City Council - Regular Meeting

room that would like the public comment. Let's go to you first in person and then we'll go to those folks online.

Oh, hey Jack.

Thank you, mayor. Thank you, city council staff. Uh my name is Jeff Markham. I'm a marina resident, also the ward one director for Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District. I'm here to talk about uh item 4 D which is discussing real property negotiations on lock patent park. Um thanks for letting me address uh this item. Uh as you recall last city council meeting our general manager Eric Morgan delivered a letter and spoke to the council about our desire to work with the city of Marina and to enter into a planning process so we can work through the many issues uh at Lock Patent Park. Um, as he noted, some of the previous uh plans that we had done either had not been fully approved or had not gone through a full squa process, and therefore we're not clear how many of the plans or amenities would actually have survived the sequel process without either being removed or significantly altered. Um so um what we're trying to uh to do is point out that the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District, you know, we manage over 20,000 open space acres. Um and we have a very good track record of uh working with partners to achieve joint goals uh as well as working with uh bodies such as California Fish and Wildlife, Coastal Commission, Army Corps of Engineers, various city and county uh agencies. And we also have very good experience in identifying and securing grants to help pay for projects. And I think our most recent and largest project is at the Palorona Ranch Kinyatta Carmel River Restoration Project which is about halfway done and is coming along quite well. Um I'd like to urge and point out that the city of Marina and the park district stand a much better chance of planning and long-term success by working together than separately. and I'm urging that uh we work together to make some progress on issues um which have been identified and projects which have also been identified. Um later this evening you're also going to be hearing a report from CSUMB environmental 660

class led by Dr. Fred Watson and his students and they're going to be talking about some of the changes which have occurred to Log Paden Park over time, their effects of the habitat and wildlife. And to me, there is a great sense of urgency that if we don't work together, there will be dire and potentially irreversible consequences to our beloved wetlands park. Um, I think we can't let disagreements on projects and project particulars keep us from doing the right thing and taking care of this very special park. So, let's work forward together on the things we agree on and work through the things that we disagree on. Um, together I'm very confident we'll succeed, but I fear apart we're going to fail and uh a failure in that regard will rob our future generations of a very unique and beloved wetlands park. So, I think it's time to think into the future. Thank you. Thank you, Jeff. Let's not fail. Okay, seeing no one here in person and no one online, we'll go ahead and close public comment and our close session and we will rec uh re we'll come back here at 6:30

We'll get started with a couple of preliminaries while we wait for our city manager and council member Viala to join us so we have a full crew. But we just came from close session. We've been there since 5:00. Uh our city attorney Renee Ortega will summarize that for us. Thank you.

Yeah. Yes. Thank you, mayor. So, council provided direction but took no reportable action. And that is my summary. Now, close session was packed. We didn't finish it. We're going to finish it tonight at 10 o'clock. So, we're going to go in open session here until 10 o'clock. And when uh wherever we are, we're going to adjourn and mop up on Thursday night at 7:30. So 7:30 p.m. this Thursday will be the mopup of what we don't finish tonight so that we can get this close session because lock patent is important for us to be a little bit urgent. So we're going to make sure that we cover that close session item before we go home tonight and that will be at 10 o'clock. So we're kind of kind of under a hard stop at 10 o'clock. Um, and let me ask our city manager, how do you want to advise the public in as much advance as possible of what is going to be after 10 o'clock?

If we just went down the list, 13 DNE would be the last things. Local coastal program and city manager request for proposals for the equestrian center. Yeah, we might not get to the equestrian center the end. Okay. So, if you're here for the equestrian center, just knowing progress, right? Do you think we'll get through A through D?

Uh, I think we can. Okay. And we're often optimistic, so we'll check in on time um a couple times during the night so you're not waiting for something that never happens for too long. All right. So, uh, uh, would someone like to volunteer to lead us in the pledge of allegiance? Just raise your hand. Okay. And what's your name? I can't see you.

Nancy. Perfect. All right. Former council person Nancy Amade will lead us in the pledge of allegiance after a moment of silence. I aliance of the United States of America and to the republic stands one nation under God indivisy and justice for all.

Thank you Nancy. Okay. Uh, Council Member McCarthy is gonna, uh, lead us through a Red Cross Month proclamation. Thank you, Brian.

Thank you, Mayor. And I want to recognize I think we have, uh, Ed Sanchez in the audience. Do you have anyone else with you, Ed? Uh, is anyone else with you today or is it Okay, great. Um, so I'm happy to read this proclamation. And I have to say that, um, I just kind of Googled the origins of Red Cross because it's not in the proclamation. Um, if Google's correct, it was founded by someone who was appalled by the lack of care for wounded soldiers in the 1859 battle of Sulio. Um, and I just want to take a moment to recognize as we possibly enter into another war just how important this uh organization is. Uh and with that I want to read the proclamation which states whereas in March we celebrate American Red Cross Month by honoring our neighbors who make its humanitarian mission possible in Marina. Every day their acts of kindness change lives bringing relief, comfort, and hope when help can't wait. The compassionate spirit runs deep in our community just as it has for 145 years throughout the American Red Cross. Whereas the contributions of local Red Cross volunteers, 181 in the county, give hope to the most vulnerable in their darkest hours. Last year in Monterey County, volunteers helped 49 families affected by 30 home fires. I know at least one of those was here in Marina. Uh by addressing

your time. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Ed. And if you'd like, let's do a quick picture. Take a moment. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ed.

Okay, I think our city manager is going to discuss March 24th, 2026 community workshop from vision to action shaping downtown Marina together.

Great. Thank you, Mayor. Linda, if you can pull up the slide presentation. Great. Thank you. We have a wonderful opportunity coming up on March 24th at at our community library. It's going to start at really four o'clock and go till probably nine o'clock that night. And it's a community workshop. We're titling it vision to action shaping downtown Marina Together. Um, next slide. There you go. So, uh, this right here represents our, uh, our downtown, our core downtown, our transitional downtown. Our city for, uh, 20 plus years has been working on a downtown vitalization plan. The council adopted one in 2024. So we have a downtown um vitalization specific plan. We have done economic and market studies of our downtown businesses as businesses citywide to identify where are gaps, what businesses want to come here based on our demographics. And next slide. We've gone through extensive work on redesigning and and developing a streetscape for our Delmani Boulevard. And uh these are the final concepts from that. Next slide. This kind of shows the intent of that Delmani is to um slow down the traffic. Um put in some roundabouts where we can

uh it'll narrow down to one lane. It'll actually will improve the traffic flow. uh going to add separated uh biking and and walkable corridors, improve the areas that our business businesses can um move out to. And so this is kind of a streetscape on it. So council has already approved this design. Next slide. Uh we have a uh a roundabout plan at the intersection of Delmani and Reservation and we have a $1.7 million grant and originally the grant was to put in new crosswalks and signals there and the council said, "Well, what about a roundabout there?" And so we have a roundabout design and that's a possibility. The grant would absolutely apply to the roundabout. Next slide. Then C then the council and the public said, "Well, we're doing this. What about reservation road? What what are we going to do with reservation road?" So, we brought in Kimley Horn and they looked at the whole traffic flow. Did a traffic study on reservation road. They looked at converting the the traffic signals into roundabouts and narrowing down the roads where we could, improving the uh walkability and bikeability of reservation road and kind of came up with these ideas. Next slide. This is kind of a cross-section of what it could be. Uh, and so we have a lot of information that we have put out here. So we we have our downtown vitalization specific plan. We have our Delmmani uh quarter plan. We have um our economic development plan. We have our reservation quarter study. And so this workshop on March 21st is going to put all this information together. And really at four o'clock, we're going to have our various consultants are going to be available just to talk one-on-one. So, it's going to be kind of an openhouse. So, you can uh talk into

detail about all these specific plans. And then really from six o'clock on to about 9:00, we're going to have a facilitated workshop, but they're really going to be talking about, you know, you what is downtown? What is your vision for downtown? Where is downtown? Uh what do you want to see in downtown? Um and and so for the next three hours, uh we're going to engage the community and find out what you want. Um well, this really is our future of our community. And so we're we're opening up to everyone. We encourage everyone to attend. It's at the library. Um and we're really excited about that. We're going to start putting out a lot of information on our website, on social media, but this is just to put it out there um to everyone. If you have questions, please reach out to us. Thank you, Mayor.

All right. Thank you very much. Now we go to council and staff announcements. Any staff announcements? Ismael Hernandez is the director of our public works department. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. Um I just the only announcement I have is that we want to introduce to you our new uh assistant engineer, Nissandro um Salazar. Yes, sir. Um he uh he just started a couple weeks ago. Can you repeat his name, please? Landro and his last name Salazar. Okay.

Yeah. Um he he's a from the area, lives in Seaside, went to high school in the area. He did an internship with the city of Marina a couple years ago. Then he left and finished out his degree in Sacramento, came back and uh loves the area, loved working for Marina. So he actually uh he graduated school, waited a few months until um till we had an opening. He kept calling and checking in, but he really wanted to come back and work for us. And we're we're just we're thrilled to have him. We're actually really blessed. He's been a great help already. So, come on up. Thank you for having me. Uh, this is my first time ever being at a city council meeting and speaking, so it's actually pretty big uh milestone. I know there's going to be some more coming soon, but I want to thank the community. Uh, I want to thank the city for having me again um officially on uh back on and can't wait. A lot of important and exciting projects coming.

Thank you. Welcome. Welcome aboard. Great to have you. Thank you staff. Uh other presentations. Okay. Council Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. Just real briefly, I want to remind um the audience that a couple weeks ago, city staff released Marina Connect. It's a way for residents to report concerns that they're seeing in the community. Um uh whether it's potholes or street lights that are out, a lot of public works related things. Now I know why they're hiring more people. Um and to staff, I just want to thank you for um going down this journey with us. I mean, this for me is huge. Um I could not be happier that the city has implemented this. I know it's going to be a long journey. Um, but stick with it. I I think that all of our residents are going to benefit uh through the use of this program. So, thank you to all the staff that are kind of working out the kinks and um making this work. Thank you, Mayor. Great. Brian, let's go to Mayor Pertam Viser.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just wanted to announce uh that this afternoon was the final uh engine widening and roundabout project meeting Zoom. And I just wanted to announce they're still ahead three months of ahead three months of schedule and the artwork will be uh installed hopefully later in March and u there will be an a festive ribbon cutting at some time. But anyway, I just wanted to um uh to to brag for the city for the team. I wanted to brag about this on on their behalf. They should be so proud of themselves. Awesome project. Thank you.

Great. And um I'll piggyback a little bit. Volunteers came together Sunday, a couple days ago, and cleaned up the Imun Parkway, Abrams Drive area. When we drove by the four directions, we didn't see a lot of trash, but two hours later, we had collected, you know, like four large trash bags and one large trash bag of recyclables. And we noticed a punch list of items. when you get off your bicycle or your car and you go walking around that whole area, there's a lot going on as far as litter and construction debris and weeds coming into the new landscaped areas. And so, uh, I think there's still some some follow-up items to do and Ishmael is is aware of all those as well. So, it's it's not done yet, but it's a premium project. If you are familiar with roundabouts, these have a lot of space. They're well done. They look nice. They're flowing fantastically. I understand there was a CHP involved in an accident um soon after they were open. Don't have the details on that, but I watch it a lot and you're all welcome to watch it uh 24/7. There's there's webcams on mjparkway.com. One of the best is the corner of Mjen Parkway at Abrams where you have the most traffic. So, if you watch it during rush hours, it's fascinating uh to watch. Uh the other thing I want to mention is we have a Earth coming up April 18th, Saturday, April 18th, 2026. It's always outside the uh Marina Library at Lock Patent Park. And it's the 20th annual Earth Day event. It's just a fantastic way for people to volunteer and then get fed for free and have a festival and a party and dancing. And uh all the kids go home with environmentally friendly free toys of good quality thanks to in large part almost entirely to uh council member uh Biala who helps fund those and shops around for months. Uh so anyway, great event. April 18th, Earth Day. Okay. Um

let's go now go to public comment. Anything that's on our consent agenda, uh this is the time to comment on that. or anything else that's on your mind that's not on the rest of our agenda besides consent. Yeah, step on up. We'll talk to the people here first or have them talk and then we'll go online. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Michael Marovich, manage small apartment complex, Corner Lake and Palm. We got a problem. It's going to get worse. I'm out there all the time. That's my day job as such. Half the people that go to the intersection stop. It's a very heavily traveled intersection. The other half, about half do a St. Louis stop. They hesitate. The other 25% blow right through it from every single direction. We're right next to the children's center. Got kids, little kids walking, little kids in strollers. They can't move too fast. Somebody comes through. We've got older people. We go out walking over morning. Plenty of times we've seen them blow through. Uh we've got tourists coming through looking for a quick way to the uh to the beach. The last time we had a police officer spend significant time about two years ago. My request they pulled somebody over in minutes and it's not getting better. What I request is increased yet sporadic police presence. Come from time to time, every couple weeks, 15, 20 minutes. keep them guessing. Once you start uh establishing a reputation for handing out tickets and we'll get a handle on this. And I'm just talking about the motorists. The bicyclists don't even bother to stop. Yet they're yet they are subject to the same rules of the road that motorists are. I've never seen a bicyclist stop any direction of the four directions. I'm really concerned about these little

kids. they can't run too fast or let it run in the right direction. But somebody in a stroller, somebody like me, when I go out walking, I go with my friend who hears better than I do. I can't hear even with hearing aids. Can't always hear them coming. So all I'm requesting is increased yet sporadic. Shouldn't take too much effort. Shouldn't take too much resources. Might save somebody's life. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. What was your name, sir? Mike Marovich.

Mike. Thank you, Mike. Thank you. Hello council members and staff. Christina Medina Dirkson, resident of Marina. First of all, thank you for all that you do. Really appreciate your selflessness and your time here. Um I have two things to to um to talk about. First one is I am team Ishmael. I am loving our street sweeper. if I could if we could have the um if we could have the uh schedule somewhere a little more prevalent, but I'm in love with Street Sweeper. So, thank you so much for that. And uh welcome, Mr. Salazar. You've got a great team that you're joining here. Thank you for coming back. The other thing is I wanted just to let you know that Marina Youth Arts is having its um annual tea party this year. It's happening Saturday. I'd like to invite you all to it, invite the public to it. It's our largest fundraiser of the year. It's going to be from 1 to 4 out of the Moose Lodge and tickets are still available so please let me know. The Matilda is the theme um Kelly Pelton who is retiring from our theater program. She'll be giving her last performance with the team um of Matilda and not only that we have some other retirements. Nancy Amado is the founder of Marina Youth Arts. Um she is directly responsible for arts programming. If anybody doesn't know what Marina Youth Arts is, is we provide free arts education in Monter in Marina schools. And we are 100% volunteer, 100% fundraising. So all the money stays here, which is very important because as we speak, MUSD is talking about cutting mental health um positions. We have something called art u therapy through journal um journaling. And it's kind of sad to say this, but we are expanding it to the little kids at Marina, one of the schools down here, because the kids are really just needing an outlet uh to understand to to make the connection between creativity and their feelings.

So Nancy retired. She from our board, and we also had um two others, uh Nick Kite and uh Gail Young Bloodood, who's been on the board forever. So she told me it was fun. So I'm here 10 years later, I'm on the board. So anyways, I just want to say thank you to Nancy for uh finding founding something that has been so so important in our community and just know that it is a very marina thing for all of us. You know, it's it's uh we take care of ourselves. So the pride is to have a program where our kids are, you know, engaging in the creativity and it's all because of we have support also from the city. So thank you.

Thanks for all you do, Christina. So, I have to say I'm very proud of Marina Youth Arts. I couldn't have retired if our current president hadn't done such a great job recruiting new board members with amazing skills. So, the organization will live well beyond me, hopefully well beyond Christina, um, and well beyond all of you. That was the plan when we started it and it has grown exponentially and certainly Marina Youth Arts always accepts donations. You can do that at any time. So don't hesitate. I am here to say thank you to uh again Ishmail for the park almost complete. Gloria Jean Tate Park. It is amazing. I've been here for over 38 years. That park originally opened about a year and a half after we moved here. And um my daughters were two, four, and 10 when we moved here and they all enjoyed it. Well, I recently sent them pictures that I took of the park and what it's going to be in a very short period of time. and their response, the oldest who's now 49 says, "Oh, I wish they'd done something like that when we were kids." And my two younger daughters, they have children. Well, my middle daughter has a 21-year-old. He's not interested in playing at the park, but I'm sure he'll work out on that equipment there for adults and teenagers. Um, but the other three are seven, six, and four, and they are so excited to come back to Grammyy's house so that they can go to the park and not just ride on the pump track, but play on all the equipment and a huge

lawn to run on. And oh, they have dogs. Guess who'll be coming to the dog park. We are really, really excited for it to open. I know there's been a few delays, especially rain and u some requirements from MCWT that tore up our roads, but I know that'll be completed soon and they are still working at putting equipment together and it's just super exciting and I want to say thank you very much city council for approving the expenditure of funds and Ishmail and his team for putting together a wonderful park that'll work for generations to come. Thank you so much. Thank you, Nancy. And hello to Dan. Thank you.

I'm sure he'll be on the swings and stuff like that.

Hello. My name is Natalie Anetti. Thank you for um for hosting this tonight. Um thank you for also talking about the agenda items and how you may not be able to get to all of them. And one of the items that I'm here to listen and potentially comment about is your the last one which has to do with the equestrian park. And so because you may not get that to that tonight, I would just request that whether it's tonight or on Thursday, which I would try and return to if that's the case. Could you please um start that section by explaining why you are looking to an adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to issue a request for proposals to solicit qualified operators for a long-term concessionary agreement for equestrian programs at the Marina Equestrian Center. Um there's currently someone there and I'm I'm just confused as to why. And so if you can start the proceeding that way it can be more effective for public comment. Thank you.

Thank you very much Natalie.

Anyone else in the room before we go online? Okay. Anyone online who wishes to raise their hands to speak? Please do so. We'll give you a moment. All right. We'll close public comment. Uh Natalie, thanks for the suggestion. I think that would probably happen. We, you know, that's a good suggestion. Probably staff was going to introduce it that way. Uh and Mike and Randy, our police chief. Randy, do you have a way? How do we follow up with Mike?

Um if Mike wants to follow with Randy directly, police department, you certainly can. Is Mike still here? Um, so how do we Well, we we took his comments and Randy is aware of it and so he'll take it there. All right. Anything I I didn't uh address that needs addressing everybody else. Okay. Let's um move then to our consent agenda. Council, do you have anything you want to pull or ask brief question? Uh we'll go to council member McCarthy first.

Thank you, mayor. Super brief question on 10C1, which is the planning against the city. Um I was just a little surprised because this is a member of the public just mentioned the roads being torn up. This is a case where um a contractor perhaps damaged um some private property, but they're issuing a claim to the city. And in research, that's that's not uncommon, right? At first, I thought it was very strange that they would issue that claim to the city, but does that have you seen that happens quite frequently or versus issuing the claim to the contractor? Um, it it it certainly happens that way. Yeah. Okay. Um, but it it'll just go through a normal process.

Okay. And then just my followup is I asked I think over six months ago for um staff to provide the council some kind of synopsis of the claims over the last five years or so and and kind of what the statuses are and I I don't know if there's been any progress on that but I'm still very much interested in that. Um I don't know if the rest of the council is but um if not I can take it as a one-off and if so maybe we can have that disseminated to the council. Thank you mayor. Okay. Thank you. Uh Lane, that claim list, is that something that can be forthcoming? I'll work with Blind on that. Yes.

Okay. All right. Mayor Prom Viser. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a quick um uh let me see here. Sorry. 10 G2, the street signlight inventory. Thank you, Ismael, for having answered my questions in advance. And just to explain to everybody who might have read like I did that it only says it's in in certain districts, it's for the entire city. So, the entire city will be inventor priced, right? Okay. And um see, Mr. Mayor, somebody requested to pull 10 G3 for some

Yes. explanations. We'll be pulling S uh G3 and I was wondering 10 L1 we received a letter from uh the housing def the California housing defense fund defense fund whether staff uh can let us know if those two questions they asked if that can be taken care of.

Sure. So we we received a letter uh and uh we are evaluating it. What we suggest is for the council to move forward with approval of this second reading. Uh it will this ADU ordinance will be submitted to HCD. Uh HCD may have further comments and so we can when it comes back to address any comments we can address uh whether anything in the letter uh needs to be addressed at that time.

Thank you. And that's the same approach we did last time we heard it that we had last minute uh correspondence from the state and staff said let's approve what's before us and we'll make sure to address state concerns. So it's kind of the same thing.

So at the last meeting we we actually incorporated some revisions and we brought it back. We incorporated those revisions. Those revisions are before you in the packet. Uh these are re further revisions that are requested, but we request again I mean we recommend uh that council move forward and get any feedback from HCD and then at that time we would make any further edits as well as incorporate any comments necessary uh and bring that back to council. Okay. Thank you, Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. Um just some comments on 10F1. Uh I'm very grateful that this is in our consent agenda and I want to reaffirm uh my commitment to ensuring that our city facilities remain safe, welcoming spaces um free from ICE activities. Uh and I'm very proud of the city for taking this step and appreciate my colleagues support. And then 10 F20. Uh I'm pleased to see the restroom coming to see Haven Park. Uh, and as I have spoke over the last few years, I'd also like to take this opportunity to yet again advocate for the restroom at Windy Hill Park, um, which is still not installed. However, I'm told that it's on the way. So, thank you.

Is getting very close. So, if you want to see a $500,000 prefabricated restroom, go to see Haven Park after it's in. And when is it going to be installed? Uh, is what's the time frame on that? Uh we're hoping to start construction um by midsummer. So about 8 months or so after that, the restroom will be installed. And that's plumbing and concrete and the rest comes. Yeah. Yeah. So the the construction project, we'll build the park, have the pad and everything ready to go, and when the restroom comes in, it's just a crane sets it in place and we're ready to go.

Thank you. Okay. Um, council member Biala want to make a motion to approve the consent agenda. And I guess we're pulling um 10 G three. Yeah. A second. Okay. Just for discussion. Council, when would you like to hear uh G3 10 G3? Would you like at the end of the meeting, which is our practice, or as soon as we approve this consent agenda? Depends on how urgent it is. and turn to us for that. Do we have uh Shay representatives in the house? And how urgent is this?

I I think the questions that were raised really are not um items to discuss that are not really related to this agenda item. So it would be quick. Yes, I suggest doing it right after. So we'll deviate from our normal practice and hear 10 G3 as soon as we're done with the consent agenda. Okay. Uh if are there any more questions before we vote? Oh, did someone make a motion? You and who was the second? Brian Jenny. Okay. All in favor, please say I. I.

All oppose, please say no. Okay. Thank you. That's unanimous. We move to consider 10 G3, which I and Mayor Prom pulled. because a resident um was concerned that the HOA, the housing, the homeowners association will be responsible for some maintenance of a roundabout, but that might not be germanine to this issue. So, I'd like to turn over to our city attorney.

Sure. Uh and very briefly, this is an amendment to an existing agreement. the existing agreement uh imposes uh the obligation to maintain the private improvements on the developer uh and then the HOA. So that obligation is not being changed by this amendment. That is a pre-existing obligation. So uh but just very briefly, this amendment does three things. One, it uh recognizes MCWD's uh easement, which it has in the rightway area. Um, number two, it just clarifies that the level that the private improvements need to be maintained, which is a provision that we inserted in a another landscape agreement in November 2025 that council requested. And then the third amendment that does that the city requested was just clarifying that the city can terminate this agreement and the conditions under which that agreement can be terminated.

Okay. Thank you. Uh, is there a motion on this? I'd like to motion to approve. I second G3. A second. Okay. So, we're approving amendment number one and we're authorized city manager to execute the amendment with final approval by city attorney. All in favor, please say I. I. I.

All oppose, please say no. All right. That passes unanimously and we move to a public hearing uh to hold a special election regarding city Marina's community facility district in Marina Station. And I'm giving something to read here. Um, this public hearing is relating to that formation of a community facilities district number 2026 number one and it's now opening our public hearing at 7:34 p.m. The council's received a staff report on this matter which is hereby entered into the record of this public hearing and staff has a presentation to follow and then we'll open up to the public during the hearing. Thank you, Mayor Jim Fabian with Fieldman Rollup and Associates, city's municipal advisor. I also have with me Vanessa Legban from Stradling in the audience. We're going to share the presentation. Also, Susan Goodwin is on the Zoom and was hoping to be uh bumped up to a participant. If if you could do that, please. Uh so uh we have a presentation that we're going to walk through. Could I get that loaded too, please? To the beginning, please. Okay, great. Thank you. I can take control, right? You're probably saying, "Okay, you take control." Well, again, good evening. Uh, thank you for having us back. We were here on January 21st with the resolution of intention for the

Marina Station CFD. Uh, tonight, as the mayor described, we have our public hearing to, uh, continue the process of the formation of the CFD. Uh at our meeting, excuse me, at our meeting on January 21st, Kieran Tedman was here uh and provided in detail a great backup of the uh Marina Station project. uh going back to the very beginning back in 2008 uh the amendment that was done as well to the development agreement and listed the the different uh approvals along the way that the city has made related to the project. Uh the 2022 as I mentioned was a de development agreement amendment uh that recognized the new uh property owner third millennium uh really fine-tuned uh the development agreement for what was now uh the plan for the project and extended the term. uh did some other uh things related to the uh project including uh re reinforcing the fiscal neutrality that is a key component of the project from the city's perspective. Uh this is a an overview of the project for the Marina Station development plan as it currently exists. Uh when you think about Marina Station, it'll be 1360 homes. Those consist of single family homes roughly 887 of those 473 multifamily units. Uh there is a requirement for low and moderate income housing as well. Uh also a key component of the project is the jobs balance. Uh

we have um as you can see here retail uh space designated in the development, office space and industrial space and then 19 acres of parks and open space as part of the development. Uh just to recap where we've been so far on the CFD formation side of things. Back in December of 2024, we approved a deposit and reimbursement agreement whereby uh the developer uh agreed to pay all costs associated with the formation of the CFD. Uh the developer submitted a petition to the city. uh that also included a consent and waiver of certain election requirements associated with the CFD and really was the impetus to start the CFD formation process. Uh at that time the developer uh in their petition and their approach to the CFD they wanted to form one improvement area now and then to designate the rest of the site in Marina Station as a future annexation area. That future annexation area would require city council approval to annex the property into the CFD at later points in time. But the first improvement area number one is what is being designated right now at this time. This map uh you can see the dark graded area is that uh future improvement areas uh the annexation areas. down at the the bottom uh is the improvement area number one portion of the project and the CFD boundary map after our uh this this map has been recorded with the county. Uh so on January 21st uh we we came forward and had the resolution of

intention. The resolution of intention was step number one in the process of a CFD formation uh where we accepted the petition. We also approved at that point in time our intent to form the CFD to do improvement area number one now to have these future annexation areas in in the future and then had in front of you the rate and method of aortionment which provides the detail of how the special tax will be levied within the CFD and then it's set tonight as our public hearing for the CFD formation. Additionally, uh I wanted to go into detail on how the CFD special taxes work. Uh every property within the CFD will have a special tax lean recorded against it unless it's ex exempt. Uh you can see we have roughly 2761 to $4,458 per unit for each single family home within the development for their special tax share. Anybody who buys property within Marina Station will be informed about the lean on their property and the special tax obligation that they assume when they purchase the property. Uh we we also levy against the multifamily uh property in the in the district and then also uh have a tax if it's undeveloped property. Uh we have five tax zones within each within the CFD and those tax zones are requested by the developer to match up the special taxes based upon the different types of units that will be uh built within the the district. Uh we also have a services special tax uh that will fund uh the maintenance requirements for the infrastructure

within uh the CFD. uh that services special tax has a 4% escalator. Uh on average uh that services special tax will run in perpetuity uh to be able to pay for uh the maintenance of the uh infrastructure within the CFD. This is very similar to the services special tax that the the dunes has on and was approved by the city council for the dunes project. On the facility side, this is different than the dunes in that we'll have uh facilities uh that will be funded through CFD bond issues in the future. Uh that uh ser the facility special tax has a 2% escalator on it and it's a 40-year term. So at that point in time, the services special tax or the facility special tax would go away in year 40 and then you would have the services special tax go on in perpetuity. Uh I wanted to show that these are the types of facilities that will be funded by the bonds that will be sold at some point in time in the future. uh your typical backbone infrastructure, streets, roads, the all the advertisements with those the the gutters, the medians uh will be funded through the CFD. uh on the infrastructure side of things, on the services side of things, uh the maintenance of the parks, the parkways, the roads, the the sewers, the storm drain, the sidewalks. Uh and in addition, the public safety services for fire protection, fire suppression. A key component of the services special tax is to help fund the cost of a of a staffing of a fire station.

So again, uh the other thing that we did on January 21st and in addition to the resolution of intention to establish the CFD, we also adopted a resolution declaring the intent to issue bonds and that had a not to exceed amount of 7.6 million for the improvement area number one bond issuance. And as I mentioned before, in the future, as the project builds out, the developer will request that there'll be annexations into the CFD. Each one of those annexations will require a uh a proceeding and a not to exceed amount of bonds to be issued for that annex area into the CFD. But for improvement area number one, the maximum amount is $7.6 $6 million. So, that is a recap of where we've been. Vanessa is going to walk us through what we're going to do as part of the public hearing tonight. Right. So, you've already opened the public hearing. So, that was step one. Um and during the public hearing, we'll provide this presentation. Then you can get any public comments and discuss amongst yourselves. Um after you close the public hearing, we have here receive and file the community facilities district report. I don't think that's in the list of things that I have for you to do, but it is in your staff report and you've received it. Um then there are two resolutions that you can take at the same time. The first resolution establishes

the CFD. So it, you know, approves the rate and method, establishes the boundaries of the CFD, um, uh, describes the public facilities and services that will be paid for through the CFD special taxes and then calls the election for this evening. The second resolution that can kind of be approved at the same time as that is the resolution declaring the need um for bonded indebtedness in the CFD and that's to help finance the facilities and those bonds would be paid only by the facilities special tax. Um and as Jim noted the maximum bonded indebtedness for improvement area number one will be set at $7.6 million. Then you can as described in the resolution of formation or the resolution establishing the CFD call the special election. Um at that point you can conduct the election. The city clerk I believe has the ballot in her possession. She can open the ballot envelope and read out the ballot results. Um there are three propositions that the landowner is voting on. It's the proposition approving the levy of the special taxes, approving the issuance of bonds up to the $7.6 million maximum, and also as required by state law, setting an appropriations limit for the CFD improvement area number one. After the um election results are after the ballots have been open and the election results are known, then there's a final resolution um approving sorry certifying the election results. Um

sorry I didn't put the slides forward. Once the election has been certified, um we're assuming that they are voting yes in this presentation. Then, um you can hold the first reading of the ordinance that approves the levy of the special taxes within improvement area number one of the CFD. Um and then we have here approve an acquisition agreement. That's actually part of the resolution of formation. So that will have happened when you approve the resolution of formation.

Okay, Vanessa, I'm a little confused on what you just said. That last motion you just described, is that to wave the full reading and approve the title only? You can absolutely do it that way. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Go ahead.

Okay. So then after assuming successful public hearing, we have a couple more things that need to be done before the CFT is formed. Uh we come back with the second reading of the special tax ordinance on March 17th. Uh and then we would record the notice of special tax lean with the county. Again, that would put the the lean on all property within the Marina Station CFD boundaries. and then 30 days later uh a special tax ordinance would become effective and then the the CFD is formed at that point in time. So with that uh happy to answer any questions or if you want to work through the public hearing matters just let us know.

All right continuing the public hearing. Do we have any public comment and we'll start with folks in person then we'll go online. I'll just have a question for clarification. When the presentation was being done, it talked about phase one only. And then the last comment was that it was the entire Marina station that would be approved um with this. And I just want clarification that it's only phase one. Thank you. Thank you, Nancy. And were you referring to uh improvement area number one or you were you referring to phases? Okay. Improvement area number one. Got your question. We're going to get all of anyone else in person. Okay. Uh anyone online wish to comment? Please raise your hand at this time. All right, we'll go ahead and close public comment portion of this hearing.

Oh, okay. We'll reopen the public comment. Come on up to the microphone, Natalie. Right. Welcome back. Um, it's just a request for a definition of what CFD is. Great. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to uh speak in person or online? Okay, now we'll close public hearing. Um, first question is, uh, it was mentioned that area improvement area number one, improvement area number one would be financed with a $7.6 million bond indebtedness and uh, can you speak to the other uh, improvement areas?

Absolutely. So tonight your the the proposal is that you form the community facilities district. Sorry I'm stuttering the community facilities district and designate the initial area that's being included within the community facilities district as improvement area one. So the entire portion of the district that is being formed tonight and established tonight that will be improvement area number one. Then you are also proposing to designate a future annexation area and properties within the future annexation area can be later annexed into improvement area one or they can be annexed into the community facilities district as subsequent separate improvement areas and that is to be determined at a later time.

Okay. And can you help define uh what a community facilities district is?

Yes, absolutely. So when we say CFD, we mean community facilities district. And it's a special tax district formed under the government code um and the charter in the city of Marina um where you can levy a special tax that is designated to pay for facilities and services wi um within or of benefit to that specific area. And in this community facilities district, which infrastructure services will be paid for by the CFD?

So the facilities portion of it, the new construction is um primarily uh roads and road maintenance. Oh, and utilities. And then the services is like road resurfacing, road maintenance and fire services and a little bit of parks. And how about storm water? Storm. Anything to do with storm water is paid by the CFD. I don't remember if that is specifically and street lighting. Yes, those are in the CFD

because the other CFDs we have, they pay for like the dunes pays for Yes. street lighting and storm water retention maintenance and roads. Correct. Those are all in the CFD. Okay. U Mayor Bertam Viser, did you want to give us some input? Yeah, it might help. Page 11 in our packet shows all the elements that are in Can you can you read through some of those?

Would you like Oh, I I could have known it. Okay. And first of all on uh it says um fiscal year 25 26 facilities cost and it accidentally says annual costs for the facilities but that annual should be crossed out which took me an extra 10 minutes to understand this thing. Uh, so it says streets, storm drain, sanitary sewer, portable water, recycled water, city parks, Delmonte Boulevard, northbound Highway 1 intersection, southbound Highway 1 intersection, Tate Park lift station, and then a 15% contingency on all those projects for a total of 63,492,274. And the second box

and the second box for the services cost annual cost, street maintenance, sidewalk maintenance, curb and gutter, vertical curb, park maintenance, fire services costs and administration costs for a total of 2 million and 23 some,000. Okay, thank you very much. That puts it into perspective. Okay, anything more, Vanessa? All right, thank you very much. Okay, at this time, do we have any discussion or questions from council members? We'll go to council member McCarthy.

Thank you, mayor. Um, couple questions. One is last time, I think we talked about the fire station uh issue, and my question with staff is did you go back and make 100% sure that we're heading in the right direction with that and that there's no opportunity to ask for land or whatever the the language argument was that we had at the last meeting. Yeah, I met with the developer and we're fine. We're covered with it. if in the future phase, which we will never need, um that we decide that we want to build a third fire station, um they have land and we have the ability at that point. But, um all of our our fire service review shows that at buildout we will never need a third fire station.

Okay. Um and then just a little commentary maybe for the council is that, you know, this is right what people call me. um it was a law that was um enacted by I think that was the name of the people that created the legislation. Um, but these are the the the kinds of legislation that people down the road are going to ask questions like, "Hey, why do we pay this to fund our infrastructure when people like me get it for out of the general fund, right? Like um and so they are not only going to have to fund their own infrastructure, but they're going to have to pay regular taxes, too, right? That also fund my infrastructure." And so um you know, it's it's don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to derail this thing. I think we've been going down this path for a long time, but I think it's really important that we all understand what we are doing tonight. Um and and that is creating, you know, a tax burden that are going to live in these neighborhoods that quite frankly I know I don't have to pay. Um uh I do have a question for the consultant and that is to what extent has this paradigm kind of been stress tested in terms of a huge market downturn um where maybe lots don't sell or um I I think that's probably better asked of the developer in terms of their planning for the project. But re remember when when the this developer determines the price point for these homes, they're factoring in the effective tax rate that this home will have. That includes not only the advalorum special taxes, but the CFD special taxes. and they'll, you know, have sophisticated uh worksheets to determine what people will pay for a home, a brand new home. You know, remember that a brand new home with brand new infrastructure, what what they'll pay for that assuming the fact that they're going to have this

additional burden of higher total effective tax rate. and they have factored that in their marketing and their modeling for what these home prices will sell for. And you know, it again, it's a market working itself out. You know, when you know, you could buy an older home that has a 1.2% effective tax or you could buy a brand new home that has an effective tax. These are going to have about 1.5% effective tax. And so, you know, the marketplace will will determine that by the the fact a buyer will decide, well, I want that brand new home that has a higher effective tax rate.

Okay. And just to help me understand, is there some risk to the city if there is a huge market downturn and and these taxes aren't collected? Um, is there a risk to, for example, the general funds? Well, I think the the remember the part of this project uh the the reason we have the fiscal neutrality built into this project is that uh you know there's a partnership between the city and the developer to be able to find a a financing mechanism that will make sure that the city has adequate maintenance of the infrastructure and then also the the u contribution to the fire services that are required And so if there was a downturn, you know, if these homes didn't sell, you know, that that contribution uh would probably lag a bit potentially and you you would uh probably not have the need then either if there aren't the homes. So, you know, it's again, you know, we're all assuming that this over the next 5 to seven years, this project will build out and, you know, those homes will come in and and the revenues will be there.

Okay. Thanks. And the last thing I'll say is I just find it interesting that we're potentially approving this tonight, but not a couple months ago did we dissolve. I don't remember if it was CFD or landscape and lighting district where the residents said we don't want to pay anymore. Um, so just kind of a little bit of interesting dichotomy there, but thank you, mayor. Yeah, thank you. And on that point, um, I think this has the annual inflation escalator in it, right? It does.

So, we won't run into that issue where districts don't have an annual inflationary add-on and then they can't pay for themselves and they don't want to tax themselves more. So, we run into the problem you just mentioned. But, this is not that situation. it could still potentially happen, right, that a that a CFD might say that they don't there's unforeseen expenses or um and that they don't want to special assess or whatever the case may be. I mean, I I hear what you're saying. There's an inflation index and I think that's very helpful and yes, that's true, but I I don't think that necessarily means that we can't run into problems in the future.

Yeah, I'd like to get an answer to that. you know, are there risks involved with uh payment of the CF community facility district fees?

Well, what happens with the CFD, community facilities district, I should say that, community facilities district, not using the acronym, but you know, this property, every property within that community facilities district will have a lean on it. And that lean is there to protect uh bond holders when the CFD bonds are sold. So if a home own homeowner said, "Well, I'm not paying my taxes." Uh there's foreclosure provisions that would be uh put into uh future actions that would require the city to foreclose on that homeowner for non-payment of their property taxes. That would include the special taxes. So you have that mechanism to make sure uh that uh everybody pays their their taxes going forward and typically when you have a mortgage on a home that mortgage company who has a lean would protect their interest and and pay the delinquency and the special taxes. So there's there's mechanisms to make sure that special taxes are paid in the future.

Brian, did you have anything else? No. Thank you, ma'am. You're welcome. Thank you. Let's go to Council Member McAdams. Thank you, mayor, and um thank you for this work and for shephering us through this technical and and long process. I um I appreciate your expertise. Um this is maybe more of a question for staff. Have we talked about having some sort of public safety substation out there? Uh police substation, is that what you're referring to? Uh no, we haven't really talked about that.

Okay. Is that something that we want to talk about? I mean, we're basically doubling our city, right? And so when we, you know, are talking about not having a fire station, not h I mean, how how are we going to get public safety coverage out there? So, we're going to have adequate fire coverage. Um, and typically our police are patrolling in the cars around around the cities and they aren't so much in a in a police substation. Um, those are more helping. They're doing report writing and things like that. So, I'm not sure if there's need, but we we can certainly talk about it.

Perfect. I think that would be great. I mean, I I think it would be helpful to have um a conversation, you know, with fire chief and and chief Hopkins about what that plan looks like. I mean, I I know that the infrastructure is there, the roads there, there's planting trees, and there's a few um model homes, and I just would really encourage that we're prepared as a city for when we have a mini city out there in Marina Station. So, thank you. Okay. And I'll note that we have about 24,000 people now in Marina, and there'll be about 4,000 people living in Marina Station in those 1360 homes. All right. Let's go to council member Viala.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, um, in response to Council Member Mccarthy's, um, concerns about, um, uh, the selling of the, uh, these properties, etc., remember, this is not a Ford or um, property and so they're not as restricted and and have other things um, attached to it as the Fort lands would. So people develop these, you know, with the conviction and their planning that to sell it. So short of any big catastrophe, I think that it's it's like any of the the dunes or sea haven with some advantages because it's not a four-door property. But having said that, I just want to say to the public that this is maybe Marina's last big development. We had first the dunes um that had 1237 units and then Sea Haven 1050 and now we have this 1360. So it represents of the three largest large developments in Marina um it it is the largest and the dunes um and correct me if I'm wrong Lane that the affordable um units in the dunes is um is for rentals and in Sea Haven the affordable units are for sales of homes and in this one Marina Station we have a combination of both on affordable units they will be both for sale homes and rentals. So I think that's uh you know a great contribution to our our the last development of our city. So I just wanted to help people to see the magnitude of this Marina station to uh the development of Marina as a whole. So thank you for coming and being here today. Thank you.

Thank you Kathy. And I'll note that we do have Cypress Nolles coming up and that might be around 700 units or take. Let's go to Mayor Pretend Fisher.

Thank you Mr. Yeah. Yes. And not so much a question, but yes, people who buy a home, they will need to do their homework. And um it's different for each of the three big developments that we have here. This one is the only one of the three that don't doesn't need to pay the prevailing wage because it's not former or h it will have CFDs that are higher than especially the first phase of the dunes. Um second and third phase are a little bit higher than first. It's somewhere in between. and C Haven doesn't have uh CFD. So, it's but I don't think that people when they buy a home, I don't think that will be the determining factor. But, of course, you do need to pay your property tax and CFD and it just is on your property tax bill. So, not paying is not really really an option. The first thing you get hit with is a a fine. You pay an extra percentage if you don't pay on time. And so people better are prepared to well let me say this they need to budget it budget for this. It's yeah but it's exciting that we have three big developments in our city. So and it's also very good that maintenance of the the two developments that do have CFDs that you can you can be sure that those areas will be maintained because the money will be there. So so it's give and take. Thank you.

Yeah. Since Propy 13 passed in 1979, cities all over California scramble to make ends meet with rising costs of materials and labor and the property tax no longer doing the share of pulling the weight that it used to. So we chase after sales tax and hotel tax. And then we have these special arrangements where Sea Haven is like the rest of Marina that Brian just described that doesn't have a CFD. And then we have tweeners that are neighborhoods in central Marina that pay for landscaping and street lighting and they're in landscape and street lighting districts. And then we have the furthest uh most expensive where we have the dunes and now Marina Station that have uh community facility district fees and homeowner association fees and property tax like the rest of us. So they will be paying the most to support our city, but it's in the vein of figuring out any tool we have to make ends meet. And um there's an inequity that Brian described. And so people have their choice of where they want to live. Do they want to buy an older home or a new home in Central Marina or do they want to buy a new home in any of these other projects that might have a street and landscape district or a community facilities district like East Garrison is similar. Uh so yeah, it's a matter of choice and sometimes people get into what they're not fully aware of. Um but I think they're fully aware of the monthly payments that they're going to have. If not, then they really haven't done their homework. Uh but it's a very it's a very interesting topic for discussion and it's triggered tonight you know at the front of our minds. So thanks for discussing that. Okay. Um, so now I'll move beyond the council discussion to ask if the city clerk's office has received written protest to

any of the matters addressed in the public hearing from any registered voters or land owners of more than 50% of the acreage located within community facilities district 2026-1. We have received no protest.

All right. And then if there's no further comments from the public or members of the council, I'll declare this public hearing closed at 88 p.m. And I'll entertain a motion to approve a resolution of the city council of the city marina establishing city marina community facilities district number 26 2026-1 sorry also known as marina station and an improvement area therein to designate a future annexation area to authorize the levy of a special tax to pay the cost of acquiring or constructing certain public facilities providing certain services and paying for certain incidental expenses and to pay debt service on bonded indebtedness. and calling an election within approvement improvement area number one therein. So would someone like to uh uh move to approve,

right? Okay. And before we get a second, let's table that just for a moment because there is a second resolution that we can do at the same time and save time. And that second resolution uh would be that the city council of Marina acting as the legislative body of city marina community facilities district number 2026-1 determining the necessity to incur bonded indebtedness within said community facilities district and improvement area number one for the amount of 7.6 million and calling an election therein. Would someone like to make a motion on those two resolutions? I so move if I don't have to repeat the motion. Yes. So move. Council member Viala has moved. Is there a second? I'll second.

Okay. Um, now we will go to a vote. Uh, all in favor, please say I. I. All opposed or abstain, please say no or saying. Thank you. That motion passes unanimously. And the resolutions that we have just adopted call for an election within CFD number 2026-1 to authorize the levy of a special tax, the incurring of bonded indebtedness, and the approval of an appropriations limit for CFD number 2026-1, which is to be held at this time by the deputy city clerk.

Such a dramatic moment. We have one ballot, three yeses. So, city uh deputy city clerk, would you agree that all ballots have been cast in connection with the elections for CFD number 2026 and the elections are now closed?

Yes. and that each of the ballot propositions has have been approved by more than twothirds of the vote cast in the elections for CFD number 2026-1. Yes. Okay. So now I like to entertain a motion to approve a resolution of city council of the city of Marina acting in its capacity as a legislative body of the city of Marina Community Facilities District number 2026-1, also known as Marina Station, certifying the results of the March 3rd, 2026 special tax and bond election. Is there such a motion? I'll move that we do that. Is there a second? Second.

Okay. So to then to adopt that resolution. All who want to please say I. I. I.

I. Any nos or abstensions. So then that motion. Thank you. Passes. Um 5 to zero. And that resolution certifying the rele the results of election for CFD number 2026-1 has passed. At this time, the clerk will read the title of the ordinance that we're about to consider and the council will wave further reading. Uh, ordinance of the city council of the city of Marina acting in its capacity as a legislative body of the city of Marina Community Facilities District number 2026 2026-1 Marina Station authorizing the levy of special taxes within improvement area number one.

So, we'll have a roll call, but first we'll need a motion. Move for approval and a second. A second. At this time, a motion is made and seconded. Is there any comment before we go to a roll call vote? Roll call vote, please. Council member McCarthy, yes. Council member McAdams, hi. Council member Biala, yes. Mayor Pertim Fischer, yes. Mayor Delgado,

yes. That motion passed unanimously. Thank you to everyone for hanging in there and thank you for everyone that was on the team to get us here. U Thank you to staff that's been working with the developer for since 2004ish. Uh it's a long time before something like this comes together and as council member McAdams said it's like a new city with all the pieces that it has. It will function almost like a new city within a city. So thank you everyone for that. Okay. So now we move on to uh Lock Padden and we have an esteemed group of CSUMB graduate students who have aly given this presentation on a few other occasions. Tonight's going to be a little bit truncated for the sense of time that we don't have that they took at the other community meetings and we really appreciated those uh three community presentations that you have given and this report uh is on the lockpad wetland ecological history and the predictions where it's going and management alternatives for the future.

All right. Hello everybody. My name is Isaac and I will be kicking off the presentation on lock padden. So the project in lock paddin was done in the um CSUMB class for um ENVS 660 last fall 2025. And the purpose of this presentation will just be to inform decision making. And the full report that we produced is actually within the packet. Next slide, please. Yes, please. Thank you.

Awesome. Thank you. All right. So starting off, Lock Padden. A lot of you if you visit Lo Padden today, you'll see it's mostly dominated by bull rush and there aren't many open water views. This is different from how it used to be where it was mostly dominated by open water. So we have several questions to address. specifically how did Lo pattern get this way? How do we want it to look? And what are some of the means we can take to get it to where we want it to be? So for some of the um vegetation history of Lo Paden, it used to actually be a seasonal saltwater pond sound by salt marsh. Today that is not the case. It's fresh water. And to back up this claim, we have maps from 1770 and 1854 clearly labeling the lakes in the area analog pattern as salt water surrounded by salt marsh. And so to answer this question regarding how the transition occurred from a saltwater environment to a freshwater environment, we took aerial imagery from 1854 all the way to 2024. And we examined the um land cover. And diving right into our graph, you can see in pink we have salt water vegetation while in green we have freshwater vegetation. And you'll notice that in the 1970s you can start to see a shift from salt water to freshwater. This actually coincides

with the urbanization of marina where we got storm drains installed in the area and runoff led to the creation of a freshwater environment. Going all the way to the bottom of this slide, you can see in around the 1970s, there's this influx of green. Dark green being willows and light green being the bull rush, which you currently see dominating the what was previously open water landscape. And you can see open water is currently at its lowest in 2024. And here is just an image of comparing 2011 to what you'd see today where we have bull rush dominating all of the open water area. So here's lock pattern as it stands today. And one of the major points I really want to drive is that the vegetation that we currently see is actually almost all non-native to lock pattern itself. And this vegetation was somewhat recently introduced due to the transition from freshwater or saltwater to freshwater. I did want to note that the vegetation is however almost all native to California itself. So it came from elsewhere in the state and established itself in this newly freshwater environment.

All right. Thank you, Isaac. My name is Joe and I worked on the hydraology portion of this. And um similar to the vegetation classification that Isaac just described, um we used this historical maps and satellite imagery to um assess open water area over time. And really there was a fundamental shift of uh lock patent in the 1970s due to this um storm water infrastructure and the urbanization of marina. And we can see seasonal shifts in the saltwater environment, including 1937 where the pond got really small. And this is actually a natural um thing that occurred. This is it drying up over time. As it shifted and there's more freshwater input into the system, we can see as it gets bigger and actually stabilizes to around above 5 acres. And in the last 20 years or so, this has been greatly reduced by bull rush. As you can see on the figure on the right, the steep decline, we also assess water quality in fall of 2025 and this is aligned with the citizens report um put out in 2024 that this is a freshwater system that's enoxic, meaning it's low in oxygen. And this is we believe due to the bull rush reducing the wind circulation and the mixing of the water. And this is not an ideal habitat for certain species and specifically birds. And just as a counterpart to this, Laguna Grande is a similar system and it has way less bull rush due to a a greater depth and that actually has a higher doo. So there this bull rush is having a big impact on the water quality.

Right. Hello, I'm Lydia Demo and I was part of the team that evaluated the wildlife communities at Lockpad and Wetland. And so we started our evaluation by looking at historical and current records of special status species in the area. And while we have uh a few special status species that were known to occur at the pond, the one that we're going to be focusing on isolored blackbird because uh it continues to be present at the pond. And so we wanted to understand how those habitat changes over time from salt to freshwater with a larger bull rush encroachment has affected the bird communities there. And so we evaluated different bird groups at lock pattern. And uh you can see that in the lower portion uh these are detection rates. And when we look at shore birds uh like herand and egrets that need open shoreline and shallow water conditions uh their detection rates have declined over time. And then other species that love the dense bull rush like the marsh song birds and the soars and rails their detection rates have been consistently strong over the years. And focusing on blackbird they've been consistently detected at the pond and so we wanted to investigate that further. And so looking at that same detection rate data over time, uh you can see that mo the majority of the detection rates in the top figure occur during the non-breeding season. So that's in the fall and winter time. And uh that's where the majority of sightings have occurred since around 2010. And then looking at the lower figure, this is uh historical data taken from CNDB. And you

can see that in the mid 90s and up until 2001, tririccolor was documented nesting at Lockpad and Wetland. And these birds are especially impressive with their nesting behavior because they're cons, uh they're considered the largest colonial nesting bird in North America. Um and then after 2001 uh there were surveys conducted in 2014 and 2015 but no documented occurrence of breeding. And when we look at the habitat changes over time you can see in 1993 and 2001 there was more open water available and sparser islands of bull rush which is considered ideal nesting habitat for these birds. And then comparing that to current conditions, there's much more bull rush encroachment and less open water available. So just to emphasize the plight of blackbird, this figure shows a very dramatic decline in their population throughout their range in the central valley. And so these birds are experiencing a pretty steep decline in their numbers. And when we focus in our region, there's no strong downward trend. So, um, that can be interpreted as the pop there's no real big change in the population. And so, um, an idea is that they're probably not nesting at lock pattern because it's not necessarily related to their overall population decline. It's just that habitat conditions have changed and most likely uh are no longer suitable for nesting. All righty. Now, getting into some potential future scenarios for the wetland. Um, to do this, we actually created these cross-section figures that

I know it kind of looks like an animation, maybe even a little cartoonish, but this was an indepth survey that we did of a cross-section of the whole wetland system with the left side being on the upper end by the hotel and the um parking lot. So in the in the top figure you can see out the wetland as it is now covered with some vegetation potentially ariccolored blackbird and some open water area. Now if we do nothing in the next 10 years we predict that the whole system will be covered in bull rush and if there's another option of clearing all the bull rush and that would you know increase the open water area but it would remove some habitat for different species. And we believe there's a path forward that involves selective clearing and management for the desired outcomes of the wetland.

Go back one just to where you just were. I just want to point out that there's a couple of ducks that are half underwater. Those are dabbling ducks. That's pretty cool. Thank you.

Thank you, Bruce. All right. Um so one thing to call out um is that these dense stands of bull rush actually um provide a pathway for nest predation. And to drive this point home uh Fred and I and a couple other students were actually walking on these dense brushes during our survey. So they can support the weight of full grown adults. um they can absolutely support the weight of raccoons and rats that potentially would be uh you know going and getting these blackberg eggs. All right, so diving into the vegetation composition that would be included in these future scenarios. I just discussed the do nothing alternative, the remove everything alternative. Um now to talk about the one in the upper right. This is the viewshed or sighteline alternative that prioritizes uh viewshed. So areas that you know you can see open water and that would be ideal for for birding. This would uh leave a component of the bull rush kind of over into the eastern side. Now in the bottom left we have a wildlife focus and this is um focused on uh prioritizing the habitat diversity of emergent wetland and uh upland habitat. And this would be you know prioritizing habitat diversity for multiple different species. And the combined approach takes something from the viewshed, takes something from the wildlife and you know really optimizes both the human use and also the habitat diversity of the wetland. So how exactly would we turn these potential scenarios to life? Well,

there's a couple ways we can do that. So, initially you're going to need a little bit more of a heavyduty solution if we want this to last for a while. And what we propose is possibly using a long reach excavator to maintain the vegetation in the wetland. And you may be wondering if this is widely used, and it is. In fact, it's happened pretty recently in Monterey County over at Lagona where we saw the removal of willows and bull rush which are the exact vegetation that we would like to target in lockpad. Following up with our initial removal, there are several different ways to manage vegetation that we could choose from. There's manual removal, which is using hands, aquatic herbicide using sprayers, and there's also mowing and weed cutting. And that third option has actually happened in the past at Lo Paden before. And so, a little bit more in the follow-up removal, we would be looking at removing about an acre of bull rush per year. And we believe that would equal out to around $2,000 per year or about 10k every five years. And next we wanted to quantitatively weigh the different future scenarios that we came up with. And to do this we produced a table where on top we have the five different future scenarios we came up with. Then on the side we have different criteria that we

ranked these scenarios on and these criteria include open water views. So more human centric approach. You have birding opportunities and habitat diversity which is a more wildlife based approach. And then you have permitting and cost. And ultimately we chose a more balanced solution that includes habitat and viewshed oriented management where we really don't want to see any ones popping up in our final decision. We want to see balance across all the different criteria and equal consideration. So therefore we consider habitat and viewsheds to be the best option for choosing where to clear vegetation in lockpad. So to summarize, we recommend doing something and managing this wetland. We believe it should be managed to benefit both the wildlife and the people through producing good views. And an additional benefit of this management would be increasing public safety within lockpad and wetland. The first step would be to define the specific areas that need to be cut and maintained. And we also would propose replacing areas that are cut with something native such as herbaceous wetland plants to prevent. It's unlikely that invasives would enter this region that we cut. We provide details in the report, but we do believe

that native plants that are native to the saltwater state of lock pattern should be added in replacement of bull rushes and other non-native plants that should be removed. But that is our presentation. Thank you so much for listening. Thank you. Nidia, Joe, and Isaac, thanks for coming tonight. You did a great job again. Um, let's go to the public for comments, questions in person and then we'll go to those online. Um, thank you. My name is Jeff Markham. I'm a Marina resident. I'm also the ward one director for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District. And I want to start out first of all thanking the EMV 660 uh students again for an remarkable report that they did. I think they're humble and the fact that they were given only eight weeks from knowing nothing about lockpad and park maybe driven by it uh to probably becoming uh the the experts about the pond and the wetland system that's there. So it's quite remarkable how how much work they've done. If you haven't had a chance to go through the whole report, it's really quite remarkable. um what they've detailed for us is really a system that needs our help. Um it's something the if you see in their presentation to me the do nothing option is really not an option. Uh we have to do something. So I think we as a community have to get together and look at the options that they presented and work together to figure out what we can do to uh to help us uh take care of things like thericcolor black birds. Um I'm going to motion that we never let them leave. they graduate, they have to stay and and uh and for the

rest of you, you're all going to be getting hip waiters and sickles to go cut some of that bull rush out of there. But thank you so much for all the hard work that you did and uh we owe you a great uh debt of gratitude. Thank you. Thank you, Jeff, for your leadership in this project.

Hello again. I didn't think I was going to talk this much tonight, but I have to say, well, I'll just echo what Jeff said. What an amazing team and what an amazing job they did. I would like to speak to the fact that I have seen personally when you neglect the environment. It has a huge impact on wildlife and on people who enjoy the wildlife and want to see more of it. And I'm going to speak to the cypress trees that were turned over to the residents of Cypress Cove. We're the only ones who've done anything with it, my neighbor and I. And we had our trees pruned way up. There were so full of dead wood. We no longer had birds. And we used to have probably 10 or 15 varieties, including thericcolor blackbird. They were all gone. Since we did this before winter, the big birds have come back. We now have hawks sitting on our fence and watching our dogs. I hope they don't run off with them. Um, but we are also getting others a variety of different sized birds because they need that space to be able to sit in a tree and they didn't have the space anymore. So, it's been very exciting and now to know that there's a way that we can return that beautiful lock pattern back into beautiful lock pattern where it does attract birds. I can remember seeing blue hair in there frequently and I haven't seen one there in a very long time. So, it's really important that we look at this and the habitat that we're creating and the beauty that exists in that habitat and that we're saving birds and other animals just by protecting the

habitat, bringing it back to its natural state. Thank you. Thank you, Nancy. All right, we'll go to people online. If you want to speak, please raise your hand. And first we'll go to Grace Silva Stantella. Welcome Grace. Guys, I don't have co-host, I think. Hello, mayor and city council. First, I want to express this is the third time that I've heard this report and I want to express my immense gratitude to the students, but I also want to express my immense gratitude to Fred Watson. He had approached myself, Jeff Markham, and Mike Mohler asking if uh given our three names were on uh two reports that had been done, two citizens reports that have been done on Lo Padden Park, if we would uh support his students taking on the lagoon of Lock Padden Wetlands Park as a project. I'm sorry I'm going blank on the uh title of these annual reports and work that are done and we were thrilled and I cannot express strong enough how appreciative I am at the depth of the work that they did from going back to my husband just actually Ray just yelled out

professional how professional the work was that they did going back to the uh 1800s to now 2026. I beg of you and I also beg of the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District Board, so I'm glad our representative Jeff Markham is there tonight that this report does not land on a shelf and nothing gets done with it. This is a tremendous opportunity we have to bring the two agencies together, the city of Marina and Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District, and really uh approach the lagoon in a scientific uh you know, I'm not going to have the correct terminology here, but please don't let this study just sit on a shelf. self and that we achieve nothing from it. And again, I just want to express my deepest gratitude to Fred Watson and to the students. Thank you.

Thank you, Grace. And thanks for all your involvement in this. Let's go to Mike Mohler. Welcome.

Yeah. behind a mayor and city council and it's a another great presentation. You know, again, I I've seen it now uh three times and it's it's wonderful. I enjoy it every time and I I really enjoyed the history that went far back than than we did on our reports. Um you know, there's been many residents that advocated for the restoration of this wet line for years, well before I even moved here. And we know that Lo Penn is one of the most important natural areas within the city. that provides habitat for many species species that historically relied on this uh ecosystem. Um so as the council considers direction staff I urge you to uh adopt one of the you know the hybrid management approaches you know whether habitat first you know is is fine that's my concern mainly I think if you put the habitat first um you know the the personal enjoyment of the wersheds are are are there good enough um I I think the habitat is is definitely more important but the hybrid approach you know, they're both so close. I think it's going to be a a win. Um, so I I do um I I do hope that uh you're able to uh strengthen the coordination with Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District. um you know they're key partners in this this park and stewardship decisions should reflect the broader wetland park system rather than just some fragmented management that we've seen over the years. Um, so I I also urge you to avoid any additional development or interf in infrastructure projects within or near that wetland area that um unless they directly support habitat health or ecosystem recovery. Um because you know the small

incre incremental impacts can add up over time and slowly undermine any restoration efforts. Um, so there's plenty of other parcels in this city uh suited for any of those type of projects that do not directly affect the restoration of the wet line. Um, it's a great report. Um, I mean, what a what a freebie the city got for uh for a wonderful report. And I and I do like Grace said, I do hope that you take this to heart and uh and and and take the free advice and follow and work with NPRPD and really once and for all work on the wetland. Um that's all people really want. You know, a lot of people do with what 250 signatures. That was pretty effortless to get on that petition. So, you know what the public wants. Um, you're elected to follow what the public wants. Please do it. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mike. Is there anyone else online that'd like to raise their hand to speak that hasn't give you a moment. Let's go to Margaret Davis. Welcome, Margaret. Hi. I'm just wondering would the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District share the costs of park maintenance?

We'll answer any questions you might have as soon as public comment's over. Margaret, do you have any more input?

Um, yes, many thanks to the students and it sounds like a hybrid approach would be ideal. All right, thank you very much, Margaret. Anyone else before we close public comment? All right, we'll close public comment and thank you for those who did comment mostly to say how much they appreciate and want to see progress um in this regard. Uh as far as Margaret Davis's question, will NPRPD share the cost of park maintenance? um that is to be dis decided in future um uh documents, leases, arrangements and so we can't give you that answer tonight. Uh but right now the public the city is doing u the best it can to kind of maintain the park and caretaker status without spending you know too much money on any new projects or u involved maintenance. But uh that's a key question that the two parties are are under discussion to resolve. Okay. Um did I me miss any questions that someone else may have noted? Okay. Let's go then to Council Member McAdams and then McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. Um and and thank you so much for for taking on this project. Um and for the work that you have put into it. like you can really really tell the care and the um thorowness and just how how well it was done. Appreciate that. Um I also appreciate the community's participation um and tenacity in advocating for Loch Paden Park. Um I have uh apologized in the past and I'm going to apologize again this evening for the neglect and the current conditions that the park remains in. We have received this report, a report from a resident group, a report from a a resident petition. Um, and the city is fully aware of the illegal camping, the drug activity, the um public safety concerns and the litter that occurs in the park. Um, yet meaningful action has not been taken. And so, you know, I feel like a a record on repeat. Um, log paddent is a very important natural um and community space that we have and it is our responsibility to address the issues and ensure that the park is safe and clean and accessible for everyone. So, I would like to ask staff what barriers currently exist that are preventing the city from beginning just any basic maintenance and cleaning at the park.

You talking about the park overall or the wetlands area?

The wetlands areas where all the trees have been downed for years since the large storm. So, the wetlands area, we really need to bring a consultant on board and do all the biological um studies before you can actually go in and do any work. We have proposals um that'll range anywhere from $400 to $700,000. And and so, yeah, finances do get to be a big part of it. Uh but even after you spend that much on on a report, just to be able to move forward with it. Uh, another item on the agenda is this ported zoo state park and it's very similar, $800,000 just to do the biological work, just to do a little segment of a path and part of it it's in the coastal zone and so there's just going to be a lot more. But then on top of that, you have the significant cost to get it um restored and up to where where it needs to be. and and that's always been the problem in the past is the city nor the district um have had the funds or have prioritized the funds to do that. So that would be the next step is is to as we're we've been talking with last year with the district and are going to continue to work forward try to figure out a path forward. But cost is certainly going to be a huge part of that.

Okay. So then should we just decide that we're not going to do do anything or I mean because what I'm hearing is just delay and barriers and we don't have the money like thank you for this report but we can't do anything with it. So when when is the point of no return because I'm feeling like we're getting there.

Uh these are the discussions that we're having with the with the park district right now. What we are recommending is that the council accept this report and their and their managed approach recommendation in the report as a starting point uh as a preferred alternative. And then if we bring a consultant in, we've already accomplished a huge amount by saying okay the council and if the district um adopts is this is a starting point for foundation of we want this balanced approach and that will that will definitely help speed up the process. So I think um what Dr. Watts and this student group have done it really is a huge first step that has not been accomplished in the past. Now, we just need to find the funding, work together with the district on a path forward, and and I think we're both really committed to trying to make that happen.

Great. Thank you. And who on staff is leading this? Uh Allison Hunter was leading that and and so we have a new planning manager on board, Tim, over here. Um we'll introduce him at our next council meeting. And so it'll probably be on Tim's plate.

Okay, great. I mean, I always say that, you know, policy, governance, projects, it it's like moves as slow as a barge, right? I mean, and I just I really feel committed to like we all say, "Oh, we have to do this. We have to do this. It's so important." Well, is it because we're not doing anything? And so if it were really really important, we would have progress. We would have that champion. Not that's not a resident that's not, you know, the students bringing us this beautiful work. We would have a city champion. And I just don't really feel that or I don't really see that because of the lack of action that we have that person within the city. And so I would just encourage, you know, I know that we've had some um some staff changes, etc., but it's loud and clear to me and it has been for years that this is really really important and we're going to get to a point where all the reads are grown in so much that we've lost the wetlands. We've lost that and we can't undo that. And so, you know, I just I I don't know what more cry for help the the park needs beyond that. And it's in the data. I mean it's clearly shown and those were lovely um you know uh in the the slide and also in the packet where it shows over time you know from the 70s from the 80s from the '9s I mean you're seeing the waters just diminishing and and us being complacent we're we're we're accepting that and it's unacceptable to me. So, I really just I don't know what else to do at this point. I know that we are all committed

to the park and we you know, we hear that and we talk about that, but it the the proof is in the pudding and and that's all I have to say. So, I'm here. I will fund I will support the fund. Whatever is needed like please just we have to figure this out. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Jenny. Council member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, a couple things. So, one of the things not covered in this more concise version of their presentation is that or I didn't hear it is one of the causes, right, that they mentioned is the diversion of storm water into this pond over a long period of time. Um, and it's unfortunate that folks that originally created these storm water diversions didn't think about the impacts that were going to create this desalinated environment, right? um that would allow Bull Rush to thrive and and create this maintenance burden for the city. And so I am worried that going into the future, minus some solution to that desalinization problem, um that we we've created this perpetual maintenance thing that we're going to have to just be really honest and clear about. And that's probably for another time. Um, I I I'm really not excited about putting kind of like band-aids on solutions and I do want to think really long term and again I think that's something that needs to to come back to us. Um, I shared with city staff um a couple days ago this document that I found from 2014 where the city clearly engages um a contractor to do pond maintenance. Um, and guess how much it cost or what the proposal was. It's unclear if this was a proposal that was actually acted on in 2015. It cleared up the pond. 39,000 bucks done. Bam. Understand it's not going to be that easy now because now it's become this divisive issue and you know we've brought in environmental concerns and um and everything else, but it's it's unfortunate that even in this document it mentions the need uh to do continual maintenance and and we failed the park by not doing that. Um, and I just kind of want to echo my colleague, um, and I've said this behind closed doors, and I think it's really important to say publicly that over the past five years, this park has become one of the most divisive issues before this council. This division has cost us time, momentum, and trust. Our community is

not asking for perfection. They are asking for progress, and they are asking for progress now. They are asking for us to lead. I'm asking my colleagues on this dis to rise above any past disagreements about what uh future projects may look like at this park and get these wetlands fixed. Um we need to focus on what we share and I think we all share that desire to to create a more healthy habitat in the wetlands area and I think that's an area where we can agree on and focus on and commit to finding a path forward with the parks district. We may not get everything that we want, but we can agree to get something done. Um, and and doing something together is so much far better than standing still and doing nothing. So that's just my plea to the colleagues on this DAS that enough is enough. Let's get something done at this park. Thank you, Mayor.

Great, Brian. Thank you. Um, Joe, Lydia, Isaac, again, thank you. Um, Isaac, you mentioned that the majority of plants that are mapped, shown their distribution here, are native to California. Would you say that they're also native to Monterey County and native to Marina?

Yes. So, the vast majority of the plants are native to Monterey County and native to Marina. Okay. Thanks. Um, can we go to the slide that had the five potential scenarios? This is kind of the punchline of the effort that the ENVS 660 grad class came up with. It shows um these five uh do nothing remove all bro. Yeah, there you go. So, in the lower right of those five maps, I just wanted to give everyone a picture of kind of what the punchline is talking about. There are about six to eight view sheds that lane. What color is that? I think no. No. Is that green? Gold. It looks like green, but kind of green. Gold maybe. No. Uh anyway, those six golden uh V-shaped uh viewsheds are on the west side uh on the reservation roadside of Lock Patter and Park. And so this punchline, this um conclusion is that that is the preferred approach or something similar to it. And so uh this is a starting point that we're talked about considering approving tonight as a starting point. And so although it's a starting point, we might think, well, we want to make some view sheds to be sure that on the library side of the lake, which would be the other side, the east side, there might also be some V-shaped view sheds. But it's a great uh starting point, and that's what we're talking about uh tonight. Um the $2,000 per acre of bull rush maintenance um uh it might be low, it might be high. It's hard for me to think that we could do anything for $2,000 an

acre. Um especially if it involves heavy equipment or or or contracted crews, things like that. But at least it shows us that it's might be very doable to the extent that it's accurate. I really appreciate that. Um, we know that whether we go down the path of a restoration permit versus a development permit that we have a lot of permitting that's going to need to be done. And we know that this group that presented to us, these graduate students are hoping we can figure out a way to call what we're going to do restoration. Because if we call it restoration, it's a lot easier. It's a lot cheaper. It's going to happen sooner as far as the permitting phase. And uh this SQA uh process, California Environmental Quality Act process will require us to come up with an environmentally superior alternative, which may not be what they're asking for. Maybe that's going to be uh the the one on the lower left, vegetation change to benefit wildlife. That might be our environmentally preferred alternative. We're going to have to have a no project alternative. So some people say, well, we can't do nothing, but we're going to have to analyze doing nothing. Doing nothing will be an alternative because it's required in the SQA process. Um, there will also be a a required a range of alternatives and we have some here, right? We've got five on this slide, but it's optional that we choose a preferred alternative. So we can choose like the lower left, I'm sorry, lower right, the vegetation change to benefit and wildlife and open water. We can choose that as the preferred alternative, but SQA doesn't require a preferred alternative. But I think if we get behind this starting point that might be labeled a preferred alternative in the end. Um, so I just wanted to mention some things that are in our future as we

progress. uh because I think it's important that we all understand kind of where we're going. But tonight, it's really just to thank honor these these authors and as Grace Silva Santella said uh their mentor and and professor Dr. Fred Watson and to um get direction on strategies uh and and how to use this as a starting point. So uh I'll end there and and hear from others. Coun uh Mayor Pertan Visher need to have my light on but if I can speak so um yes thank you of course to the students I've seen it two and a half times I miss half of a presentation but um yeah it seems that every time when I heard the presentation that hybrid option seems to be a very logical choice but of course there's the cost there's the point of cost and cost sharing and we don't have an answer about that yet, but that's definitely something that needs to be discussed. As we know, our city doesn't have unlimited funds to to um to to spend on this or on any of the other projects that have not been funded yet. So, it's a bigger issue than just saying, "Okay, we we'll go in and and I also thought that $2,000 per acre seem seemed very low, but but thank you for having included a cost um estimate. Thank you. Okay. I do want to mention that this removal and management of lake vegetation at lock patent. Oh, sorry Kathy. I didn't see your light on. Let's go to Kathy Ba. Council member Bola.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so I have to say thanks again and and I have also seen this presentation three times and so it's it's it's unbelievable that you were able to do this kind of work in that kind of time limit as well. And I really thank um your professor Fred Watson for kind of um encouraging the this group of students who are budding professionals. You're already showing that hands down. So thank you so much. And it's not only that you did the research and you produced facts for us, but then you actually gave a pathway for us because we've been struggling about what to do about it. And so it was it's it's a real tool for us for the future, which is amazing that you could produce this for us. So thank you so much for that. And you know, I do have to thank also we have so many volunteers coming to Loch Paden Park every single week. And I have to give a shout out to them because they've consistently done a lot of cleanups, weeding, watering all, you know, um the areas there. And this is mostly on land that the city doesn't own. So I have to give a shout out to them for over the years being so diligent about maintaining this special park for us. But I I want to say that that I do prefer and if you look at this uh you know this this one I like this this um um chart. I know the mayor just pointed out the five um in a visual, but I like this chart so much where we're talking about the um the option five there about habitat and viewshed orient orientation. And um this this I really appreciate because it's not just about um the the habitat preservation, but you're thinking about the people and their needs of when they use the the natural habitat. And so I I just love I guess this is what we're calling the

hybrid solution, but but it's very meaningful to me and that so often times we might just be very uh tunnel vision and think that um a land needs to be pristine in some way. Um, and I I have to say this was remarkable when you're telling us that this body of water was saltwater and that was probably why it's under the local coastal plan because at some point it was um part of uh the um uh seawater uh connections um and that it is it changed to to freshwater because of man's intervention with with um infrastructure and the storm water drainage. It's phenomenal to to know that piece about um this wetland area. So, I appreciate that. But then again, it speaks to how we use the land that changes um and from our interventions. But sometimes if we like lock padden the way it is today, well then we thank our infrastructure and the apartments all around and and the the the roads that we've built around there. So, it's not a static quality. And for you to also think of how people benefit from these kinds of natural habitats was so important to me. So I really thank you for that because you could have left that out, but instead you're saying people view um those beautiful um uh vistas as well and that's important for us to think about as well. And so I really appreciate it and I hope that we can support um it looks like we're we're going to use this even in the squa anyway the alternatives and whatnot but it's also nice to to to know that we might have be identifying a preferred option and for me it's the hybrid or the habitat and viewshed orientation and I I thank you for putting out all those options for our city council. Thank you very much.

Thank you Kathy. Uh very quickly, Kathy, thanks for thinking about the volunteers. So, the university is super important to our city. This is a great example. Uh there's a service learning institute. There's a college core program. Um and those college core members and those service learning uh students and and the service learning leader who's a CSUB student who provides leadership to those service learners, they come to this park every single week from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. to remove non-natives, to plant natives, to uh clean up litter, to remove graffiti. And that's why if you go to Lo Patton, you almost don't see much litter or graffiti unless it's very recent, like within the week. And so every week there's a uh a tour of the park, the entire park, looking for litter um and biological substances from humans and and removing any graffiti. And we have uh tens of examples of graffiti removal, you know, every every few months. Um so thank you to the university students here and to all the people, many of whom, you know, you've been service learners yourselves and we appreciate that. This project is priority number 93 for the city out of about 40 projects. So all of us met in a retreat and ranked ahead of that time 1 through 140. And this one came out at 93. And so by addressing it, we're bumping it up from what we all on average thought it should be. Its place was number 93. And I thank Christina Medina Dirkson for letting me know that. Uh, so we as a council have some say in when we get to projects like this and we put it 93 out of 140 which is not very high. We figure every year we'll focus on the top five to 15 projects and get

to some others that are below the list if we have time or special circumstances come about. This is a special circumstance that's come about. You folks and the citizen group have pushed this to the front burner and we are now responding and I want to congratulate you for sort of adapting because you came in hesitant to recommend heavy equipment in the lake or dredging the pond to get its depth better for what our goal is. And after you got no push back at the mention of that, you started showing pictures of heavy equipment doing things that you thought we probably would not want to see. And I think that's a great example of you all learning how to navigate through public uh public community meetings. Um that's all I had to say and we'll go now to uh Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. And I just um the project list that I saw is from 2021. So I didn't have an opportunity to weigh on that project list. I don't I know that there is a more recent one. Um but the one that I think we're both looking at where it's number 93 is back from 2021. So I don't want to share that information if it's not the most recent information. All right, C. Thank you, Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. And yeah, I mean, I I appreciate the discussion about council priorities, which is tricky. I mean, we have a a bucket of priorities bigger than you you could imagine, but just for reference, COVID was priority number 84. So, this was just about as important as CO pretty important, right? Even even then. So, yes, 93, but um you know, be just be careful, I guess, how you interpret the data there. So, thank you, ma'am.

All right. So, we've received the presentation and um I'd like to make a motion that we use the EMVS 660 class uh study and recommendations as our starting point. And then we direct staff to continue uh discussions with the park district who share the ownership of this park and this wetland so that we can move this toward SQUA and other things that we're meaning to do. Uh that would be my motion. Second.

Does anyone have any uh comments or question before we let's go to council member McAdams. Thank you. Um just discussion on the motion. So, how much do we currently have allocated for park maintenance? I think it's 750,000.

We have 500,000 allocated for tree um maintenance and wetland maint wetlands. We we have correct. We have 100,000 allocated for the management study of the wetlands which we know we're going to need more and we have 250,000 allocated towards the Asian-American garden that's okay what we have allocated in the park

and so with moving forward because I want to make sure that you can tangibly move forward. Do you want more money? Yeah, we um in May we're going to come back to the council with our midcycle budget adjustment. I think that would be a good time to talk about and relook at priorities. Um all of our pretty much all of most of our funding is gone. council has uh given us direction to we're trying to fund for our ball fields, soccer fields and youth fields and and so it's just as a matter of all the parties we have we have spent down the funds and then it's um it's not that we don't have money but it's um what projects does the council want to fund.

Okay. So in May when you come back perhaps a us an alternative would be taking out of that pot of a half a million that we have you know earmarked for tree and wetlands. Well well obviously we're missing a step. So absolutely maybe we would move some of that money so you can move forward with SQA and and and all the permitting and and getting that consultant. Does that sound exactly reasonable? Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. All right, let's go to Council Member McCarthy.

Yeah, thank you, mayor. Just um going with with with the cost discussion. I mean, I just want to reiterate something I said that in 2015, we got this estimate. I understand we're in a different paradigm now, but my colleague, Council Member Viser, mentioned that she thinks it's going to be more than $200,000 an acre. Maybe totally true. In 2015, we got it done for $10,000 an acre. And we did it because it wasn't controversial. We did it because the council was aligned. We did it because we had good partners that helped us through that process. And so I just really hope we can recreate a little bit of that um and get things done. Um and you know, we'll see where it goes. But and maybe to the city manager, I did provide this document to you. Maybe you can make sure the rest of the council receives it as well, just so they know what I'm kind of referencing.

Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Good point. Um, mayor pretend Visha,

just a quick remark for anybody watching and about the list, you know, the the priority list, I would encourage anybody who who um questions us, do it yourself. You you need to put something on number one, that's the easiest, but you you have to put something on the last on the last line. And um it it's not easy and we can only spend our money once and I agree with our city manager. We need to look at everything. We cannot just say okay this one project will now put the money there. We need to look at everything. The ball fields are coming up every meeting. So thank you. Okay. Uh so all in favor please say I. I.

All oppose or abstensions. Thank you. That's unanimous. Thanks to the students, the class, the university, Fred, um staff for working and the library for helping out California Plant Society was very appreciative of what you've done. You guys, you know, the rest of your lives, this is part of your legacy. So, let's let's see it happen and then you can see something that you devised actually come to fruition. It's fantastic. Thank you very much. All right. So, we have a time crunch. We think we have about two hours more of items, but we only have 50 minutes more of time. Um, we have consultants here for 13 C and D and those will take one hour. The we believe the 13B will also take 1 hour that totals 2 hours and we have 50 minutes. One option is to uh go till 10:30 instead of 10 as a hard stop and then go to close session or lockpad and park. Another option is to not address something else that's on our agenda. And a third option is to move things around. perhaps do C and D first, but that would do a great disservice to those who are waiting since February 18th to hear about the funding options for our facilities. So, uh, council, how would you like to proceed?

I I would move that we address 13B because it's a tax measure and I don't believe we should be discussing that after 10:00. Um, and that we postpone C and D. I know the consultants are here and I'm trying not to look their way but until a future date. Okay. Thank you, Brian. City manager, how urgent is CND are CND?

Um, Esme, if you can help a little bit on we have some time crunches on our funding a little bit with that or you can come up to the Um D or C is grant funded. Um we do have a timeline there that we're a little bit behind on already, but I can make the next council meeting to present at that time and we're yeah the March I can make the March 17th council meeting and it I think it would be okay to wait until then. Could you make I think Dido said, "Can can you not make Thursday?"

I cannot make Thursday. Okay. Because we were thinking of having a mockup session where we finished what we didn't do tonight on Thursday at 7:30 and you can't make it. And uh you're talking about 13 C's and Charlie. Yes. All right. How about 13 uh well 13 C uh are you necessary for us to address that? I think Lane could present if I'll leave that to Lane. Uh yeah, I think I can. I think it's pretty straightforward. 13C. Okay. Now, let's move to 13D. Can that be done on Thursday?

And it and they have to be here for 13D is in David. Yeah, that's the LCP. We need them here. Okay. So, can we move 13D to a later meeting? And does that uh create any problem? Uh I think it's okay. Yeah, I think it's okay. We should not have an issue. Okay. So 13D is less urgent than 13 C. Yeah, I I guess so. Yeah, 13C we can put off to the Thursday and I can handle that item. Okay.

All right. So we'll we'll have on March 18th I think it is uh 13 17th March 17th we'll have 13 D as a regular agenda item and then this Thursday we will do uh 13 C and E and right now we'll do 13B as in boy which is uh updated information on our facility funding options for our city facilities. Uh I apologize to the consultants. Thank you for being here and I'm sorry we can't get to your items tonight. So now let's move to uh 13B. And who will start us out? Are Tori Hannah, our finance department director. Thank you Tori.

Good evening. Uh at the last council meeting, uh council provided staff with direction to look at some of the cost of the city hall facilities as well as um the cost of incorporating land and and additional improvements that may be needed for the Vince Deaggio site. And uh we also looked at incorporating some of the proposed revenue streams into um the amounts. And this is advanc one. Oh, that one. So, council, while we're waiting, we expect this item to take up to an hour, which would put us beyond 10 o'clock. Uh and then we have close session for lock patent. So what would your uh

wishes be if we're not done with this item by 10:00? Say continue to 10:15 then and then go into close session. Okay. I would agree and just make the comment that I appreciate that some sort of diligence to kind of keep us on track and not an open session too too late. So, thank you for that. All right, ask questions.

We have a I suspect it's about the equestion center. Maybe there's something we can say about that. Yeah, we just don't normally do that. Then we have to open up public comment to everybody and then we're trying to save time. So, I'd say come to us when we're done tonight and talk to us.

Okay. My apologies for the delay. We had um done some revisions to the presentation and we just needed to make sure we were pulling up the correct one. So uh in the prior agenda packet there was an exhibit A and exhibit B which look at the proposed cost of facilities um and then exhibit B inflated those costs by 15% for an inflation factor. What these costs represent is the cost of facilities with that 15% inflation factor plus uh $6 million for the city hall city council chamber site. And uh in looking at what that entails, it would be uh the additional cost for land if it were at the um if it were at the MST site. However, uh when the city manager was working with the R&T consultants, they said that there might be additional grading, retaining walls, ADA parking, and walkways that would be needed at the Vince Deaggio site, which they anticipate to be a maximum of $6 million. So rather than look at it from side by side, we looked at the two maximum costs and actually since they're the same, the total project cost would be $69.3 million. When we look at the funding, what we added to the the initial funding was the allocation from the Preston Park Fund, the 3.25 million remaining amount. We also added an additional two years of public facility and public safety impact fees and that brought the net cost down to close to $50 million. So, if we're looking at what what kind of bond issue would be needed or UUT needed to be raised to make a $50 million bond, if if there were no exemptions given and everybody paid the

equivalent amount, there would be 5.75% utility user tax needed. We looked at what would be the estimated annual household impact. How much would each residential user pay? This does not include, you know, commercial users, but looking at the average would be close to $311 per year. And if we look at what would happen if we exempted those uh residents who were on the PG&E care program, that means they would not pay any utility user tax. In the original original scenario with no exemptions, because they are paying a lower amount of utilities through the program, their average costs are lower. But in the second example, they are paying none. So, if they pay none, then the amount of utility user tax needed to pay $50 million on a bond would be about 7% or $41 for a residential user. We also ran one additional scenario and that was if you were to include the recreation campus uh in in those cost and the same information we applied the same allocation for Preston Park funds and the same additional two years of public safety impact fees and also facility impact fees. We did not apply any of the parks fees to the recreation campus just simply because we've been putting a lot of those revenues into the Dunes Park as well as some of the other parks. So, if that was the case, there would be uh a $57.6 $6 million bond needed and the utility user tax with no exemptions would be 6.5% and the average annual household impact

would be $352. And if we looked at exempting everyone who was in the PG& care program, then it would be approximately $458 annually per household. And just noting that in both of these examples, the utilities that are included are gas, electric, water, phone, and that includes mobile phones as well as cable. And this seems consistent to what the majority of the cities are using to base their utility user tax on. And with that, um, I conclude the presentation and I can defer to the city manager for any additional details on the actual, uh, project.

Dory, thank you. I I think you just totally nailed it with new information tied to the old to give us an update and that was just a great presentation and it saved us a lot of time. I'm sure. So, let's turn it over to city manager for any input he might have. Actually, I don't have anything else to add. Tori covered this is what council requested the additional information and uh at this point we have our uh consultant writer uh Smith is on is on Zoom if you have any questions of him. Okay, we do have we do request that we get some direction because now we're in crunch time, right? Um and we would definitely have some direction.

Great. Well, what you provided us makes it easy to give direction, I think. Okay, let's go to public comment. Anyone in the house that wants to speak in person to this issue? Okay, let's go. Anyone online? And we'll start with Michael Solerno. Welcome, Michael. Hello, mayor and city council. We can barely hear you. Michael, can you hear me now? Yes, much better. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. I turned up the volume. Uh, thanks for uh taking my comments. I uh sent some comments earlier today. I hope um the council members and the mayor had a chance to read those. Um and I have some additional comments now and it's regarding the Deaggio Park site. Um so I'd like to address the legal responsibility the city has regarding Deaggio Park. Uh, parkland held in the public trust is one of the most important legal concepts protecting parks in California because it directly affects whether a city can lawfully build something like a civic building on a public park. In California, parkland is not treated like surplus real estate. When land is used openly and continuously as a public park for decades, maintained by the city, improved with public funds, and relied upon generations of residents, it's considered to be held in public trust. The public trust trust principle means the city does not act as an unrestricted land owner. It acts as a steward or trustee holding the land for the benefit of the public both present and in the future. The obligation doesn't arise just from paperwork, but from longstanding public use and reliance. When a city allows land to function as a public park for decades, courts recognize that the public develops a reliance interest. At that point, the land is impressed with a trust obligation, meaning it cannot be diverted to non-park purposes without clear legal authority. Before considering any reduction or conversion of this park, I ask the council to determine whether the city is holding this land in trust due to the decades of continuous public use and whether diversion would require would require legislative authority,

voter approval or other legal steps. Partland once diminished is rarely restored. The public trust exists to prevent exactly that kind of gradual loss. I urge this council to proceed with full transparency and a clear legal determination before taking any action that could permanently alter Deagio Park. Um, and I'd like to add a couple other comments. Um, from the staff report just on the MST site, uh, there was a note in the staff report that it would cost 5 to6 million for a land acquisition. And it appears that the site is only 2 acres if I'm not mistaken. So I'm wondering why that estimate is so high and maybe staff can check on that. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Thank you very much, Michael. And we'll answer your question at the end of public comment. Let's go to Mike Muller. Welcome back, Mike. Hi. Uh hello again, mayor uh and city council. Um well, great uh great comments by Mike Serno there. Um you know, I'm going to go in a different direction, although I mean as you consider the city hall site, um I encourage you to closely align it with the vision already outlined in the downtown revitalization plan. That plan clearly states that downtown Marina is intended to become the figurative heart of the community. It is meant to be a place where civic life, commerce, housing, and community activity all come together. The plan specifically highlight civic uses as important anchors to help create a vibrant and walkable downtown environment. Right now, the plan also acknowledges that Marina does not yet have a clearly defined downtown district. There are relatively few places for people to gather and many of the existing properties are dominated by large parking lots along major corridors. So that kind of pattern creates a suburban feel rather than a traditional downtown. Now a prominently located streetfacing city hall would directly address those issues. A civic building like city hall creates a visible focal point for the community. It brings people into the downtown area throughout the day and helps establish a recognizable city center. The downtown also recognizes that achieving a revitalized downtown will require significant redevelopment over time. It specifically calls for strategic public investment to help drive that change. So, a new city hall located within the

downtown core is exactly the type of investment that can help catalyze that process. It signals a long-term commitment by the city, encourages nearby reinvestment, and strengthens the role of downtown as the center of civic life. The plan also anticipates civic administration buildings as part of the downtown public facilities framework, reinforcing the idea that city hall belongs within the downtown core rather than outside of it. It's important to note that Vince Deaggio Park is not located within the downtown core area defined by the plan. Placing city hall outside of downtown risks weakening the city's own adapted vision and creating a clear of creating a clear civic heart for Marina. Um so place it downtown. You could support the plan's goals by anchoring civic life, strengthening downtown identity, and aligning public investment in the city's long-term policy direction. Um, you know, we selected uh the MST site because we kind of determined that hiding it back there in its existing uh place wouldn't be uh really the best option. Um, it doesn't matter where it goes, but I do think it's important that it somehow is in the downtown core and faces the street rather than hidden behind a park or another building. So, uh, consider that. Thank you. Mike, thank you very much. All right, let's go to Grace Silva Santella. Welcome back, Grace.

Hi, Mayor and City Council. I just wanted to clarify something that had come up at last meeting and it was after close of public comment. One of the council members stated that you only became aware of the Vince Deaggio Park location because a member of the facility citizens committee spoke to you at the council meeting. But this actually isn't true because the report that you had received from Ryder Smith of Trapey um who was our consultant I say ours in that I served also on the facilities citizens committee wrote a very thorough report. All of us on the committee, all 13 members had the opportunity to look at the draft final report before it went to you. And in that report, it stated that Vince Deaggio Park was brought up as a possibility. It was discussed and considered by the committee and though the committee accepted it as a section second option by 13 to zero unanimous vote. We strongly recommended the MST, the lot adjacent to MST, close to the post office and in the poor downtown vitalization geographic area. So, I just wanted to be sure that you understood that the gentleman who spoke to you at that council meeting was not bringing to your attention something that you

weren't aware of. because had all five of you read the report, you would have seen that there had been some discussion about Vince Deaggio Park, but that was not the first choice of the committee. Thank you very much. Thank you, Grace, for that clarification. Would anyone else like to speak to this matter before we close public comment? Let's go to Margaret Davis. Welcome back, Margaret.

Thank you. I would also like to speak about Deaggio Park and just observe that the family that gave Deagio Park to the people of Marina did a beautiful thing and they would be shocked if they could see the casual contempt the city is demonstrating for their gift. And the rest of us are horrified. As Michael Solerno pointed out in California, a park is held in public trust. Deaggio doesn't belong to the five people who happen to be sitting in the big chairs this evening. And it doesn't belong to the staff. It's not just a vacant lot. It's a jewel and it supports the happiness and well-being of all sorts of people and creatures in Marina. But even if it were yours or ours to exploit, why would anyone do anything so callous, so gratuitously destructive of the the loveliness of our town, unlike cities like Monterey, Carmel, Pacific Grove, Marina has minimal parkland per capita. Please don't delete Deaggio Park. Please respect the desires of the people and build the cubicles on a sensible and harmless place that as Mike Mhler says makes sense civically and reflects the will of the people who live here. Thank you.

Thank you, Margaret. And if anyone else wants to speak online, please raise your hand. All right, we'll close public comment. I'd like to ask council, did I open this up to public comment in person from the floor before we went online? Shep is saying yes. So, council, what's your um preference? We have a member of the in-person audience that would like to speak. Would you be okay reopening public comment or would you rather not? I'm okay with open reopening.

Okay. Okay. Let's open public comment for those in the room. if anyone would like to step forward. And I apologize if I didn't do it earlier, but I thought I did.

I think you did, but uh uh yeah, Steve Lee, resident of City Marina. Um and as you probably know, I advocated for the Vincent Deaggio uh site. Um I just like to clarify one thing. Um you Grace was mostly correct. The only thing that I just want to point out is that the 13 to0 vote was before I raised the idea of Vince Leagio. So of the options provided by the consultant in that third meeting, the 30 the MST site was the only viable site. It was after that that I'd raised the idea of Vincier as a as an idea. um that received some uh I think three or four others joined in and uh suggested that was a you know an option. Um at the time I was uneasy that we were being directed in one direction as to what we were supposed to be choosing. It seemed to be the city council or the staff were directing us. Uh but uh I brought up Vincio as a as an option. um three or four people chose it uh and suggested that was go should go forward. It ended up in the report as Grace said as a second preference uh based on those few people who had uh joined with me. Um but I just wanted to make sure but there was never a vote between uh there was never a vote between uh the MST site and the Vincia site directly. So the 13 to 13 to zero is not quite how it came out. it was not didn't go in that order. So, I just wanted to clarify that uh particular point. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Steve. Anyone else in person that wants to speak to this matter? All right. We will close public comment. And Michael had a question of why would two acres cost 5 to 6 million? And I'll turn that over to our city manager. it. No one has an estimate of the of the market value of the MSD property site. MSD has not done an appraisal of it. They um I think there's one report someone said that might be 4.5 million. Um but what they have said is they will sell it at at market value and so um that was our best conservative estimate of six million.

Okay. Mayor V, uh, Mayor Prom Fisher, do you have anything? You're our rep on MSD, do you have any more input on that? How we got five or six million? U, sorry. MST, they they the staff there, they they estimated that it's four to five million. And I I like how our city manager said we'll be on the conservative side and we'll say six. And the six is uh because inflation etc. Correct. And just to it's better to be uh to to guess higher than coming short. Yeah.

Overpromise, underpromise, overd deliver. Okay. Did I miss any questions that anyone else had brought up by the public? Okay. Thank you to the public that did comment. Let's go to council comment. Starting with council member McCarthy.

Oh, I'm sorry, Brian. Just be patient. Uh city manager Lane Long. Yeah, I neglected to make this at the start and as we've listed this on the agenda um that this really the focus tonight is on we want direction from council on the funding. Um the intent is not to have a discussion on the site um because um over the next four months we're going to have many public meetings, many community meetings, walkthroughs of the site, our consultants on board. We're gonna um specifically involve the public walkthroughs of the of the site. And so we' request that that unless council really feels a need that we don't talk the site tonight because we aren't prepared to it and we have a very different process to do it. What we want direction from the council tonight really is on the funding. I'm seeing now the agenda is to receive information on the facility funding options which we have and provide direction on strategies for the construction and funding options for the city facil for the city uh police, fire, city hall, council chambers, community center. So yeah, let's try to stick to finances tonight given the agenda and city managers. Um to the extent that the the location impacts funding options, I guess we could stretch it to talk about that, but let's try to stay within funding the best we can. Council member Biala.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um first um I was a little disappointed in how the um the one side of Vince Deaggio the grading um uh uh price went up $2 million at the last time I looked at the staff report on Friday and so now it's okay but you know it it jumped 2 million. So I just wanted to note that. Um also, um with the final estimate of 8% for our UUT that's needed based on your newest configurations that is higher than what the the citizens advisory committee uh was anticipating and and thought. So, do we have during the outreach to the community and surveys from the community, will we get an assessment of of how how much of a tax the that's going to be palatable to the general public? Is this what we just present to them or is there some kind of assessment about variations to that 8%. and and we do have Ryder Smith on board and he can kind of help with that. Um, but one thing I wanted to clarify, what you're looking at right there was in the 8% included recreation campus. The citizens advisory committee uh did not recommend that. They just recommended strictly city hall um city council chambers and that scenario doesn't go up to 8%.

Thank you for that clarification. Let's go to council member McAdams. Can I'm sorry. Were the consultants going to answer my Yeah, can you answer her question and just about um the the process for

I can I can answer I think I can speak to that question. Council member um a couple points. Uh, one thing I would just summarize from the work with the resident committee was really focused on picking whatever the number was that was going to confidently build the facilities that were identified was the number that they were gravitating towards and that was an kind of back of the napkin number we were trying to come up with as we were going through facility costs and the work of the committee and frankly it's also dependent upon interest rates in the MUN bond market at the time that we would theoretically do a financing. Second, uh working with FM3, the survey research firm, we still not in the field with the survey because we are looking for direction tonight. But when we have direction, part of their survey research can be to identify the sensitivity to the um utility rate and to make a determination about uh community response to that rate. So we would want to figure out is 7% viable, is 8% viable, or is 6% viable. So that's part of the methodology that FM3 can deploy as part of their survey research. And of course, we've outlined a series of community meetings to discuss this entire effort with the community in the coming months. And we would anticipate discussions, you know, which obviously will not be a scientific survey, but anecdotal conversation and community engagement that would also discuss this issue and discuss the potential rates necessary to build the infrastructure.

Okay. Anything more, Kathy? Let's go to Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, I am going to briefly talk about location. Um, just because I think for us to move forward and for this dialogue to continue in the community, we need to know, does MST want to sell us the site? If so, how much? And how much is the grading? Is it 4 million? Is it 8 million? Because that really is going to lead this conversation. and we're going to have a bunch of angry residents who want the MST site and are maybe not going to understand that it's not available to us or it is available to us but it's way too much money. That's what the messaging should be. And so we need that affirmative, you know, just a good faith from MST to move forward um before we continue down the path and before we have these community conversations with the consultant, etc. So I think that that needs to be really tuned up and and clear. Um and then as far as um well and thank you so much uh Tori, I really appreciated um the tables, you know, showing the exemptions that this the various, you know, cities have. I um a hardship waiver and exemption. I know that that was something that, you know, we really talked about. And so, um, it's, you know, we're not reinventing the wheel, right? And so, that's I think that's very helpful. Um, what is the timeline though to put a utility use tax on the ballot?

Ryder can speak to that. Sure. Uh, typical timeline would be community outreach and engagement from now until approximately June or July. Then in the month of July, most likely you would need to adopt a ballot resolution to place the measure on the ballot for the November 2026 election. And then we would enter a phase of public information specific to the UUT tax and uh and go from there. So, so four months then of four months

and of of what we having to adopt the resolution, getting the wording, deciding on the percentage amount, what the exemptions are, etc. Is that correct? So, typically you would submit the UT rate in the exemptions when you go to adopt the ballot resolution and then our education effort and outreach effort would continue all the way through until roughly midocctober. There are certain things that would have to stop per FPPC guidelines to respect um the process, but we would have we have about 7 months of education period to get through and about four months between now when a ballot resolution would need to be adopted.

Okay. And then is it is it helpful for your team to know what the percentage is and to know what the exemptions are? Uh so the probably the most helpful thing that could happen in the next three to four weeks will be well certainly tonight getting direction from you on a theoretically saying that UT X-ray is what we should go test and experiment with if that's what it's going to take for the infrastructure noted and to get in the field with a survey tool that helps test a bunch of parameters that's a scientifically valid tool for me when I communicate with the public the more certainty I have and clarity. So for example, your query about um validating whether or not the MST site is a real option would be very helpful because a lot of this effort is all built around building trust with the community and the sooner we can have solid numbers and facts that we can present the more effective those dialogues can be.

Perfect. Thank you. I I really appreciate that. Um, so you know, for me, I I would hope that tonight we could maybe get to a little bit closer. Um, but again, like with with him confirming like we need to get this MST site, is it on the table or off the table? I don't want to do any work until we know that. Um, and so are we going to know that now or are we going to know that in 3 months? So that's sort of where I'm at. I would love to move forward. Um I think I could get to a percentage. Um but I'm not I I don't want to invest any time um of the consultants until we're definitive about the MST site. So that's sort of where where I am with that. Thank you.

Thank you, Jenny. Mayor Prom Fischer.

Thank you, Mayor. To start with MST, we did receive the letter for today's meeting uh that they are stating MST is open to coll collaborating with the city of Marina regarding property adjacent to the Marina transit exchange placing civic facilities near major transit transit hubs strengthens access to public services and supports multimodal mobility. So, they're they're really they they would really like to see our civic center built right next to their uh transit exchange, but I agree that it would be good to get an appraisal and I don't know if we can decide to go that route. Uh city manager, can we decide to ask MST for an appraisal?

Yeah, we can have that discussion with MST. Okay. And discussion means please get us a number. I I will talk with Carl with MST and find out what the process is to find out a number

because I agree that will be good and and for the rest um oh Grace when Grace had her public comments and mentioned a council member who said that we hadn't heard about that side I assume it was me and I do not want anybody to think that I did not read that report and I might not I might not have um said it correctly but what I meant to say was for us as council. That was our first opportunity to discuss the Vince DJO location and I hope I'm correct about that because even I get tired after 11. You are you are you're you're correct that at that the city council and this is where people are getting confused. We talked about Vince Deaggio as a fire station site. We've never the council has never talked about Vince Deaggio as a city hall council chamber site and so people are talking about it different things but but um this is the first time the city council is talking about Vince Majou as a city council at a city hall site

at our last meeting when two of our fellow council members were

no longer with us. So, uh, and for me, just to throw it out here, um, and thank you, Tori, this is so clear. This is so easy. Um, for me, the PT&E care exemption would be an a given. I I think people who are on on PGD care, we cannot expect them to pay a dime per month more. And so, the difference will be um seven or eight% to include the recreation campus or not. And that will be it. So the one will will be on average 3342 per month and the other one 3816. So it's an extra I cannot think anymore. Um seven couple of dollars I'd like to say a cup of coffee probably.

So that will probably be the Can you repeat those numbers please? Sorry. So the bond on average I'll slow down the 7% on average will be $41 per year which is 3342 per month. The 8% on average 458 per year which is 3816 per month. So about $5.

Thank you. Because I cannot think it. Yes. Thank you. Not even which is um not even. Well, maybe a uh a venty or no vent is already more I think. So, um but anyway, that I think that will be the discussion like um people who can afford it, they might want to say, "Oh, yes, for a couple dollars more per month, please give us the recreation uh campus as well." We don't know. And I know we have professionals who can survey and try to find that out. And it's easy for me to say because I would say yes. and uh I would still have my venty. But um so yes, I agree with council member M Adams. Please get um the process at least started with MST to get a real number. Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you. Let's go to council member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. Um when I had mentioned a cup of coffee a month during the property tax discussion, I was um teased for it for months. So, I hope you suffer the same wrath. Um, you know, just a couple things, not to uh repeat myself too much, but you know, I've I've long had significant reservations about this tax. Um, I honestly still don't favor it. But having said that, you know, I want to walk the walk that I talked earlier, and I am um fully looking forward to supporting the majority of this council and moving forward. I also want to thank the majority of this council, actually all of this council who worked so hard to try try to find other alternatives to come up with this money. Um, in particular, Measure U, which I think would have been a more equitable solution. Um, but look, the reality is is we didn't get there, right? And so, here we are. Um, I want to talk about location, but I'm not going to. I just don't really think there's a lot of value at this point. um uh agree that there's some things that need to be ironed out and I think those things have already been said. So I I don't want to, you know, hash that out too much anymore. Um yeah, I think that's just my comments. Oh, one more the the 65 and older piece. So we talked about PG& care and I totally agree. Um and I'll point out no shade I think I'm the farthest away from 65 and older but on this dis having said that some of us never get there. Touche. Touche. Um I I think that's a class of people that warrants a little bit of um scrutiny. You know, when you have a family of four or five, P Gen Care allows you to make I think up to 75,000. But most people older than 65 are either widows, single people, or just empty nesters, two people. And I think the income threshold is like 43,000 or something to qualify. And so it becomes very hard for old people to qualify. Well, sorry, 65 and

older people to qualify um

for PG& care. Um and yet they still have fixed incomes. They still struggle to make ends meet in their own way. So I would like to see staff evaluate some alternative for that class of folks. And maybe it's not, you know, P Gen Care, but maybe it's, hey, the first $150 or whatever it is, I'll let staff come up with some recommendations. Uh, get creative. But, um, if council agrees. I just think that, you know, I I know a lot of 65 and older that are on fixed income and are going to, you know, an extra $314, you know, is a lot of money for them. Um, you know, there's a lot of people in that class that it's not a lot of money for them. But I think there's a way to create a rule that says, "Hey, if it's important for you, you know, if you're in a income bracket basically that's not the 43,000, but maybe it's under 75,000, right? That's not enough to live in this area. I got news for you. You know, PG care or not." So, um, yeah, that's my only request is that the council consider some other rule for the 65 and older class. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Brian. Let's go to council member Biala. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think um I'm worried that this even this 8% is maybe going to be too high. So, I don't want to add any more exemptions um and you can be on a fixed income but still own your house. And so I just want to make sure that we're not we're not um you know giving away some money that that we're going to need to pull back on later um depending on what the community as a whole tells us what the maximum that it would be palatable for them. So I just want to have a caution about that. Um, also I think that with the current information that Tori has given us, sort of saying at the higher end, let's say grading and um and uh uh the sale or the purchase of a of a piece of land is pretty much uh equal and and and you're you're estimating at 6 million. I think that that's all we really need to know and to make this decision about the UUT um percentage. Um I think you know we're always running the risk at this point and I think that's why we've been cautioned about talking too much about the actual sites is that people will say well I'm not going to vote for the UUT if it's at this particular site or not this or this one. And I think that, you know, we only have two that we're identifying. And so I think we we need to be uh wary that we risk that. And so, you know, to me, if we just take out the actual um uh land appraisal from this equation because we've got 6 million to based on Tori's current numbers, we have

six million to, you know, to play with on on um the UUT percentage. So I don't know that that is going to be the thing that makes or breaks the the that site that particular site. I think between the two sides because those are the two two the only thing that it would present is that we we would have a delay perhaps in in working with another public agency to enact that purchase of of land. But if we've already gotten it covered by the upper limit of 6 million, I think that that's not going to be the breaker the maker or the breaker of of us deciding UT percentage in this. And I and I think the le the least that we can talk about the differences between the two sides at this point probably is the the more prudent thing for our council to consider as we go forward.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

All right. Thank you, Kathy. um the sale of the recreation campus um since it wasn't preferred to be included by the advisory committee uh and because it has a price tag that makes it even more expensive goes from 7% to 8% if we have some discount on based on PG& makes me want to ask um when we sell what's here now because we've opened up civics facilities elsewhere. Do we have a ballpark estimate of what this land value is worth? Because that proceeded can go to a new rec campus.

Yeah. Later. Yeah. We don't really have that number, but that's something we could we could look at. Would it cost about 10 grand to get it? Uh, yeah, probably about 10 grand to get a

Okay. All right. So, let's just keep that in mind that maybe if we want more certainty to tell folks who want a new community center that as soon as this moves to the new location, this is up for sale and could fund the rec center. That would probably happen, you know, just a few years after we move. If we move um I think one of the strategic strategic next steps that has to be should be in the motion tonight is that we do progress on the survey research and the questions that will be in that survey will come back to us before the survey begins. But we should consider a question being if the choice was site A or site B which would you like? If the choice is not made between A and B, would that influence your vote or whatever the right words are? Um, and then, uh, Kathy is not in favor of getting an appraisal at MST. Um, and may not be in favor of getting an appraisal of the VDP, the Vistagio Park work needed. I'm thinking that if we had an appraisal number for MST and we had a better thoughtout appraisal number or estimate of the V of Instamage Park work um and we had an appraisal of this this land that is I think going to help our future discussions and probably help give certainty to the public. Last thing I want to mention is that I hope that the strategy in the motion that we move forward tonight is that we include direction to staff to consider payment options for lower income folks. We have one tied to PG& and Brian or Council McCarthy has a has a good idea of something different that could be

compared to that one option which might be you know the first 150 you don't pay or whatever you know he he said it better than I but there's there's options there. So, I hope that those will be some of the things uh in the motion and I hope that we can get to that survey soon as possible so we don't fall further behind because that really killed us last time. We were so far behind that we were in a rush. Okay. Uh Mayor Proan Visher.

Yes. Thank you, mayor, and thank you, council member um McCarthy, for bringing that up because um of course people can be house rich and cash poor because all their money is sitting in the house. And so my question is for um probably our city manager, does the consultant or or the or city staff have examples of income related exemptions for um seniors? So maybe other cities have done it already. So I don't need an answer now, but it might be good to Yeah, we'll because I really like that um suggestion

and um we're not going to talk about sites, but since we did a little bit, I will add the MST sites offer space for some residential development, which of course could offset some of the cost, although I would really like it to be more of a park and potential uh expansion. But um and then the final thing I would wanted to um mention is I would encourage anybody who's interested in in this to um attend the shape the future of downtown oh help shape the future of downtown Marina event on Tuesday March 24 at 4M in the Marina Library because that of course will give you an idea of downtown and what it can be and what it would be with or without a civic center at within the downtown. So, like I've said before, this will be the exciting time when when things will be designed where at what location. Yeah, doesn't matter. Thank you.

All right. Thank you very much. Trappepy Smith has some input here. Go ahead, uh, Ryder.

Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate that. I just want to clarify one point which your city attorney could also speak to as well which is um part of the pursuit of a UT is that the general tax not the special tax which reduces the threshold for 50% plus down to 50% plus one from a 66% or two-thirds vote. Uh that has potential implications for how specific the tax is and what it's funding. You may recall from the report from the citizen committee was an advice for a general tax combined with an advisory vote. So in some ways the site location itself ends up while it certainly is part of the discussion and should should be part of the discussion the uh eventually not tonight but eventually um the site itself may not be directly tied to the uh ballot question itself and I might defer to your city attorney to comment on the clarifying point regarding that and how that might become a specific tax otherwise. So, Ryder, I I want to understand what you're saying, uh, that you're suggesting, and our city attorney will confirm that the location of the site may not be appropriate to be included in the ballot language.

That is correct. Okay. If I can just clarify even further, not even the the site itself, but perhaps that any facilities you can mention facilities in general will be constructed, services will be provided. It is a general tax and you can't you can't say such as uh we can work on that, but we'll probably want to limit uh any specifics. The closer you get to specifics, the greater the risk of it being characterized as a special tax. Thank you, Ryder. Or do you have more input, Ryder? No, I just want to make sure I was clear with the council about that because it does create an interesting nuance in our pursuit of this.

Okay. Uh let's go to council member Viala and then McAdams. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, I need a clarification because you just quoted this thing about shaping the future of downtown Marina, but was this the one that our city manager was talking about? So this is not it seemed to me that we're talking about the roadways and the development of that. We're not we're not advertising this to everybody come and and and speak to your your site preference. Correct. This is not city facilities.

Okay. So that needs to be you know that needs to be clarified because this is this would be jumping ahead of what Ryder and associates want to do. Yeah. So, what I meant is before you answer, uh, Brian McCarthy was next. Brian, do you mind if Elizabeth Oh, sorry. responds. Oh, MC Jenny, I'm sorry. Do you mind if Elizabeth goes and Oh, just a quick reply to For me, it was just meant to say anybody who's interested in our downtown, please come to this. Fantastic.

Oh, I'm sorry. I I thought you talked about it in relationship to the site. Well, you you can that's one of the things you can see what what does our downtown look like and what could it look like if we add certain Okay. But then that's giving a preference to what to No. No. Because people might say, "Oh, I don't want that here." Yes. Well, which is giving a preference. Yes. Oh. Oh, no. I don't think at the library we're going to be very restrictive of what people say. Okay.

It's hard to control in that environment. Well, but I think that if we're going to to have a consultant group work on on a whole outreach for the different sites, when there is given equal information about each sites, that's very different than holding a session and saying this is the future of downtown and this site is in downtown and therefore we can talk about that. That's not That's not I'm not suggesting that. But I do suggest that the consultant and staff will be framing the exercise before we turn it over to the public. Like they go to tables and they consider certain questions and then they have a person report out. I'm not sure exactly the format, right?

But we're we're familiar with those kinds of meetings. Uh city manager, you have input? No, you're absolutely correct. We we will not be putting out um sites for city hall as as part of the discussion. People bring it up on on you whatever they certainly can, but our focus is going to be on our downtown and what the community wants and how we can um move that forward. Do you have more, Kathy?

No. and and I I understand that because um and and with really making an effort to stay away from the site. I think that comes from the direction of the of the people in the um in the um leading the um meeting. But for example, um and I have questioned about our downtown revitalization specific plan just recently about how we even convert um our current strip malls, let's say, to having buildings fronting the sidewalk and I those kinds of issues.

Can you hold that thought because I forgot Jenny was next. She was patient to let Elizabeth step in in front of her, but So can you hold that thought and go after Jenny? Okay, that was part of my It's okay. Go ahead. Okay. Um, Council McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. I just I don't want to go down the site rabbit hole and just get fixated on the sites and lose sort of the general focus of are we doing this tax measure? Are we putting it on the ballot? How much are we? What does the community think? And last time that's sort of part of the rabbit hole was everyone got so fixated and upset and angry about the sites um that it just I mean I know that we lost by a very small margin but had it been done differently could we have been successful. So I would just encourage my colleagues like let's not go down the site rabbit hole. We're not even there. We don't have the money. Um, it's it's hard to be vague to the community and also, you know, the same 10 people are going to be upset that we don't have architectural designs and we don't have sides and this and that and they're going to vote no anyways. They were going to vote no. We could, you know, do hula hoops and somersaults and they're going to vote no. So, I just would encourage that we have a united message, um, a a consistent me message. let the consultants and the professionals do their work and and let them guide this process because I think um you know if if we go down the site thing and we have people meeting over here and talking about sites, we just lose the whole focus of everything, right? Um, and so I just I hope that we can just stay in this like simple mindset of what percentage do we want to put this on the ballot and not even talk about sites until we're successful and have the money. That's when we engage and talk about sites and all of that stuff. I mean, with the exception of MST because if it's off the table, I don't want to hear about it anymore. But if it is a potential, then yes, you know, let's let's let the community. I've I've heard

more about MST than anywhere and I'm thinking we don't even own the property. Like why? It's like if I'm talking about, you know, building something on Brian's property, he'd be like, "Wait, lady, like that's that's my house. Like, you don't own it." So, you know, I think we need to be careful what we're communicating because we do have people in the community that no matter what are not going to support any tax anywhere and they're just going to grab what we say and change it around to, you know, to their benefit. So, I just would encourage that we be united and careful.

All right. Thank you very much. Let's go, Kathy. It's all yours.

Yeah. So that's why I'm saying let's not even um get the money involved in it. We have 6 million that's going to cover the purchase of a land is going to cover the grading. Let's not let's not divide it at this point. Let's just say we will go to inclusion of at least a $6 million addition to whatever we configured last time and then leave it at that. And the only other barrier might be how long it would take to sell the land. But we don't we we have it covered. We have both of those things because what if it comes at 4 million? Now what? Now we're going to be arguing that it's it's cheaper than the other one so we should do it or you know I mean it can get as as well. That becomes another point of of of disparity between the two sites and we already have it covered. just let's decide, you know, based on on those those those two sites now being equal in cost, so to speak, estimate.

Okay. Um Lane, does staff want us to decide tonight on a UUT percentage, including whether or not there's exemptions? Yes, those are the two key things. And then you can give us a percentage. Then they'll test they'll test up. They'll test up and they'll test down and and then we can get you the correct information back.

Okay. I would like to start a motion that we can build together. um that we direct staff to progress with survey research as they find appropriate given our timeline and that we ask staff to consider options for lower income discounts such as PG& care or some partial discounts such as Council Member McCarthy alluded to and that we um get estimates and this is where we might have some some divisiveness uh that we get estimates on the current city hall land value, the uh ballpark of Vinceagio Park grading needed price and other sort of special to that site and uh um um variables and uh MST site price. And if we can get a second, uh, I can I can entertain a friendly motion to delete those cost three items. But just to build this down or up, let's uh get going.

Uh, is there a second? I'll second.

Okay. So, let me go through that again because it's kind of confusing. progress on s survey research as the consultants and staff find appropriate that we have staff uh look at options for lower income discounts could be just seniors it could be everybody different options that's number two um and that uh we get estimates for those three components city hall land value park grading and particular uh variables that are specific to that and MST uh site price and I'm willing to delete or add. Um let's go to Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm I'm happy to support that motion as is and probably with any amendments. A couple questions um for discussion. One is but we're being asked to pick a percentage number tonight, right? Yeah. But we haven't gotten there yet. No, no, I forgot. Okay, that's number one. Would you like to make a friendly amendment? No. Um, but I'd love to hear what your recommendation is and I'll probably support it.

Yeah. So, I I would say right away 7%. And that might come down or up depending on what we do well with with exemptions. Um, and then just in in regards to exemptions, um, again, not part of the motion, but I mean to me, if I could make it work without being an administrative burden, I'd say it's easy. 80% of AMI and you're 65 and older, you qualify, right? But I think that checking the AMI, we've learned from our BMR program, is probably an administrative burden, probably not possible. Um, but in that spirit, maybe we say something that's easier to administer, 65 and older, you get a $50 or $100 credit or something to that effect. And so I would ask staff to maybe come back and provide us something that's in the spirit of those two things, but is also easy to administer for the city. So that would just be my comment.

Brian, I have a very brief question. If I'm 30 and I'm struggling or I'm 68 and I'm struggling, does one deserve more discount than the other? So I think my thought, no, the answer is no. But my thought is that if you're 30 and you're struggling, you probably qualify for care. What kind of care? P Gen care. And if I'm 65 and struggling, I don't.

You probably don't because a lot of young people may have families where the income threshold is actually higher. Whereas if you're older, you know, you you're usually either empty nesters or widowers. And so your income threshold is a little bit so if your income is lower because of your senior citizen circumstance, wouldn't you qualify for PG& care? It's based on It's based on household size as is AMI. Okay. I don't understand it as well as you do. Thank you. Okay. Let's go to Council Member McAdams. Oh, I just I was curious what the percentage was. So 7% at this point.

Seven. And so would a friendly amendment be like six to seven and a half%. I mean they're they're going to explore various different percentages and I'm fine if Yeah. So 7% is a great starting point if you'll test up and down. Check. Okay. Perfect. Okay. Great. Council member.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would still like to be consistent with what I said and in your motion to eliminate um the um the determination of the costs of the different sites and grading and stuff because once that information is out there then now we've got to say how does that relate to the UUT? I mean if it's 6 million it's going to be a 1 percentage point UUT increase. If it goes down then another site can take off a half a percent. So, I I don't want to get in in you're going to end up having to make um make a decision based on money for the different sites if you go down that road. I think we have 6 million covered for both of them.

Okay. How about that part of the motion that uh seeks to understand the the land value of city hall current? It seems a little bit in isolation, however. But I I can understand that if we have to go down in UUT, then we'll carve off the recreation part of of uh the needs, although we can't we can't carve it out because we're not supposed to be identifying the specific uh purpose for the UUT,

right? Well, 7% uh doesn't allow for the recreation. So in public meetings and education, we would we would probably disclose that it's not likely to include that, but it could. And then people who want the community center upgraded will say, "Well, what about that?" And we'll say, "Well, that can come with the 7 million we're going to get from selling this." That was a bad number, but um anyway, that was the purpose of me thinking it. and if the rest of the council,

I just want to get this passed tonight because these two that that those two things aren't important to me, but I thought that they were a good idea. So, um let's hear from others before we officially uh remove the Vince Deaggio, the MST uh values or this current city hall. Okay. And I am in favor of the 7% by the way.

Okay. Council member um Viser. Thank you ma'am. Just what I also said at a previous meeting in the beginning I I was the one who asked for exemptions for seniors and belonging in that group. I no longer think we should have a blank exemption just based on age because a lot of seniors mature people who can afford it. So I really like to what we discussed earlier for staff to see if there are examples of other cities or organizations who have uh come up with an easy to check income exemption option for seniors. Thank you. Okay,

council member McAdams. Thank you, Mayor. I was going to um ask you to split the question, but if if the three sort of site things aren't important to you, then I mean I I would suggest that they just get removed. But if you want to keep them in the in the motion, if you could split the question to the percentage of 7% and then you know moving forward with the survey um and then the second vote would be on on on the the things then that would be good.

Okay. So for the time being I'll remove from my motion all three dollar items current city hall Vince Maja Park grading MST price and we're left with U survey research progress options for lower income um rate payers residents and uh 7% UT I just had a quick question for staff could we say this is theoretical could we say uh PG Gen care discounts would be given exemptions would be given for seniors only like if you're a senior and your P Gen care or or or that's that's a bad thing for some reason.

Yeah, I think maybe we could but we wouldn't want to I wouldn't think because to your point earlier people are struggling and we want to what regardless of their age try to ser serve them. Okay. But I thought someone I thought you were mentioning that No, no. I I said don't do a blanket exemption for seniors because okay many seniors can afford it and I earlier I said anybody on the care program the PG& care program I would really like all of them to be exempt regardless of age. Okay. So I guess I was thinking because you said that you don't want to give blanket discount to seniors because some don't need it. Yeah. But if you gave discounts to seniors only if they were on PG& care.

No. Anybody on PG& care. Okay. Regardless of the age. All right. I won't beat that up. Okay. Great. So we have a motion on the floor with three components. Survey research lower income options and UUT 7%. Does anyone want to add or delete before we go to a vote? I would still like to add that staff uh consults MST to see if what the pro uh process is to get a um Right. So, I think we're gonna the three dollar things. It will be another motion. Oh, okay. Sorry. It's just to get this main stuff out of the way. And it's not even 11 yet and I'm already tired. Okay. Thank you. Sorry about that.

All right. All in favor, please say I. Sorry. So, we are splitting the question. Yeah. that the due to friendly amendments then the motion currently only has three items. Want me to read please? Uh survey research progresses as staff and consultants find appropriate. Staff is directed to give us options for lower income exemptions discounts and the UT rate would be 7%. And that includes the piece the lower income includes a piece about the 65 and older category.

Yeah. Yeah. that they have they will come back with options. I don't know if it includes that particular option, it's up to them to come back to us. So, if you want a particular option insured to be considered or included in the ballot language or Yeah, I mean I I think staff is hearing me, but I'd like to ensure that part of that research that comes back includes a 65 and older option. If staff says that, hey, look, administratively, it's just not possible, then that's fine. Okay. I'd like them at least to consider. So, options for lower income exemptions, discounts that include, and can you say it? Uh, the 65 and older class. You're not just thinking about me, are you? Not just you, there may. All right. Uh, although I do want to see you get the benefit.

All right. I'm going to make my sure I live that long. Okay. So, those are three options. Uh, does the second hold? Yes. Yes. Three components. Okay. Um, all in favor, please say I. I. I. All oppose, please say no. Okay. So, I did something wrong. We blew past 10:00. Uh, we didn't motion to go. I guess we did agree. Yeah, we already did. So, that's why we didn't go to 10:15. So, we might We'll let city attorney let us know if we need to do this vote again on Thursday. I think you're good to go.

Okay. So, now we either Oh, yeah. So, now we're gonna uh consider those three pieces we dropped out. Someone want to make a motion to include one, two, or three of those or none of those?

Well, I think it was No, I mean, it was the mayor's motion. You just asked him to split it, right? So, now the other half of the split vote is whether we want to direct staff to come back with any of those estimates. And I see Jenny shaking her head. No. No. for Kathy for the MST. I thought that's one of the three. So, Elizabeth wants the MST just to rule it out or not. Yes. I'd be happy to support the MSD site. Okay. And that is to get an appraisal price. Yes. Okay. So, we have two people that want to So, one one of you make a motion.

Oh. to direct staff to um consult with MST to uh get a an estimate for the the site next to the MST trans. Is that the same as an appraisal? Appraisal, that's the word. Sorry. To get an appraisal. See, I'm tired. Well, in Dutch it sounds more like estimate. Uh appraisal. I don't even know the Dutch words anymore. Okay. Is there a second? Second. Okay. We have a motion, a second, council member. So, we get an appraisal from them, but we don't have their their their definitive answer that they would sell it. So, I don't understand like why we're going we're going to do that. I mean, what what does that mean?

She just read a letter, but I I've had a conversation with Carl and he said um uh the selling of that site to the city meets all their criteria to be able to sell it to the city. Now, he still has to run it through the board, right? The board has made a decision. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, you're correct. The board he you're right. He would have to run it through the board, but he said it meets all their criteria to be able to sell it to us. But I can and they want to get rid of that tomorrow because they can't do anything with it and it's money sitting on the table for them to be able to use somewhere else.

And I think my logic for supporting it is it's I mean, we really don't even have to ask them. I mean, I wish there was a Zillow for MST sites, right? We just go on the internet. It's probably not that real hard hard to figure out. Um, you know, and maybe they would fund the appraisal and we didn't wouldn't need to.

But it seems weird to me that we would get an estimate on that and not an estimate on Vince Demagio Park uh uh idiosyncrasies and cost. I would support Vince Deaggio as well if a majority of the council would, but um I also don't know that we need to go down that path if a majority of council doesn't. Right. So uh does does Jenny or Kathy care if we have in it in this motion? It has two I I do. I I am You care because you don't want it, Jenny? No, I care because it's divisive. That's exactly opening up a bag of worms.

But you wanted the MST in there or you didn't? The MST I think is fine because it will give us direction of if it's off the table or on the table. Okay. And if it's off the table then we don't have to talk about it anymore. Yes. But it if if it is a possibility then it's still in the running. So and because in three days the the grading price went up $2 million for instagio. So I mean what what what are we talking about? I don't know what that appraisal came in on that it changed that much. So, if we're going to do this, we do it seriously and we get a whole another consultant to actually price things out. I mean, I I I I can't Okay,

I can't rely on these numbers.

Well, and I don't want R&T is doing the best job they can. What they're trying to do is give us conservative numbers. Vinceual site is on a huge drop off. the site will vary millions of dollars where the city hall is located. And so, and so they can't give you a definitive number until we say it's going to be located here. And then they can see how much fill they have to excavate, how much fill they have to bring in, how many retaining walls. And so that new number, we're just saying depending on where it's located, it could go anywhere from four to $6 million. And we'll never know any more from that until we pin down this is the exact site we want. Okay, I'm I walked the site today and I will tell you that so much of of Vince Deaggio is pretty flat. However, there is that initial grade. So, I if we're going to go down that rabbit hole about uh really getting a accurate assessment of costs, then it needs to a design needs to be proposed because some of the land there is pretty darn flat. All of the open space there is pretty darn flat.

Okay. So, it doesn't make sense to me. All right. Did anyone want to include the city hall land value estimate or not? I see no from Elizabeth, no from Brian because it doesn't matter what what sites gets chosen because it won't be this site. So, it doesn't matter. Okay. Um, so I see it. Well, just for clarity, I don't think that that's true, but I appreciate your comment that it won't be this site. I mean, have we definitively decided that? Oh, I assume. No. Yeah. No, I I don't think that's true, but I don't think it's it's derive the conversation,

but for because we only discussed the two sites now, which we were not going to discuss, but so for for these two sites, it doesn't matter. So, only if so, who knows if if MST turns out to be off the table and and who knows, we might come back. I suspect it could be an entirely unthought site to be honest with you the way that you know this kind of stuff works. So um you know it may not be any of the ones we've discussed. All right. So can you restate the motion please Brian? Uh, council member Fisher, I'm sorry. Oh, sorry.

To direct staff to to get an estimate, sorry, an an appraisal from MST for the site next to the MSD exchange and maybe would you accept a friendly amendment um a letter of intent that they, you know, would be willing to explore the sale? Oh, we have it. Okay, fair enough. Second hold. So, the answer was we don't need it. by Elizabeth's answer was we have a letter stating that or we can include that get an appraisal in their you you might say as a friendly amendment get the appraisal and run it through their board. Yes. Conceptually would they be willing? Yes.

Everyone says yeah we're enthusiastic or everyone says no then we don't want to get the appraisal. Yes. Because otherwise we don't need an appraisal. Yes. Okay. I'll be voting no just because I think the two kind of go together. If you're going to get more information on one, you should get it on the other. But, um, let's see how this goes. Okay. Does, uh, Kathy, did you have more? All right. All in favor of the motion, please say yes. Yes. Yes. All in opposed to the motion, please say no. No.

Thank you everybody. That motion passes 3 to2 with Council Member Vera and Mayor Delgado voting against. Everybody willing to go to lock patent now. Close session. It's going to wake. We're going to wake up when we walk across. So, all right. So, this mo meeting is is adjourned to close.