before this body in a timely ma manner. more so than we necessarily do. Now, there are other kinds of projects or things that the council may want to discuss or consider that are more subjective to the will of the mayor andor the council. So, to me, it seems that the agenda should be almost broken in two pieces. things that have been identified by the city as needing to come forward to handle our business and to take care of things that need to get done. And then there's the items that are more discretionary or more esoteric that may want to be brought forward by the mayor and or

are we in discussion or is the council? I'm just asking if they can be broken into two pieces. There it is. Thank you. The council could take any approach it would like as it relates to divvying up um those things. I I do I think that there's if you're looking at a ven diagram, I think there is some overlap at times between some of those issues. There can be very esoteric issue that needs to come forward. There can be an issue that we have to bring forward, but we know it's going to be controversial regardless of when we bring it forward. Um but any way the council wants to set it up is fine with us. Okay. Sorry, I was getting too wordy. Council member Lent, you have any questions? I do not. Okay. I have another question.

I do too. I have a question. So, when you say um in response to Council Member Davis that it could be done by email because I had the question about if if it's just on the agenda, it it alludes to it has to be done in person at a meeting. And so you clarified, thank you for that, that it could be done by email, but are you then quantifying it that two council members say we feel this needs to be expedited if possible to go on an agenda. We don't want to wait for another council meeting to have to bring it up because that will delay it. Are you then going to send an email to the full council to weigh in as as you might hear at a meeting or would you be subscribing to as long as we have two council members that would legitimize putting something on the agenda? because we did have some prior discussion several months ago that we kind of loosely arrived in discussing it that as long as two council members and I believe council member Davis, you had pointed out originally we talked about three council members and it boiled down to two because you said if if someone else says no, I think we should really we should discuss it further or look into this that you know we might be missing things if we were always looking for a majority. But would you be requiring the full council on an email request to weigh in?

No, I'm not sure I could legally do that. Okay. Okay. Thank you for that. Uh, Council Member Davis, you had a question.

I have two uh actually one's a suggestion for discussion. Um, but the other one is, so when I've been mayor in the past, and this was under former city manager, Ingred would send me a draft of the whole agenda ready to go. I would look at all the items and their placement. I would move things around. I would take things out. It would let me like really visualize the flow of the meeting. How has been your process since lately? Do you send the full-fledged agenda baked out and then the mayor can review it or is it more just like, hey, these are some items that we're thinking of putting on?

Since I've been here a year and a half, we've utilized the process that was in place. So, we and I've worked with three mayors. We send an agenda in advance of the meeting. Um, over time, we're making some slight adjustments to that. Um, one adjustment we're we're making a little bit over time here is uh we were releasing those sending those emails just a two days before we were publishing an agenda and staff a considerable amount of staff work has gone into things at that point. Um, so I want to back that up a bit. So we're doing a little bit more of that. Um, every mayor's approach it a little bit differently um and and what they how they would like to look at the information, how they want to receive that information. Um, so we just adjust depending on the stylistic needs. Um, yeah.

Okay. Okay. Any other council member Kern questions? One minor question. I think it's just procedural. So, if I have an idea and I would want to have it agendaized and let's say I call up one of the other council members and I was like, I have this great idea. No more bubblegum sales in the city of Brisbane. And that council member says, "Yeah, I can't get behind that. Am I in violation of the Brown Act if I approach a second council member? Mr. Mcmorro,

naughty problems for the Brown Act. Uh, so you would you would be talking to one council member, finding out essentially their vote, going to a third to find out their vote. You would be in violation. Could then though utilize Yeah. at a meeting you could say, "Mayor, council matters, this is something that I really think we should look at and see if you have council support there." And then those two council members, it's that's a public meeting. There's Yeah. And then I was checking for premeating stuff, but yes, I understand.

Hopefully at that point, even if the vice mayor and the mayor maybe personally disagreed, there was already one other council member that supported and so we would you would honor that and put it on anyway. Okay. Okay. It's just a reminder, this is really for others not in the room given the council's uh comments not tonight but previously on commissioners and committee sometimes not knowing. It's not just finding out whether somebody will support something you will do. If you find out that this isn't going to happen and it's because you made a bunch of calls, you also know the action. Thanks, Tom.

So, any other questions before we Okay. Do we have any public comments? No. Okay. Discussion. I'm just going to start because I I want to dovetail off some things that I heard. Um, Council Member Okonnell, you brought something up and and each of us has been a mayor other than I'm sorry, Council Member Kern, you'll be coming up. The setting of the agenda was kind of a subtractive process. And I think council member Okonnell, you brought up something important in that city staff and the city manager know the items that are deadline driven that need to be done by state law or a new state ordinance or or just something that that has a time element. And so I I think it's it's pretty easy to understand that the council has to respect that the city manager and staff are going to put items on the agenda. That being said, what I learned as a mayor and I I think most of you have followed is that there will be things sometimes as a council will say, "Well, we'll bring it back later and we need more information." And so my job I always felt as a mayor was to remind staff are are we keeping that in mind it needs to come back. I never put things on the agenda. I just reminded the city manager some of these things were due to come back. So my function as a mayor in approving an agenda was subtractive to say there I think in my opinion these are too many things. We have to take something off

and I would discuss with the city manager. I think this might be too long. It's a judgment call, but a lot of times you kind of hear, you know, how long something might take. Yes. And then you would ask,

do we have latitude to move it to another meeting, you know, or or are we going to be for the next five months where we we absolutely need to do it that night. So the subtractive process, but one other thing we didn't bring up was who would approve it. So, I did ask around at county meetings what other cities do and many most of them do not just have the mayor approve the agenda. Most of them because they said that they had mayors who just packed the agenda with what they wanted. They went to a policy where they had two or three council members approved the agenda and that prevented one person from just pushing things they wanted

to go forward. So I think that's perfectly reasonable. I didn't understand the proposal for having the mayor and vice mayor meet with staff. It's always just kind of been the city manager andor assistant city manager. That seemed to work. So, that's just my comments, but I'd love to hear from all the rest of you. Council member Davis.

I think three council members is like too many cooks in the kitchen. I would say for me personally, mayor, vice mayor makes sense. All the reasons that you mentioned, I would not put the city manager in the position to have to be the deciding vote. I feel that that people's feelings can get hurt and it puts them in a really awkward position. We want our city manager to be as neutral as possible and don't want to put them in any uncomfortable positions. I would say if there is a standill, what you would do is maybe call in the most recent outgoing mayor. So, you know, if Colleen and I couldn't agree, then we would bring in Cliff to be the deciding vote. Um, that way you have a provision because you may it's going to happen at some point that you're going to disagree. You need to have a mechanism to solve that. It shouldn't be through staff. So, it's just outgoing mayor is the easiest one because if you want if you try to pull in next person in the rotation, sometimes that gets a little weird, especially if you know two people get elected at the same time. So, I just think you always know who the most recent mayor was and um that just makes it easy, I think. Okay. Council member Okconor,

you know, I think that the two people with the city manager is fine for approving a a agenda that's been vetted by staff and there's a certain amount of items. It's what the staff can do. It's being published a week before or less. You know, it could be three days before. Um, I think where we need to get clarity is when there's something that council wants to initiate and bring to a future agenda, how that gets put on the list. And I want to make sure we're not putting undue pressure on staff where I may say, I want to look at bubble bubblegum regulations and I want it the next meeting. that may not be feasible to them. And so I think that on the dis when we're asking for something to be considered for a future agenda item, we need to be flexible unless it's an urgent urgent item. that we're not putting undue stress on on the city manager to direct his staff to work on something to get a cohesive um uh package together to fully you know understand what we're asking for. So, you know, I think that the planning of the agenda should start with the city manager with input from the mayor and the vice mayor as far as approving it. And then we can move forward with items that someone on the council whether it's initiated from from uh public concerns or their own concerns

um should be brought forward. But in the discussion during council matters, the request can go out that I want to discuss something if there's agreement um with another council member. Yes, it should come back, but not with this I have to have it by tomorrow unless it's a reason that I have to have it really immediate. you know, if there's some issue that is really extremely time-sensitive, I think we need to give staff the leadway on placing that on the agenda. And certainly a list should be maintained of things that we've um postponed, which I'm sure is being done, but things that we'd like to see come forward. And it may be six months down the road before we can get to it, but I think that everybody on the on the council should be aware of that. I think you could implement that as well, Council Member Okonnell. If if something was brought to the city manager with someone saying this really has to happen soon, one council member or the mayor and vice mayor, the city manager could bring it to a meeting and say, "I've been given this request, but I'd like the full council to weigh in as well."

Whether with the recommendation of Yes. comes through that way or it comes from the dis as a as a pop off, right?

I think it would come through to staff, right? Like you would you would say we got to look at bubble gum and so when staff proposes the agenda, they would say, "Okay, there's been a request from one of your council members to bring an item forward." So under mayor council matters, we're going to have requests for future agenda items. if we had it on every meeting, we would be coming up with a lot more stuff just because it was on it was an option. So, and then the other two council members would know, the mayor, vice mayor, they say, "Okay, sure." You know, there's been a request, someone wants to introduce something, we put it under mayor, council matters, and then we hear it the next meeting and then staff does whatever staff does after that.

Council member Lent.

Yeah. you know, um you know, I I like the uh the proposal for the agenda setting, having the mayor and the vice mayor. Um the previous time I was the mayor, uh I had Lori Lou, she was the vice or the mayor prom sit in on the meetings because I felt it was important for her um to just learn how the process was. Um it helped me to just kind of get a better understanding of of other things. You know, sometimes you're, you know, you have a certain perspective. I think it's good to have another perspective, you know, like setting the agenda. I mean, really, really what you are as a mayor, you're you're the time manager. You're not really the one bringing anything forward on the agenda. I know that you have those concerns, Terry. Uh, as far as I know, I've never seen that in the 15 years that I've been on the council where there was been a mayor who just said, "We're only talking about the things that I want. This has never happened." You know, and I and I have to say, I've been like really impressed with, you know, how all of you have been the mayor and there might have been some items that maybe you didn't like, but you put them on, they they they wound up going before us, right? And so I think, you know, we we have that, you know, really nicely established, you know, in our in our DNA. So, um, but yeah, it's really about like, okay, you know, here's the things that the city manager, you know, lays out and perhaps as the mayor might say, well, you know, council member Davis was bringing this thing up. I think we could fit this, you know, on the agenda or Council Member Kern thinks this or we've been hearing people in the community, you know, having some concerns about something. So, you know, maybe, you know, that might be something that, you know, might be important for the council to uh to discuss. But I I

really like how we've uh opened up a an avenue for council members to bring things up, to agendaize. this is this is new and only just over the last several months have we had that kind of opportunity and I I I like it and so um it seems like the rest of the council has embraced that as well. So yeah, Council Member Kern

um I'll be brief. You guys have said almost everything so far. Um so looking at the staff report, I'm all about option B. the mayor, vice mayor, and city manager meet to determine uh the agenda. And I think we do need the call for future agenda items. We get two council members to agree to it. There we go. It goes on the list how it gets prioritized to council member Okonnell's comments. Uh that's just something that we're going to have to figure out on the go forward. And so not everything is a priority, but let's keep it on the list and go from there. So is there a way that we can memorialize this? I I hate to ask staff to reinccapsulate this discussion, but I think we need to put a policy in writing.

Oh, yes. We'll bring back the policy uh on a consent item. I didn't hear clarity from the council on which option for agenda setting. There are differences. No, I disagreed tremendously with that option. Oh, you don't like B?

No, I think it puts a city manager in a really bad spot to be the deciding vote. like they're that's them being that's them having a say. They can come and say, "Hey, this is what we need because they should be an informative role, not a decision-making role." They're saying, "We need to do this because state law, we got a timeline or whatever." But there is going to be a time when, you know, there's something else that's not like that. And maybe the council members disagree if it's too much on a meeting or not. you know, whatever. It should not be on the city manager to decide.

I thought it was all three though. Didn't say the mayor, vice mayor, and city manager meet and determined collectively. Yeah, but Okay, Jeremy. So, in your staff report, I thought you said that that was not your preference. So, what's your what's your preference? That's why I suggested having the outgoing the person who's most recently mayor, if there needs to be a decider, that person would be pulled in at that time. So,

well, a couple things. um my so in in my seven years in Pollola Valley we utilized option B and in my time there there wasn't a moment where we there was a disagreement where I felt like I was casting a tie vote but we were I was always aware of that and I was always concerned that if I was suggesting something one council member who didn't want that to happen may take it the wrong way. So, it is not my preferred option, but this is an option. Um, I think that's my only point. Thank you.

If we follow under just the mayor and the vice mayor, we're following the same policy the way we've always done it. The only difference is by having a second person, you need a tiebreaker. And I I thought your suggestion of um the former mayor is as being a really good option. and it brings in a third person who's on the council and it takes away the uncomfortable position the city manager's in because to me it's a given the city manager is involved in presenting the agenda anyway, right? And that's not a Brown Act thing, Tom. Okay. Then why not? Okay. So, are we all okay with that? We don't need a vote on that or do

No, no, I don't think you need to vote on that. we know what we'll bring back. And and I I should have made this comment earlier. In my time here, my time in other communities where I've been city manager, um there's always been uh respect for what the city manager is bringing forward in the reasons why. Um and I think you guys encapsulated that conversation very well this evening. Um and I know that I can go to any mayor and say, "Here's an issue from a resource standpoint or a timing standpoint." And that's always part of the conversation. That's always been respected. So, thank you.

Thank you everyone. I think that was a a good discussion. And for anyone in the public going, my goodness, you know, um don't they know how to do this? The the fine details of how we handle it. We're always trying to improve it. So, it's a good time with a new city manager to discuss these things. All right, we are on to the city manager's report. City manager Dennis, your report, please. Thank you. And I lost my piece of paper. Here we are. I wanted to cover a few things that have happened in the last week. Um, first of all, the doggy dip at the pool was highly successful. I think we had 55 dogs. The photos were outstanding.

Um, this is going to be a banner uh event for us. I just hope that we don't have to do it every year because that means something's wrong with the pool. Yes. Yeah, exactly.

It was so fun. the um this morning uh we hosted an event meet the new um directors um so Ma and Julia were there uh was well attended for event in Brisbane. We really appreciate the people who came out to say hello and share their ideas. Um we have a little thing coming up called the Super Bowl. Um the effect on us will be related to Cow Palace activities and rest assured your chief and the police force are well suited ready to go should there be any issues. We we would expect some um mutual assist sort of issues with the daily city that have you checked in with our hotels. Do you expect any increase in bookings there?

We um very Thank you for that question. Um we recently Mitch Bull the economic vitality director and I had lunch with the new general manager at the Double Tree. Um we we check in with him about once every 6 months. Uh this was last week. He didn't see a a bump a significant bump. Um so more to tell on what that means. Um in that vein, we're also actively considering how we can be part of um the World Cup. Um we are looking at um opportunities here to um to uh to potentially be part of that that discussion. Um uh so I had a conversation recently with Mitch and we we think our partners the Double Tree we've actually brought this up with them. um they are considering bringing in some um some TVs to support the event. Um and we have a couple other options in town that may be interested as well. Um so I just wanted to let you know, you know, we're heavily we're going to be heavily involved in the security aspects of this as well. Um so that's coming up. Then let me give you the calendar. There's quite a few things happening in the next couple weeks before your next meeting. Just give me one moment. because it looks like I closed it. There we go. This weekend, um, both days 12:00 to 5:00 and 10 to 1 is the Mob Shop event at the Mission Blue Helping Hands, excuse me, Brisbane Village Helping Hands is holding its 10th anniversary, which is absolutely fantastic. Uh, this Saturday, 2 to 4, and that's going to be the Sunrise Room. So, hope you can come down to see that. It's also parents night out on Saturday. Oh, no, that's Yeah, parents night out this Saturday as well. Next week, we have a couple fun ones. Come train and name our chatbot as

part of our efforts to bring online on February 24th the uh new website. Um we've actually we've got some good news on that front. uh we've been working with our vendor and they have brought forward a a vastly better product than the one we were going to be stuck with. I'll just put it that way. So, um we're really appreciative that that they have offered that. So, uh we hope people can participate in that event. February 12th from 3:00 to 4:30, we're holding an event uh regarding the community awareness camera that's the council has directed placement at the park. This is an opportunity to speak to the vendor, learn about the camera, ask any questions that you might have, and hopefully alleviate any concerns that there might be. Middle school dance is on February 12th from 7 to 9:00. February 14th, Valentine's Day, is our winter habitat restoration day. Um, it's entitled or subtitle is flowers for butterflies, planting seeds of love. So, we hope that you'll come to the corner of Checker Spot and Rock Ren up in Mission Blue uh 9:30 to 12:30 Saturday the 14th. Reminder, we'll be closed for President's Day on the 16th. On the 18th, we have a new art exhibit called A Crowded Oh, excuse me. That's already that already happened. I don't know why that repeated there. My apologies.

The reception. Oh, that's the reception. Reception. Thank you. the reception for uh the wonderful work that you see in our newly named city hall conference room. Uh Kevin Frier did an excellent job in the photograph. So, we hope you come out to see that. And that concludes my report.

May I ask you if I I was hoping we might have Commander Garcia or Chief MSAS here there. You mentioned uh about the community cameras, but we've had some concerns expressed. It's been in the news about Menllo Park and flock cameras. And I know Chief MSUS responded. I asked her a question. Would you be willing to just give a a brief account to address what she responded to because citizens in Brisbane were concerned or do we have enough controls on our flock cameras? what we've learned

and maybe I should I'm sorry maybe I should set the the stage is that in Menllo Park um it was reported that ICE accessed one of their flock cameras one and so the question was posed does Brisbane have the same vulnerability thank you for setting that up um I I'm sure that residents have been reading uh in addition to Menlo Park other communities that are questioning the use of the flock cameras related to uh what is being termed unauthorized access. Um we're learning more about whether there were other access issues. Um we do not believe there are any vulnerabilities associated with our system. However, I have instructed staff to start to prepare um a report that anformational report for the council um speak I'll share with you madame mayor that the details on that but we were hoping to do that in early March to allay concerns. So staff has already begun work.

Good. Thank you very much. Glad to hear that. All right. Countywide assignments and subcommittee reports. Who would like to report out first? May I? Oh. Oh, okay. Please. Council member Okong. So, I had a an airport roundt meeting last night and one of the big things that's going to really affect our community is SFO is going to be doing runway rehabilitation and closing down two runways for 6 months. Wow. Oh my

the basic uh gist of what's going to happen because of that is um right now the runway that they use to do the stick departure

um which has Southern California traffic and eastbound traffic take off skirt Brisbane allegedly and then turn and go around them to go south or turn right to go east. Um that is not going to be in use. So they're going to be using one which is the typically the gap departure going out um heading out towards the ocean and they're going to as soon as they leave the runway turn immediately right and that is going to tremendously affect our takeoff noise um

for six months. It's basically like they're in reverse flow for six months and it will be very disruptive to our community. Um there's really nothing to do about to do about it. Um and I just wanted to make everyone aware I will give maps to staff so they can um put them out in some sort of blast. The airport has also advised that they would be willing to come and give a little presentation to different communities that are going to be affected um and let them know how why it's going to be going on. They are going to be doing they said day and night construction. They went a step below saying 24-hour construction, but I do believe it's going to be 24-hour construction, weather permitting. And so we might also hear just like when there's ramp ups and you hear noises depending on where where you're located in the city. Um I mean I can hear them from my bedroom when they do a ramp up on the runway in certain wind conditions. We may be hearing that grinding noise from the airport um 24 hours a day. So, I just wanted to bring that up and let everybody know about that happy news. Um, and and just so everyone's prepared and not asking the question, why are they flying over us so much?

I have a question for you and I don't know if this has come up at your meetings. Um during COVID the flights really dropped and then postco it was it was said that not only would they go back to previous levels but that there were plans for expansion in capacity and yet we've heard of less air traffic controllers. Have they talked about number of flights or whether they're still expanding or whether they've contracted or just what's going on there?

Well, uh the general overview from the director's report and the management of SFO is they are back to preandemic passengers but with about 94% of the flights. So the flights are going out heavier. Mhm. Um so while you may have less overflight, there is heavier flights. So they might be more disruptive per flight

because the flights are going out heavier. Um, as far as having air traffic controllers, um, of course the airport and the FAA stick to their story that they are being safe and safety is their general their number one priority. Um, and that they are fine with how many controllers they have both at Tron and at SFO tower. Personally, I, you know, have to assume that's correct, but I I can't answer any more than that. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else ready for report? Cliff?

Sure. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um, I had a heart board meeting um, a couple weeks ago and HART is helping the Samale um, office of education to uh, purchase a building that then so it's a market rate building that through the use of um, a various uh, bond scheme and a down payment from the office of education that they will be able to make all of the units affordable. Wow.

So, um yeah, it's a it's yeah, it is it's a great program and so um yeah, really stoked uh that they're doing that. And then um you know, Frank and I we met uh in our economic vitality uh subcommittee you with Prolis and there's a a little thing here that I just wanted to read because I think it's super cool. Um it said that prol and this something that you would uh really love madame mayor. So prologologist installed 1 gawatt of solar this past quarter high on MPS rating standard for customer service and are committed to zero net energy for any new development. Good.

So it is possible. It is. There you go. That's very laable. Can I follow up here? If Hart's looking to expand their portfolio, there is a really nice apartment building for sale on San Bruno across from the Bees and I think it's 2.5 million, seven units. They're all onebedroom. Four have been remodeled. Um, but that's, you know, for affordable housing, those are those

Yeah. those units that will be the cheapest that are for, you know, the people that make the least amount of money. That's their best, you know, the unit that in a studio is the most affordable unit. So, uh, you know, thank you so much for mentioning that and I will send uh Armando Sanchez, executive director, a text this evening and, uh, I guess put him in touch because, right, because I I'm on both boards, I just got to, you know, make sure I do it right. But who uh send it to Jeremy.

I did tell a member of the school board because the school board was looking to um provide some teacher housing. I don't know if they're in the same position anymore, but that would be also an ideal location for that. Yeah. You know, that that could be a potential. So, thank you. And then so I'm curious though, uh Madame Mayor, I mean, if we wanted to put something on the agenda, is now the time like to post some or pitch something or do we do that later? I I don't It's right after the report, is it? Okay, cool. Then I will wait. Okay, Council Member Kern.

Uh, absolutely. I've got two things. Uh, so, City Manager Dennis, is it possible to get Council Member Okonnell's update put in the blast? Put in something in prints, an email about the changes coming uh with the airport noise. As soon as those materials are available, we'll put it in the next blast.

Great. Thank you. Uh, I want to give a really great update. I've got, uh, pieces of paper here, uh, likely 70 major achievements by the San Mato County Libraries. I'm only going to report out on four, uh, that I think are a big deal that we, uh, we accomplished in the last year. Uh, so between July 24th and March 25th, again, we've got 13 libraries in the county. Uh but between July 24th and March 25th, uh our vehicles logged 3600 miles um on our outreach vehicles. That's our Maker Mobile, Bookmo, and Bookban supporting 69 school stops, 143 community stops, and 16 special events, including library nights at the San Francisco Giants at Oracle Park, which was an awesome event. I love this library. Um, we engaged 3,800 adults in 392 workshops, classes, and field trips designed to support cognitive health and social engagement for people over the age of 55. We unveiled our second ever library outpost, which is in Pacifica, which is a ginormous vending machine that is open 24 hours a day, um, and allows people to access materials in that vending machine. and there's over 300 items um using their library card and it has push Wi-Fi, so there's Wi-Fi all around the library in the common areas. We are now allowing checkouts of blood pressure kits at all of the libraries, all 13 locations.

That's good. Yeah. And those are my four. I was going to go five. That those are my four. Those are the good ones. Good stuff. Yep. Good stuff. Council member Davis, I don't have anything.

Okay. Well, I normally you would get a nice long PCE report. You're not going to get that. Suffice to say, it's the beginning of the year. A lot of reorganizing going on. The big items are renaming of Peninsula Clean Energy to I won't go into it's going to be rolled out. Um and also a 10th anniversary. And um the biggest decision that I should tell you about is that the board actually voted um PCE rates. We now do flexible rates and adjust them whenever we know we can lower it. The rates will be 10% less than PG&E. Nice.

That's my report. That's a good one. Um, we did not also have a Parkside 2 ad hoc subcommittee simply because the council's had numerous numerous meetings and staff involved as well. We just couldn't do it. So, that will be upcoming. That being said, does any council member wish to propose items for a subcommittee to discuss? For a subcommittee to discuss. That's what's on my agenda here. That's what it says. That's why I asked what would be the

I don't know what that was about. or does any council member wish to propose items for a future agenda? How about we'll try that one? Uh okay. So, you know, um let's see. Well, I have one item. So, we did talk about, you know, whether or not we could uh uh have uh MA, you know, do that study, the geotech and the infrastructure proposal are. So, um, can't wait to So, do would would you need a request from us to put that on there or do or did you get enough direction that we can just put it on there?

Well, and please collective counsel correct me if I'm I'm wrong. I understood the direction tonight to be on uh the fund the the work is detailed in the staff report, but that there was also interest in reviewing the geotech. So, I will work with Moz to bring that to a future council meeting, likely the next one. Okay. Yeah. No, I I I I think that Yeah, we that's how we understood it. Okay.

Okay. Anyone else? No. No. Okay. Written communications. City clerk. Council members received the correspondences from the following members of the public. Jessica Farcus, request to consider water cost allocation 12126. Chuck Hemstead, please preserve nature. January 21st. Uh Michelle Sammon, Brisbane Marina Issues, January 20th. Sue Cins, proposed development of San Bruno Mountain, January 28th. Tracy Hoer, support for amendment to the contract for Sierra Point parcel R concept plan. February 4th, Katrina Rev invitation from supervisors Jackie Spear and Ray Mueller. February 3rd, Getting It Right from the Start. Um, getting it right from the start presents 2025 California local cannabis policy scorecards February 3rd. David Skoolie received January 30th San Bruno Mountain is once again under threat. Jolene Rodriguez park at the marine I think it meant marina February 4th. Michael Barnes, Sierra Point parcel R cont C contract amendment with the CMG landscape architecture 2526 council meeting that was sent February 4th and um Brisbane California Civic Plus Marina Park from Judy Trigonus and that was sent February 5th. All right, thank you very much. We move on to oral communications number two. Do we have a member of the public wishing to make public comment? Anyone here or anyone online? No, Madame Mayor.

Okay, that being said, this meeting is adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Thank you very much, everyone. Thank you, everyone.