City Council - Regular Meeting

caught up and settled in, but uh we will launch right into this mopup meeting. We didn't finish a few items on Tuesday, so we adjourned through tonight to be able to finish what we can. So, there's two items tonight, 13C and 13E. We're going to leave D as in David, until the consultants are available to walk us through that. They put a lot of effort into the local coastal program. It's a pretty dense document. So, we don't want to run through there without having the con the authors and the experts on that. So, that'll come next uh March 17th, couple weeks from now. So, for now, we're going to start with the uh design plan for Ford and we'll take a roll call being u helps out there.

Council member McCarthy here. Council member McAdams here. Council member Biala here. Mayor Prom Bisher here. Mayor Delgado here. All right. Thank you everyone for being here tonight and those of you in the audience, thanks for being here. Staff, thank you for coming back tonight. Okay. So, who's going to walk us through this uh state parks issue?

I will take that one, Mayor. And if you could pull up the slides, please. Um, this is a project that actually started a couple years ago. Um, I was at a at a conference and found out about some potential grants from the state coastal conservancy. And so I reached out to them and and uh and found out that they had some grants available and they were interested in working with us on trying to improve our access points to the beach in Marina. Uh while we have these lovely sand dunes along the coast, our challenges is is we only have four or five really access points to the beach. and those access points. Um, if you are mobility impaired, have um, ADA struggles, um, you're elderly, you have,

you have struggle um, walking down to the beach, even if you have small kids, um, it's a challenge. And so our goal in getting this grant was to try to um select an access point that we could get um a nice almost boardwalk all the way down to the beach that um that everyone could use. And so when we met with the state coastal conservancy and the state parks looked at all our access points and they said that the forward state park that would be the one that they wanted us they'd be willing to fund through the grant. And so we started the application process, put in an application to the state coastal conservancy and we received an $800,000 grant and that $800,000 will just cover the planning and going through the SQA process. And so right now and we've had several community meetings, the our recreation cultural services commission has received at least one maybe two presentations on this. We've we've met down on site several times and and what we have before you now is the conceptual plan that um state parks and the coastal conservancy says they um are willing to move forward. Now, this plan doesn't have everything that we initially wanted on our end. Our primary goal was to get a a nice ADA path all the way to the beach. And we ran into some difficulties um just with the endangered species and where it would go down to um both state coastal conservancy and state park said to get the boardwalk that would meet the ADA requirements would take away would impact too much of the habitat and

endangered species in the area. And so the plan that we're going to show you is the plan that they said um is the only plan that they could um support down to the beach. So it's not what we wanted. Um but at this point um that's what they say we can um we can do. Uh part of the reason for u the meeting tonight is this is the it's still a conceptual plan. So, we'd love to take feedback from the public and the council and and we'll take it back and um EMC, I'm not sure if they even have any anyone here from EMC, but we certainly will take this feedback. They have done a phenomenal job of working through this process. It's very complicated, but you're in the coastal zone. Uh there are so many rules and regulations that you have to um that you have to work through, and they've done a really good job with that. Uh next slide. This would kind of give you a reference point. So Dune State Park, you access it from the eight street bridge. Um, and from that point, it's not city of marina property on the other side. It's it is state parks owned property. Next slide. This kind of uh lets you know where we are on on our um progress. So we are now to the conceptual plan point and uh it has taken us um over a year from starting our community input just to get to the conceptual plan. So, it gives you just a sense of how complicated it is to work through um the coastal zone and and when you're in endangered species habitat and and just all the different agencies that you have to work with. Um after the conception plan, it will go to the 30% design, then complete uh the SQA

review, then it goes to 60% design. Um and then we finally have to go and get our uh coastal development permit. what we have um proposed here, it does impact some endangered species. So, there has to be an incidental take permit and all that just takes time. And so, um we are another um maybe through the end of 2027, we'll complete the permit process, the incidental tape permit process, and maybe in 2028, we'll be able to start construction. And those are just it seems like a long time frame and it is a long time frame but those are the realities and in working with the um in the coastal zone and when you're impacting endangered species and you have to uh mitigate um appropriately for those. Next slide. So this is um is where is where our project is when it started off. We are just focusing on the parking lot at Fort Dunes uh State Park and we were trying to get uh an accessible path down to the beach. Anyone who's walked there, as you walk from the parking lot lot, you go down this little path, and then you hit this goalie that when I got here 13 years ago, it was a flat piece of land. 13 years later, it's a goalie probably three, four, five feet deep and about this wide and and um very challenging to get through. And so that was our intent was try to um improve that, get a nice um ADA compatible boardwalk down to the beach. That's not feasible. Uh but as we went through this process um and we had our community meetings, we had community meetings on site and one of the things that became

very apparent to to us in the community as as we're standing in the parking lot. uh you'd see all these people walking um across the eight street bridge down the roadway and there's no pathway and you got cars and you got bikers and you got pedestrians all in the same road roadway and we know it's just going to get um busier over time. And so we asked state parks and the coastal conservancy if they'd be willing to expand the scope of our study and allow us to um put a trail um from the eight street bridge down to the parking lot. And they agreed to do that. And so we modified the scope of our study and included that. And that's part of the delay in the process was was doing that. Um next slide. And so this kind of shows what we ended up with. And so you have kind of the existing road. Uh and then we have a little walking path right next to it. Now uh we went through several iterations of the walking path. Our our preference was um like we our preferences with any class one bike path or anything is we wanted to get the walking path um away from the road. And so we wanted uh three or four feet even a couple feet of separation uh between the road and then the walking path. We wanted uh our preference was to have a walking path and biking path so we get both the the uh bikers and pedestrians uh off the road, but in working with uh state parks and state coastal conservancy um that would have impacted the endangered species too much. Um and so putting the separation between the road didn't work. Widening up the path to

make it wider for pedestrians and bikes both uh didn't work. Uh, and this is what they told us they were willing to um accept. And so that's why the the trail is abudding the road and that's why it's six feet wide. And so it it will only be a trail for people walking. Uh the bikers will still have to ride down the road. Um but again that going through the process that is what um is has determined to be feasible. Next slide. Oh, actually go back. Uh there's one other point. There's these existing um uh restoration fencing along the side there. We've talked with some people and I know the um uh Shay Homes and the Dunes, they have some thoughts and comments, I think, on that and they'll probably be uh speaking uh later on about that. We have had some feedback of why is that necessary? um that starts to take away some of the views that we like down there. And so that's why I'm showing the whole plans and if you have comments and feedback um please feel free to talk about that in public comment. Next slide. Uh so we'll be using the existing parking lot. They're going to be reor reorienting reorienting the parking a little bit so buses um can have a place that they can pull off and park. Um and uh a big part was there's there's porta potty toilet toilets and so the plan will now include um bolted toilets. There's no sewer down there so we can't have regular toilet facilities but at least it'll be a nice bolted toilet um facility better than order potties. Um it's going to add these picnic areas. It's going to add more um bike racks and biking areas. um the existing dump

dumpster there is going to have closure uh an enclosure around it and we want to put in some nice uh signage for the area. So that gives a sense of of how the parking lot will be. Next slide. Um, if you've been down there, um, uh, when you walk from the parking lot, there's this, you walk up and on this photo here to the left, uh, where it says Dunes Restoration, uh, that's the existing viewpoint and you can walk up to there and you're kind of right to the edge of the cliff. This photo doesn't show it, and you have this beautiful view of the ocean. Uh, since I've been here, the coastal erosion has covered at least six or seven feet. There used to be a nice boardwalk from the parking lot to that viewpoint. Um, they finally gave up fighting coastal erosion and and so that is now uh completely buried that boardwalk. There used to be signs up there and they're all buried by coastal erosion. And so if um people don't think that coastal erosion and sea level rise is real, it really is. And and you can um you can see that that happening. And so state parks um they they want that viewpoint to go away um because it's going to continue continually continue to get coastal erosion and um and and people are you they have fences there. They walk out, cut through the fences, and then climb down the cliffs, and it causes further coastal dunes damage. And so they want to stop that. And so, uh, so that viewpoint is going to go away and they're going to restore those dunes there. And so instead, uh, they're going to put picnic tables and benches along here. And then you walk down and there'll be a trail head information

kiosk that will talk about, uh, the species there. It's going to talk about uh the dunes, the habitat. Um uh may talk about the um the original for Stewwell Hall was there um in that area. And so it'll talk about the area there. And then where it says that um a casta overlook um they're going to have a an overlook there. It's all going to be ADA compliant. the path, the overlook. And uh again, these are just concepts, but these pictures here show some of the different ideas that they potentially have there on the overlook. And and so while it's not on the edge of the of the um beach like the current overlook, but it's set back to where over the next 20, 30 years, they're not going to have to continue to move that overlook back. And so it's placed to where um it can be there for a long period of time and it has a little view corridor um that you'll be able to see the ocean. You just won't be on the edge of the cliff. Next slide. And this is is the view that you get. Um again, it's not right on the edge of the cliff. Um but you can um start to see the ocean through those uh the sand dunes. We'd love to be closer, but again, um u coastal erosion is just moving in and and we don't want to build facilities in every 10 years if we be moving them back. Next slide. Uh and so this starts to take us down to where um the beaches. This got to kind of give you a sense. And um and the top topography really drops off dramatically from there to um to where you access the beach. Next slide.

And so this is the little trail, the existing trail there. Um and there's nothing accessible or ADA compliant about that that trail. And so, as I mentioned earlier, our goal was to was to take it from this starting point and have a boardwalk that would meet ADA standards. But as they designed some concepts for the boardwalk, the the grade drop is so steep in that area. The boardwalk, it probably had five or six switchbacks on it. Uh, and it really starts to impact the species there. There's a lot of um water overrun from the hill and um when the state coastal conservancy of state parks looked at it um as much as we wanted that 88 boardwalk, it just didn't it just wasn't going to be feasible. And so instead, what they approved for the concept is we're going to widen that existing goalie um and put steps on it and they'll put um uh uh cables along the side. And so at least it will improve the access um but it won't meet all of our goals, but it certainly is better than what it is, and it's something that will last um uh last hopefully for a long period of time. Next slide. When we started this process and when the city council approved our application uh for the coastal conservancy grant, uh one of the key things that that we had to commit and we committed that in the application process was we had to uh maintain the improvements that they put in. And so as we talked with um with state parks because this is on their property um the the new improvements going in are the it's the little pathway

from 8th Street Bridge to the parking lot. Um and so that would be our responsibility to maintain. Uh we're have uh they've agreed that they would maintain the vaults just because it's about the same cost for them to maintain portaotties as it is the vault. So they'll do that. the existing parking lot is theirs. Uh we're still having discussions on the overlook, who would be responsible for the overlook and uh and we'll get more information about that. And then these little cabled steps down where the goalie is, that would be the city's responsibility. Uh, now I've talked with our public works director and I he doesn't think it's going to be significant exactly what our maintenance costs are and I don't know if you have a dollar estimate you can throw out Ishmail at this point but um kind of ask him that. So routine maintenance uh walking through blowing off the sand would be uh nominal. uh it would just be one more visit um to our list. Uh long term, we probably wouldn't see anything until uh it'd be 10 years before we saw anything. And it's just maintaining the dealing with coastal erosion. Really, not a whole lot more.

Okay. And so as we get down the process a little bit more, we'll get some more concrete estimates, but at this point um um as Ishmael said, we think it's really going to be nominal. Um we already committed when we submitted the grant that would make those maintenance cost. Um and so that's kind of the best we have at this point. Next slide. And I think um yeah, so I've talked about earlier these ne next steps. So, this is going to take us through this year and through next year, and we're hoping by next year um that we'll um have the permit to be able to start construction in 2028. Now, we've talked with the state coastal conservancy um because our our $800,000 grant is just for this permitting uh this SQA process. um they do have um uh funding and they've committed that they would fund all these improvements and so we're trying to um figure out a pathway to get commitment from them up front while because they still have funds right now from Prop 4 funds and uh so uh we think we have a process forward to apply for construction funding before the actual permits are are issued. And uh that kind of covers my presentation to this point. Thank you, mayor.

All right, let's go out to the public starting with the people that are in person and then we'll go to the public online. So, anyone wishing to speak, come on up. There we go. Good evening, uh, mayor and council. My name is Don Hoer, and, uh, as you guys know, I'm with Shea Holmes. I'm also the president of the Dunes, uh, Homeowners Association and the Rooftops, uh, Homeowners Association. And of all of your constituents, I am one. I uh I am a resident of Marina and I am the closest resident of Marina to um to these improvements and to the state park and the 8th Street Bridge and everything you're talking about. Uh so thank you to staff and to and to the city for taking on this ambitious project. I know it's not easy. Um, I had an opportunity for the first time today to review the plans uh or the staff report and uh we sent a letter although Doug Y who I think is online intended to send it. I think it got bound up in his email potentially and so I did bring copies of that letter I can share. Oh, you guys have them already. Okay, perfect. Um, and so a couple of quick comments uh I'll make and I I want to offer uh myself and then also there's quite a few homeowners that walk this area all the time and uh to the degree the association can be of assistance or involved in this I think they would really like to be uh and so I'll offer that also if it's of assistance. The first issue has to do with um the concrete sidewalk that is planned adjacent to the street. Couple of issues there. One of them regarding drainage. You know, that's a that's basically like

a county road standard that's out there. There's no sidewalk or curb and gutter. So, when you add a curb to that street, a vertical curb, it's going to create drainage issues. So, while I appreciate the idea that we want to maintain as much land as we can for endangered species and other things, it sure would be nice if there was a way we could find a detached sidewalk, which I know Lane, you talked about. I envision or I know a lot of people envision, you know, when you walk through Yusede on a path, you're detached from the roadway. It's a pleasant experience. This is a beautiful environment out here. and uh to be experiencing it as a pedestrian adjacent to a roadway just seems wrong. And so to the degree um that it's not a concrete path, that would be fantastic. Uh by detaching it from the roadway, you eliminate the drainage issues. Um, and then furthermore, uh, at the within the dunes, we have this boardwalk that goes all the way from the Dunes, um, you know, retail center through the community out to the eight street bridge. How wonderful would it be if we had this sand colored boardwalk that extended out to the parking lot and the overlook and was an experience for the pedestrian to walk through that environment. So, we would be big big advocates and I know Lane your staff report was fantastic and I appreciate that you guys have worked hard on it. I don't want to create issues and problems but to the degree we can be involved and help advocate for that with state parks and others.

Thank you. I'll offer offer that and thank you for your letter as well. Okay. Am I at time? I'm sorry. Oh my gosh. We do have your letter and we we have there was quite a bit other things. So, all right. Thank you. Sorry for the time. Okay. Anyone else wishing to speak here? Okay, let's go online. Everybody online, if you'd like to speak, please raise your hand. All right, Shelley Cannon. Um, we're gonna unmute you here soon, Shel.

Yeah. Hi. Just a quick question. Is this time to comment about any of the other agenda items later tonight because this was kind of a a cleanup from last this earlier week's meeting? Yeah, we have two issues tonight. This is the first and the equestrian center is the second. Okay, great. Okay, I'll hang up then. Thank you. I mean, I'll wait till then. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Shelley. Anyone else uh remotely wish to comment? Please raise your hand. All right, let's go to Doug. Dant.

Yes, Mr. Mayor. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

Yeah, thanks, Bruce. Um, council members, um, I just want to continue on a little bit. I know you have the letter there um, from Don relative to Shay Holmes and some of those issues. It It's important to mention a couple of others. I think one particularly is the fencing uh not just on the pathway that uh is contemplated uh the fence uh along the roadway or the pathway out to the overlook and that loop. Uh, I think it'd really be better served by having the the the cable and the the the typical cable type fencing that you see versus a larger static fence that really uh doesn't wouldn't really enhance. I think you can keep the same control or concerns about control into a restorative area using the fencing or using a a much less intrusive fencing. Uh also the bridge itself uh my understanding is is uh I believe MST has some responsibility for uh participating in improvements on the bridge per uh their coastal permit or other permits relative to the transit station and would be good to partner with them relative to bridge improvements. Uh there's this is an opportunity now to really look at him uh that bridge which as you know the fence height on the bridge uh why a lot of people walk along the street versus on the bridge side or on the sidewalk adjacent to the bridge on the north or the fencing on the north is that it's u that guardrail or the railing is very low uh and it's potentially an unsafe situation. So, I think you really want to take a close look at that. Look at as an opportunity maybe to do some ornamental and some decorative, really spruce up the entire bridge there. Um, and as uh Mr. Hoer

mentioned, bringing that boardwalk with the stamped concrete and coloring across the bridge sidewalk. So, it ties into the whole dune specific plan. And as you can see in I think one of the diagrams to the letter, an illustrative plan illustrates that that boardwalk concept was intended to go out uh to the state park. So just some additional uh points there, Mr. Mayor and Council. I appreciate the opportunity to provide input into this important park improvement. Thank you.

Thank you, Doug. I know you and Don only had three minutes each, but we do have the opportunity to go through this letter pretty carefully before this issue is um voted on. So, thank you both for that comment. Anyone else online that would let to comment at this time? Just raise your hand. All right, not seeing anyone. We'll close public comment of Doug and Don made a lot of comments. Uh, any questions? Anyone noted? Okay. There's some questions in their letter and I hope that we'll get to that. Um, Council Member McCarthy, did you have input? Okay. All right. Um, so we'll go to council for comment questions. Who'd like to start? Let's go to Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, mayor. I'm just curious if um since the state parks is also building that campground. Has the city been in touch with them and collaborating with them perhaps or maybe do we want to connect the trails? Are they um We definitely have been collaborating. Um State Parks has been a a huge good partner with this. um they'll be connected in that um that our little triangle there. So that becomes a big loop and then they'll be able to take go from down there to the entrance to the park and that becomes a nice trail connection that way. Great on the beach range road. Correct. On Beach Range Road.

Sounds like so far they're not physically collaborating as far as economy of scale. You got the heavy equipment do some heavy equipment work. Okay. Okay. Can I add on to that? Yeah, please. Because their project goes till March of 2028. Um, and I forgot if there's be any construction here by March of 2028. Didn't sound like it, right? No. So, it sounds like they're going to be offsite by the time that we're on site.

Okay. Okay. And then, um, you know, I've I've repeatedly asked through the state parks. They have a great program at Ayar State Beach where there's um sand accessible wheelchairs. And so when we get to that point, I know that's years down the line, but I would just like to be thinking that way just so the paths will be stamped concrete or decomposed granite or something just so there is accessibility. Um, and then again, I would just encourage the city while we continue to go down um this project path to just be updating in some capacity and and keeping in in contact with the campground because I I would hate to miss an opportunity of something. I don't know what that is, but um it it just seems like a natural um connection and that the visitors of the campground will want to of course come and and and visit the the beautiful beautiful state beach. So,

good. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Jenny. Council member McCarthy. Thank you, Mayor. Um, you know, I'll start by just continuing to express my disappointment that this funding and these this plan didn't come to Central Marina where arguably I think it's needed most. Um, having said that, um, a few comments on this plan. One is with regards to ADA accessibility, there's nothing that I would want more. However, I agree with the consultants that it's incredibly difficult in this area and arguably not possible. Um, even at Marina State Beach, I don't know that it's possible. I mean, I I've never pushed one of those uh sand wheelchairs. I'd love to rent one just to see how because I I suspect, you know, I'm a fairly robust person. I suspect I would have trouble even trying to push somebody um down a path like that in the sand. Um, I'm increasingly concerned about the 20-year maintenance cost. Um, I'm looking at Google Maps now and I I, you know, maybe should have put some more effort into this before this meeting, but I'm looking at a boardwalk that exists in 2019, totally clean. 2020 full of sand. 2021 full of sand. 2022 full of sand. So, I can't help but be a little bit angry that state parks, which is a state agency that is responsible for serving all people of the state, is saying, "We don't want to do it, but maybe the city of Marina will do it." Um, and I'm concerned that we are going to agree to a maintenance agreement that we don't even know really how difficult that is. Um, and so I'm wondering if we can get a little bit more feedback before we commit to um, building out something that we don't know what we're getting into. We're going through this at another one of our parks in Marina where a maintenance agreement existed and, you know, it wasn't super clear when we did it and conditions changed. And now we're spending a lot of time arguing um over what that maintenance really looks like and what it means. So I just want to be crystal clear what we're expected to do. Maybe if we can cap it at a dollar

amount or you know if there's um significant damage to those stairs through a coastal storm event, right? Are we responsible for rebuilding the entire thing out of pocket? Right? Like I think those are some questions that we could seek clarity on. So, um, having said that, I'm all for, you know, trying to to make the coast more accessible and, um, building improvements that that we can, especially when we're getting grant money for the design. So, I'll leave my comments there, but I want to be clear that I'm not approving tonight a long-term maintenance liability that I don't even uh understand what it is. Thank you, mayor. All right. Thank you, Brian. Let's go to Council Member Viala.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um yeah, and I have the same concerns and I know that um Ishmael was saying it's going to be minimal, but I didn't hear like a dollar amount and so that concerns me. Um and uh you know this is an agreement with the state and I will say that we have had uh a lot of difficulties with um getting the state parks to do their share of maintenance that apparently you know is is part of their responsibilities on the Marina State um park and dunes parks and so um beach area. And so I just am really um a little cautious about holding them accountable for the other side of the agreement. And do we have any idea how much their side if ours is minimal and their their um maintenance costs are in the order of what? Do you know that?

I I don't know.

Okay. because that that is an area that even several of citizens including myself had gone and spoken many times with the state parks and um it hasn't been uh you know a a terribly responsive um uh endeavor and so I just am concerned about that. um looking forward to to building something wonderful and again to council member Visher's always um diligence about reminding us that that you may have something nice sparkly and new and then without the maintenance it it just it becomes uh you know an unsightly um kind of uh project in the end. So uh let's if we could please clarify that also in looking at um Don Hover's um memo because I'm sorry I'm I'm just reading this today on the dis but um the cost to um u making uh a sidewalk that is is more visually pleasing as they've described it here. How is that how much extra cost is that? And and I know that the the uh it is very nice when you see get the Dunes um shopping mall. That's what you're talking about is kind of a an imprinted and it kind of looks like a boardwalk but it's not. It's concrete. Um that that is a nice style and and I'm and I just need to know like how much extra cost that is because it would be a beautiful thing and these these kind of things are going to stay forever. So, if we can possibly do something like that, I think that would be very beneficial for the future, knowing that we're we're never going to rip it out and start building something later, uh, no matter how desirable it might be. And also, um, could we, Lane, have you have you read carefully all of these or did you just receive it, too? because I'd like some

idea of for each one of these things um that uh that uh he has brought up that we really look at each individually and and and come up with can we do it? What kind of money does that involve? And one actually seems like um it's going to reduce the cost. So that might be something that we can balance with the more decorative um uh pathway concrete. But um so and I and I do like the low cable barrier system which they're saying that would be less um uh you know less cost and more visually compatible. So if we can take the other ones too and I just want to say about the pet way stations there there are no dogs right allowed on the I know that that people will walk at on the trails and the main drag but it still holds right on state parks we don't allow dogs. I'm not positive what the regulations are.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that their campground dogs will be allowed down there. Okay. Because I I thought it was pretty firm that there are no dogs allowed on um yeah on the hard surfaces on the roadway they're allowed. They're just not allowed on the beach.

On the beach. Okay. So, you know, wherever we're placing these headway stations, we have to be um a little bit um um knowledgeable about where those places are because if we put any nearby a place that is no dogs, you're you're basically inviting dogs in those areas. So, I just want to caution about that. But yes, if there are dog dogs allowed, we we should do petway stations. Um but anyway, um and I don't understand so much the meshing things, but um if you could please at um I don't know. I I guess you'll you'll do it. Uh we don't it doesn't come back to council, but you'll you'll figure this out and and accommodate as much as you can.

Well, I I think it depends on what council gives us direction. If um if you have a list of things that you want us to take back um to uh work with our consultant, take back to state parks and the coastal conservy, we can certainly do that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Kathy. Mayor Prom Bisher.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you uh for the letter from Shay. Um I agree with the boardwalk if we can try to get that in. I know it's pretty labor intense. I happen to be watching from my window when they did it in the park next to us. And I always wanted to ask why is the that the mold, if that's the word, it's narrower than the pathway. So they had to there were three or four men. They had to line it up and then wins the mold and then do the the next to line it up with the pattern. Anyway, I I've always wanted that and never asked that question. So there might be some cost saving, but I don't know. There might be a reason why it they cannot make it longer, but it was cool to see them do it because I love it. It looks really nice. It's so Please try to get at least in a quote for that. And uh the bridge, yes, MST um the surf busway includes uh changing the railing because that is way too low. But I don't know the design and I don't know if our mayor has looked into that because he's usually good at Mr. Lado. I was do you know the design for MST for the 8th Street overpass? I've never looked into that one.

Because that's a good uh thing to look into because that will be pretty um significant what what people will see. I do you know I don't know what the design is but I do know that they'll be raising it up to I know it'll be higher but it might be just industry design like not pretty and this is our chance especially if maybe the developer has some extra money to make it beautiful. Okay. I'm just trying Mayor Prom you know that we talked about this kind of an issue with the fifth street underpass. Yes, we did look there where it was going to be sort of a Kwall Yeah. design. Yeah.

And now it's going to be uh a concrete wall with nice art on it engraved like you see on bridges and freeways and stuff like that. So it's not ugly.

Uh but now we're talking about 8th Street overpass which is way more visible to many more people. So, um, somebody mentioned the coordinate with everybody involved. So, um, uh, okay. Oh, the wheelchair, by the way. I know the wheelchair, the beach wheelchair, they're they're pretty easy to push. It's amazing. But there, of course, you you will still have that elevation, so that makes it harder. But once you're flat, it's they're cool. Yeah. And Okay. And for council member McCarthy and other people in Marina who would have liked to see some of the money or all of the money go to central marina. This beach is not accessible for anybody who is not really in good shape. You might be able to get down but you still need to get up. It's it's it's it's and it's for a lot of people. The the CSMB they walk there. It's it's that entire area. It's it's it will serve many many people. Um see is my time up already or

well if you if you had it bit more been coming. maint I'll just mention the maintenance. I so agree we need to know exactly what will be our our responsibility and what will not be our responsibility so that there's no questions and I think I read somewhere that the garbage cans will be serviced by state parks so I assume also the pet the the dog stations and um so but there needs to be no question if anything and if anything breaks yeah I would suspect I would hope that we are not responsible as a city to place to to rebuild things that break. And I also agree with the the um erosion. I have a picture of our family sitting on that bench with that overlook from 2013. Then the bench was lower lower and then the bench was gone. And that's in in less than 12 years that happened in like about 10 years from a regular bench to no bench. So yeah, I'll wait. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. So, Lane, once we theoretically do the construction, we're on the hook um in perpetuity to do the maintenance. And my question is, well, that's us going the extra mile to get the grant and get the seek construction money to get to grant funds there. Why wouldn't why would we have the role of maintaining what we put in on state parks property? That is just their requirement. they they would not allow us to

um their budgets are so tight they they can't even meet their needs and so that was a non-starter. Okay. Um

All right. So So that's that's a red flag for us, you know, because we too have always will have more need than the ability to meet their needs. Um this proposed cable steps um as Brian McCarthy and others have said, Council McCarthy and others uh it's going to get sand on it obviously in ro in u heavy wind or or rain events it's going to get uh more sand on it and because of that the state parks has essentially abandoned their boardwalk near reservation road and the one down at Monterey Beach, it gets abandoned a while and then they'll redo it, but it's major. Uh down there, they get more tourists, I suppose, so they they redo it more often. Up here, you can't find the boardwalk. It's buried. And so when this gets buried, it's going to be our job to unberry and in perpetuity. And you can see the slope on it. So, um it's going to be a big job. And initially, as our public works director said, you know, we we'll blow it off with a blower, but when it gets four or five inches of sand, you know, it's it takes a lot more time to do that. Uh so I guess my question is theoretically, what happens if we decide we don't want the maintenance liability on this component and that we don't want to build it? Is there money savings to do something else or are we in default because we used grant money to plan it and now we can't do it?

I I don't know. Um I'm not sure if Renee would know that, but that okay, that's something we could ask him if we want to pull out at this point.

Not pull out, but a component, you know, not do the proposed cable steps because they look it looks like a a heavy a heavy ticket item. Uh Renee, can you help us out here? If we just pulled out and we decided, you know, at this point we don't want to do any of these compon one of these components or another and we're talking about the cable steps. Yes, I'm have to look at the grant agreement in terms of what the city has committed to so far, but I anticipate that um there is also from the state parks not a commitment to fund the construction although lanes kind of talked to them, city managers kind of talked to them about hopefully kind of budgeting that now. Uh but I think any maintenance obligation would only arise if something gets constructed.

Yeah. So the question is do do we face any kind of penalty or bad reputation anything that's negative if we decide not to do the cable steps because of the maintenance liability that would be incurred. Um I I I think that's it's difficult to to know at this point. I don't have the the grant agreement uh in front of me but I can get back to you on that. Um I don't know that I have a copy of it.

Okay. Thank you. Now, on those steps, thinking about liability, uh we have a dog park. It's flat. It's pretty simple. Someone slipped and tore their ham spring, tore their hamstring. Uh they're not suing us, but uh they want they're asking uh us to do a better job at the Hilltop dog park keeping the concrete sandfree. It's a it's a it's a sand dog park. The point is uh the the gentleman who fell said it's slippery, it's unsafe. Now we've been notified and so we have to figure out what to do with that dog park surface which is flat and very small compared to this. So when you talk about these steps and people going up and down these steps, especially going down these steps, uh who is liable, the state parks or the city, are we liable for everything that we construct and install and maintain? I'm would have to go back to the agreement. Okay. Double check that

again. That would be clarified uh in an agreement with state parks regarding uh once those improvements are proposed to be constructed. Right now, we're just in the planning phase as I understand it. Okay. Sometimes there's nature damage, wind storm, sometimes there's vandalism. Sometimes things break over time. So all of the things that we put in the dumpster enclosure, the picnic tables, the interpretive signs, these cable post barriers, as they get bent and and busted or graffitied or dirty or aged, weathered, is it going to be our job to make them good again in perpetuity?

That that's my understanding. We'll double check that. And I'm I don't think it's in perpetuity. I think it's 20 years. Okay. And then at 20 years, uh, does the state park take over or do we have the choice of continuing or removing? I would have to double check that.

Okay. I know how much trouble it is at Lock Batten Park on other people's property. The maintenance for tenant versus landlord responsibilities. So, if a if a bench needs to be painted, we paint it. That's maintenance. If a pen if a bench is broken or vandalized, you need a new bench. Is it the landlord or the tenant? And so in this case, if if there's vandalized benches or other serious damage done, you know, where does maintenance turn into the landlord and is there a landlord? You know, maybe maybe where the landlord when it comes to responsibility. So that would be nice to know. Well, all these components that we're going to put in, who's responsible if they get busted or need replacement? Because that's beyond maintenance, but maintenance is a liability. But then replacement is isn't is a different issue too. Is the CCC the coastal California coastal commission very involved and aware and or does has this have to go to them in the future?

Yeah, that'll go to them in the sequel process. Okay. Have they been involved to date so they know what we're doing and that kind of thing? I'm I'm not positive. Okay. Is it your opinion in state parks that this will fly through the coastal commission that they'll love it? Uh yeah. Yeah. Okay. The one of the main goals of the coastal act is to improve access to the beach. Okay. Especially to um uh ADA improvements and things like that. Okay. I've gone plenty long. Um and uh so I'll turn it back to Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. And I appreciate your comments because I honestly hadn't even really thought of the liability question. Um um I do love my friend AI here and just a brief question of what potential maintenance costs could be are constant sand burial up to 10 to $30,000 per year depending on frequency trail erosion 20 to 80,000 per event. Um overlook structural repairs 50k to 200k depending on the structure size depending on damage of things like salt air corrosion. shifting and undermining footings, railing damage, doing restoration requirements,5 to $25,000 periodically. Vandalism5 to $15,000 annually. Um so worst case scenario, you know, with extreme conditions could easily be $100,000 a year. That's probably um pretty aggressive. Um but my my earlier comments about Well, let me ask a question to staff. Can we handle $100,000 a year to maintain this port? It's more of a question, Ishmail. Um, I think we're going to be adding a lot of new parks and our our maintenance costs are going to go up

because here's what's going to happen. The trail is going to get covered with sand. People are going to complain just like they do at all of our other parks. It's a it's the California coast that is eroding. I mean, there was an entire book written about the city of Marina and how our, you know, we have coastal erosion and sea level rise and all of those things. It's going to be a significant maintenance liability. So, I don't want to derail the project, but I absolutely do want to go renegotiate what this maintenance agreement looks like. I don't want to take on legal liability for three months, let alone 20 years. Um, and I want to try to negotiate language that says we will work to maintain to the best of our ability, but as fiscal our fiscal conditions change, as the environment changes, as um global warming takes hold, I mean, there's going to be unforeseen circumstances that, you know, future councils are going to look back and yell at us for entering into this agreement. So, um I would like to think that state parks would understand that and um be willing to to kind of work with us and collaborate on that language a little bit. And if they're not, I'm not so sure that I'm I'm willing to commit to the project. So, um and much of that thinking actually just after hearing the mayor talk about, you know, some of the concerns. So, um that's where I'm at right now. Um and I don't think we have to make this decision tonight. Right. We're not entering into building anything out or

Yeah, correct. that that that is this is concept. That's why we're coming here to get concept and your feedback before we go to the next step. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, Ryan. Council member Biala.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um that's uh for me when I look at this because I I've walked that part of um the state park for a long time and it really um has changed over time and it's gotten more dangerous and harder to navigate and they periodically do things to fix it and then it's back again. So that's you know something we have to consider. Um but to me this is such an important fix. this is such an important benefit for the access of people to that beautiful area. So I I think that as you're saying that we should put some kind of disclaimers somehow to protect us financially in the future for things that might happen. Um but I wouldn't I personally would would not like to say that if we don't get that completely to our liking that we would walk away from this project. I think we we have to we we have a good starter um uh amount with a grant and I think it's really important. It's a beautiful area and I would just um be really um disappointed to to see us not go forward on it. Um in in addition to what the mayor has said about the liabilities for people falling because of you know shifting sands and covering the boardwalks etc. there's the cost of maintenance, but again, I don't know, and maybe uh the attorney can advise us on this. I mean, you know, sand is just part of what our parks are about. I mean, now if we're say we build something and now we're liable because somebody might slip on on the sand that's on the sand dunes. I mean, that's kind of a, you know, a strange concept. So, is there any way legally that we can post things? I mean, I know that even at the pump track that we have signs because we're trying to protect our liability, you know, that there are

certain things that if you don't wear helmets, if you if you you you take your own risks and in and and I don't I don't know the exact verbiage on those signs, but is there anything that we can post that will help us with the liability? Otherwise, if we're to assume the off chance of somebody slipping on sand in a, you know, in a in in a sand area, I mean, that's we we we don't have enough money to protect ourselves for every event like that. So, is there anything that legally helps us in mitigate that?

So, certainly signage uh can can help uh like the signage that you described. Uh, one of the things that's um will probably be negotiated I I would think that perhaps the state would want to shift some of its liability uh given that the maintenance would be the responsibility of the city but uh I I assume uh that there would be some uh negotiation that regard um I don't think that we can take on um you know the the liability will be whatever we take on will need to be um pretty specific. Um but but again that's to be negotiated as we move forward with this project.

And then to think of um the signage as a way to mitigate some of our risk whatever on appropriate signage for both uh parties in this respect right to mitigate the the potential risk to both the city and the state.

Right? I'm going to put it in a bigger picture and we have far more exposure in all of our paths and and parks and everything around the city and and putting signs constantly if that that won't work. And so I don't think it signs it uh is going to be a huge difference because we had the same liability. And Rene can jump in here, but um the state um gives a lot of um liability protection in our in our parks and our our our public areas like that. Um and um somebody slips and falls, there's a leaf, they slip and fall. Um generally we are protected from that. Now if there's gross ne negligence on our part, it's a hazard that we know about and and it's and we know it's a hazard and it's injurous and we don't do anything about it, then it's a very different standard that that we become liable. But there any park, any dog park, there's going to be sand, there's going to be leaves, there's going to be twigs that fall in it. And and generally we are protected under that standard. But Renee can offer a lot more help.

That that is correct. And you know, not to get into too much uh too many specifics, but in general, uh unless we we've known about it and we do not do anything about it, then it's going to be potentially risk liability. Okay. Well, that's comforting to hear that maybe we're overthinking all the liability issues. And I appreciate that feedback. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Kathy. Mayor Pro Tim Fisher. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I hate signs. People know. No, I know we need some signs to to show where the park is and to explain what's there. But I have understood we have had the same in um discussion at HOA with parks. And I have understood the main thing is that you maintain everything in good order. And um because otherwise I've asked signs, okay, how large does the print need to be? do they need to where do they need to be at each end entrance point? How many languages? Um once you start and you need to maintain the signs we have so many signs in this city that are not readable anymore that it it's so the the fewer signs the better and um I would think I just had two you won't believe it just two um this is very detailed about the design or the concept that we got. The bicycle parking for me is uh really minimal and and why is it in the pathways? So, and I know this is just a plan, but I would um encourage plenty of park uh bicycle parking not on the pathways outside. And then the other question I had is um I've asked this before and there's no there are no plans to get the public transit bus to that parking lot because that's not being done or whatever. I still hope that sometime in the future there will be a bus stop there for people who use public transit because why would we allow vehicles to be parked close to the beach and not offer the same access for people who use a public transit bus. So

at least the parking lot does have a place for buses that can pull over.

But it says parking. I thought maybe they mean that school buses will come and it will park and then there will be space for so I hope that that can be included for potent potentially future bus service. So thank you this is it and I agree with everybody here we need to know as much as possible out the maintenance. It needs to be spelled out but I also hope that we will not walk away from this because this is such a great opportunity to offer beach access to a lot of people there. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much, Elizabeth. So, I'm thinking down the line of not spending the money on the beach access trail. It'd be nice to know how much these different components cost, but at least the beach access trail. It would be nice how much it costs because it will be difficult to maintain and and um if we don't do that, we might have money to do other things such as um colored and stamped concrete. So, it would be good to get the costs of things that aren't included that are upgrades that we we all agree would be great. Of course, you know, we'll we'll get into the millions by the time we're done totaling all those perhaps, but still, it's nice to know in case we want to mix and match some upgrades with some deletions. Uh, unless Lane, there's some commitment that we have to do all these uh components that are listed in the staff report.

Right now, everything is is just concept. And so I think whatever feedback um that we want uh whether it be you want to um upgrade some of the components I' I've heard different things of um if we all want to focus on like you said the the cable step area and focus on just the pathway but um we can explore all those options and come back to council. Okay. Um, mayor, I have the I do have the grant agreement. Now, if you wanted to, uh, repeat your question. Uh,

uh, if we don't do the beach access trail, is there any sort of penalty or so bad come our way?

Yeah. Not with respect to the grant agreement. There there's no penalty. This is a planning grant uh a planning and permitting grant. So, uh, if the recommendation from the council was let's not do this access, you know, path, uh, or let's do something else, then potentially that there that would be a conversation with state parks and the coastal conservancy as to what can be done with with this grant. U, uh, what further planning and permitting can be done with this grant.

Okay? because I think we'll forever be scratching our head wondering why are we on state parks property sweeping off this walkway. Uh and so it would be nice to get the no or the yes to the question state parks if we plan it and we build it will you maintain it? And it sounds like we already have that answer being no but is that in any is that in writing in the agreement you have in front of you? that is not in the agreement in front of me and it might uh be and link can correct me if I'm wrong. It might be sort of their standard uh approach that they um undertake when they when they fund these types of projects.

But I I think once we get firmer maintenance cost it that will be firm from the state. Yes, they'll do this. No, they won't do that. So, I'm sure we can get that. Does the agreement you have in front of you, Renee, parse out who's responsible for maintenance versus replacement versus repair? Uh, no, this is just a planning uh agreement. Planning and permitting grant agreement. Okay. So, the only thing this the the coastal conservancy is funding right now uh was the planning and permitting for potential, you know, greater access to the beach. So,

and as a result of that grant, what is before you is this conceptual plan. Okay. All right. I've taken enough time. I I'll come back a little bit later. Let's go to Council Member McCarthy.

Thanks. Just two quick follow-ups. Um I think I heard from Doug and it was unclear if he was representing uh the HOA or Shea Holmes, but either it doesn't matter either way. Um an offer to be a stakeholder and I just really want to take advantage of that to some extent. Um, I don't know exactly what that means, but I I would hope that um the city manager might reach out and and just see what they they're thinking in terms of being a stakeholder. Um, and then my my other comment just because I love to be databased and maybe poke at my colleague, Council Member Bisher. Um, I I looked up while I was here, Marina State Beach is at 50 foot elevation and 250 ft to the beach. This one is at 80 foot elevation but over 500 feet to the beach. If I remember my algebra class, rise over run. Presumably this the slope is actually steeper at Marina State Beach. Um if I again if I remember algebra right, which maybe I don't. Um but my point is beach access all up and down the coast is very difficult. Um and and yes, I've been to both of these beaches. Um and it is hard. you know, it's it's a a little bit of a workout, right, just to get back to the parking lot. But yeah, just wanted to share that with with the DAS.

All right. Thank you, Brian. Mayor Pro Tim Fisher. Yeah, just one more remark about um coordinating everything including the uh beach range roads bicycle path which is now if you look from above Google maps the bicyclists and the pedestrians are being forced into this narrow opening because there's this this gate for uh the vehicles. It it's weird. So, please look at everything that the intersection there for pedestrians, bicyclists, and the occasional uh car that goes there. Okay. Thank you, Elizabeth. Um, in the Sha letter, one railing is too low, another fence is too high. The eight street bridge railing that's there now it's said in this letter is too low. So encouraging more people to cross that bridge today. If they fall over it's death, right? Because it's the freeway underneath. If they fall over. So, if we do any improvement to the walkway and somebody in the future falls, are our city attorney, are we liable because we we we we modified it?

Um, so so and you're talking about what on on state parks. uh the A Street Bridge if you walk across it on a sidewalk that we make better uh and someone falls over the low railing that's there now. So we are not making those improvements. Um that is strictly MST. So okay, that's outside of our scope.

All right. So is this something that we can mention to MST that the existing bridge is too the railing is too high and is it possible for a structurally sound uh higher decorative railing to replace or add to what's there? Great that we're not responsible. Great that MSD is doing it. I'm sure it'd be more expensive to make it taller and decorative, but it'd be a question that we should ask anyway because it's brought to our attention and it's a good idea. And then lighting. Um I guess no one's supposed to be there after sunset. Is that right?

Yeah. The state parks closes their beaches down or the parking lot that sunset. Okay. So, lighting for safety would be I suppose for emergency access or what? Why would we need lighting? No, just because I know the answer to this. Oh, yeah. Um, the parking lot closes, but I don't The Coastal Commission rarely prohibits people from being on the beach any time of day or night. I mean, pedestrian access is usually open. I think in Huntington Beach, there's a few locations where the Coastal Commission has okay closing the beach to pedestrians, but I think that's pretty rare.

Oh, okay. All right. Now, if you do have nighttime visibility with lights, it is safer, but it also attracts more people, right? So that's something the state parks might not agree with. Go ahead, Mayor Prom. I know from the MSD project, they're only allowed to add lighting at the underpass, the fifth street underpass, and the coastal commission doesn't allow any more lighting. So I don't know, it's probably the same for here, right? So Okay. um have we fully been in communication with MST and what they're doing on 8th Street to marry up to what we're doing on extension of to the beach from 8th Street Bridge.

The consultant has been doing that and so I'm not sure what extent, but the consultant has been talking with them.

Okay. Seems like it'd be nice to have a on-site field visit between us and MST to say you're going to do this, you're going to end here. We're going to pick up where you leave off. You know, are we are we doing the best we can to coordinate construction planning and all that kind of thing? Okay. So, the one that's too low or the one that's too high is the fencing along the roadway to the beach parking area. Um, the fencing that's proposed, I don't know what it looks like, but it's said here in the Sha letter that a continuous 4 foot or taller fencing along the roadway is visually intrusive and more expensive. Can we do the the lower cable post barrier system, you know, uh, similar to what you have shown in this this uh this picture going down the coast access trail. That's native habitat, too. And so that this is meant to keep people from trampling the adjacent habitat. So if we have a fence going up to keep out of restoration areas, wouldn't it be s uh not safer? Wouldn't it be uh cheaper and less intrusive to have the same kind of coast postcable barrier? I think we should we should ask about that. Uh good point. the pet way stations. I I guess we need those costed out. We need to know where they should go. We need to know if they're in if they should be in the plan because they're not in the plan now. Is that right? I don't see anything to do with uh trash except for a dumpster enclosure.

Yeah, they haven't talked anything about pet waste stations.

Okay. And then I think Shay is talking about the same beach access trail that we're discussing maybe not doing because they're saying the parking lot to the beach to me that's the coastal access trail and they're talking about um mesh fabric along the surface other kinds of uh materials that would um improve accessibility and and and stabilize the sand. you know, it's like a juke netting type of thing. So, um I guess the our direction could be to investigate other materials that could be used on that coastal access trail that might be safer or lower maintenance or lower cost.

We have explored that and you have and yes and coastal concerns in state parks were not willing to do that.

Okay. So, they want uh steps or nothing, wooden steps or nothing. Good. Good to know. All right. Uh, that's it. Um, okay. So, if everyone doesn't object, why don't we start to build a motion? And I think what we're shooting for is direct staff to proceed to 30% design. And I think we can add to that with some of these ideas that might be included in the future design. And and some side issues like cost out this or that whatever it is that we want to do. And if we get too far out of this proceed to 30% design agenda item, we have our city attorney and our city manager to keep us within those sideboards.

Yeah. Just with your comments here, I don't think we can proceed to 30% design. I think you need to give us your feedback. We'll go back to them because I think we'll still be in the concept phase. Okay. So, I'll start the the motion building. Number one, uh we would like some more specifics to liability so we know what we're liable for and what we're not liable for, especially for the d more dangerous things, not the pet stations, you know, but the especially the coastal trail. And number two, that we want some more specifics on who's responsible for maintenance, replacement, repair. And number three, that we want costs. two kinds of costs. Cost for all the components in case we want to add, subtract or improve, and cost for maintenance, replacement, and repair. And you know, the AI trick that Brian did was very helpful, and it just gives us a placeholder ballpark. But we need to know as a council, as a city, what we're in for on money. Very important, right? Um, and then what does the conservancy and state parks think if we don't do the beach access because it's either too costly for maintenance or some other reason? I'll I'll stop there. Um, do others. Well, first let's get a second so we can continue.

Okay. Uh, who would like to add anything to this or subtract anything from it? We'll go to Council Member McCarthy. Thank you, Mayor. Um definitely would like to add that we um reach out to Doug Hoffer and get some clarity on how him or they might want to be a stakeholder. Um and then Mr. Mayor, did you include language about under better understanding the legal liability? Well, I did that was the first thing more specifics on what we're liable for and what we're not liable for. I think I'll just stick with that then for now.

Okay. On the barriers, um I think we should ask the conservancy and the state park service why not a less intrusive lower cable barrier system. I should say less intrusive and or lower. Um for example, their their standard post and cable uh barrier that we're going to put in anyway on the existing trail to the beach. Why not have it up top, too? Uh, and then I guess the liability question we already covered on the too too small, too short of a barrier on the on the bridge. That's not our that's not our issue. Um but another issue is the MST that we um have some conf confirmation that we have enough coordination including a field visit about who's doing what and how our different ideas or or plans are going to mesh up to each other since people are going to walk across MST and they're going to step on our project and then go to the beach. Uh that's that's it. Does the second still hold?

Yes. Can I ask a question on you on the question of liability? You're asking if these improvements get constructed, who is liable if something occurs on those improvements?

Yeah. And specific that's true. And then one specific would be uh can the state parks assume liability almost like a certificate insurance which they don't give out because they're probably self-insured but um can we be in the position of similar to additional insured where where we don't have to worry about being sued that they take care of insurance. Is that even a possibility? Am I saying it right?

Yes. I understand. So, we'll ask about the liability. Um, who's going to be liable? And if we are, they'll probably require that we have insurance and we'll talk about do we need to list them additional insurance. So, we'll explore all. Do they need to do we need to list them or do they need to list us? I was thinking Yeah. So, we'll we'll explore all options on liability with them.

Okay. And we talked about specifics as the first liabilities and then maintenance number one and two in this motion. We didn't talk about so far in this motion asking state parks if they would be responsible for maintenance in the first 20 years, if they'd be responsible for maintenance after 20 years. Those are two different questions. Okay. Um, does the second still hold on that? Yes. All right. Uh, has anyone kept track of the motion? Yes. Yeah. Okay. Do you want to run through it and then people can delete or or add one more time?

Sure. Um I have most of it but not the last couple. Uh you want uh more specifics on liability both um who's insured who will in ensure and then definify each other. More specifics on the maintenance and repair and replacement and replacement. Uh who's responsible? Yes. Who's responsible? Yes. Uh you want cost for all components? Uh cost on all maintenance. Uh can we cut out different components such as the step beach access? Uh reach out to Shay on how they can support.

Yeah. How much money they're going to give us for all this help with the project. um uh want to explore less intrusive and/or lower barrier options with the posting cable, what options we have with that. Uh coordinate with MSD a field visit on their improvements and what they're willing to do and how we can coordinate with them. And will state parks be responsible after 20 years for the improvements and the maintenance? and and would could they be responsible for the first 20 years? Make sure we get the no. Okay.

You know, like in writing or something. I don't know. So, we know what we're going to have to pay for when this comes back to us. Anybody else want to delete or add anything? Council member Yala, just a thought on the liability issues. Do we want to include any recommendations for us to reduce liabilities? like we talked about signage or some some other mechanisms for state effort parks just to clarify so that that is um that is what my job is uh to do so to the extent you don't request it that is what I will do uh anyway

Rene a quick question I'm sorry Renee quick question we're sort of free from liability to some extent at a skate park or a pump back. Uh, is there any similar coverage at a park where we have stairs or is a pump track and a and a wreck facility like a state park somehow different?

And again, you know, in if we were not involved in any respects with this project, state parks would be responsible and liable for any issues that may occur out there. And the issue here is what portion as we construct these improvements may they want to transfer liability to the city. So it will be probably component specific and it will be as to which improvements um you know get get constructed by by the city on state parks. Okay. So I guess I my question wasn't clear. If a skate park, you're at your own risk. In a pump track, you're at your own risk. Why are you not at your own risk if we're walking down a stairway to the beach?

So, again, that would be you would be at your own risk unless there was a known issue um that we then didn't go uh in a reasonable time go repair. So, if there was a step that was broken and we knew about it and we knew it could cause injury and then we didn't do anything about it, then potentially liability may arise. Okay? So, there's no difference if you unfortunately break your elbow at a skate park or you break your elbow on this uh coastal access trail. They both have the same laws involved. Okay. Thank you. All right. Does everyone have any questions or comments before we go to a vote? All right. All in favor, please say I. I. I

Oh, motion uh any any opposition or abstensions? So that motion passes unanimous. Thank you everybody and thank you Lane for doing so much work on this. Great actually as made your team is they did great. So um this will be coming back to council at another time.

All right. So, now we move to a request for proposals perhaps for a long-term concession agreement at the Marine Equestrian Center. And I'll be handling that also, Mayor. Okay.

Um, Belinda, if you could pull up the uh picture of the equestrian center. Great. Thank you. Um so the um for a little background for the property, this is our marine equestrian center. Uh this right here totals about 27 acres, maybe up to 35 and um but we'll say 27 acres right here. Um, currently, uh, um, we own the property, but it came to us from a, uh, from the United States Army. And when it came to us, it was sub subject to uh regulations from the National Park Service because it's a we call it it's a National Park Service conveyance and and those are um deed restrictions are are in perpetuity and and essentially that park has to um be open available to the um public for park and recreation uses. it can't be uh any private type use and that had been the the issues for the previous 20 years with the marine equestrian u association and trying to hit that balance of private boarding private use and and ultimately the national parking service said it was not compliance and and at some point if we operate the park under convi um out of compliance um they will step in and it doesn't revert back the National Park Service. It actually goes to the um government agency. I can't remember which government a general services goes back to them. Uh and then they'll dispose of the property and and

so it it it's a beautiful piece of property and and so our goal is we always want to keep it in compliance with the National Park Service uh regulations. And so back in 1922, um actually the the city had been working for a long period of time, previous city councils, um with the National Park Service, they developed um what is called a program of utilization and and the existing program of utilization is for an equestrian center and equestrian type uses. And so that was approved by the National um park service. And with that approved program utilization, the council then uh went out and we issued a request for a proposal for a concessionire to operate an equestrian center in compliance with our program of utilization. And and we went out through that process. We got a couple proposals back of the city council chose um the Chapperel Corporation as the concessionire for the property and they've been um operating as the concessioner for the property. They're not the owner. It's not a lease with Chappelle. It's an it's a concession agreement and um over the years um the program that they that they put in it was to start the equest center was to develop and expand and get more uses. The property we all know um uh has a lot of improvements. There's a lot of things that have been torn down. We've improved some of the structures and and um and to date the city has probably put about um $650,000 into uh improvements on the property. Um the improvements that we put on the

property came from we had a national park service fund. We have um any rents collected from the property go into that fund. But we also have a cell tower uh that generates a lot of revenue and that stays there. And so that is what has funded those improvements to the property. But most of that funding has now been exhausted. And so the uh this year there had been u multiple breaches in the contract with Chaparel over over various issues. Our city attorney got involved. We um sent them notices in September and again in November. Uh they didn't reply to those notices. We gave them an opportunity to cure. They didn't cure. And so in December of 2025, December 18th, they were given uh a notice that we terminated our concessionire agreement with them. And we have the ability to do that. And and not only the ability, but really the obligation uh to do that. Um the National Park Service uh they don't approve the the concessionary agreement. We approve it. However, it's the same as our airport. They review it for compliance with their National Park Service regulations and if it's not in in compliance, they will they don't approve it, but they will not allow us to to operate that concessionary agreement. And so, uh they're the National Park Service is an important part of the process. They review the draft concession air agreements and they let us know if it's compliance with their regulations and with the deed restrictions on the property. And so right now we we no longer have a a concession agreement with Chaprael. They were given 60 days to vacate the

property with their horses and and their equipment that expired around February 16th. out in that period of time. Uh there's an individual uh Doug Hatran who's um has an arrangement with with uh had an arrangement with Chapel and and we don't know what that arrangement is. We um chapel does not have the ability um to sub lease nor do we have ability to sub lease that agreement to other people. it has to go through the National Park Service type process and they look at the concession agreements and and we don't have the ability nor does Shaper to say, "Okay, we're going to subleasase and let other people do it." Um um those don't work with regulations. And so there um one thing that we talked with the council about was you potentially uh looking at a temporary arrangement with uh Mr. Hatran while um while um while we went out with concession air agreement and and um and work with him with his horses on the property, but some other issues occurred and and discussion with our city attorney. Um um the path forward really is the the um concessionary agreement chapel has been terminated and our only path forward is um and that we're asking direction from the council tonight is to issue an RFP for a new concessionaire and that would be wide open to anyone whether it be um uh different organizations Mr. Hatran, anyone can respond to that concessionire agreement. We expect that that process will take uh 5 to 6 months.

Um uh staff will be looking at very very closely. Um the the problem with with an equestrian center is horses are are very expensive to maintain and that's why you see equestrian centers just closing down all across the country. And the areas that have equestrian centers, they make their money off the private boarding. Well, because of National Park Service constraints, we can't have private boarding. And so the main revenue sources of equestrian centers is not allowed at our equestrian center. And that's the core of a lot of the problems that was the core of a lot of SHAP Rails problems is everyone had great ideas and great suggestions of their improvements to the property, but you have to have a revenue stream to do it. And and the other activities uh did not cover the cost of maintaining horses are expensive. the veterinary costs, the feeding costs, the cleanup costs, the staffing costs, the security costs um are very expensive and if you can't board on the property um it's a huge challenge and that was a and so I'm not speaking anything uh bad about chapel um they they struggled um with those issues and they had a great vision and uh and that that's the challenge with the property is how you can have equestrian uses um can't have private boarding, but so your ancillary uses, they had had line dancing, they had um lessons and riding to um taking horses out in the paths, but um maintaining horses on the property is expensive and and that that's the problem. So, I'm I'm not going to sugarcoat it and say um uh yes, um uh it's solvable, but on the other hand, uh question centers do

operate and and if the council is interested, I think the best option is and and staff is recommend at that point in time is put a concessionary agreement out there, see if other people are are interested, look at that and and see if that's a pro proposal that the business business plan seems to make sense and it's something that we want to uh try again if we want to try to keep equestrian uses up there. When we uh when the council made the decision on the previous uh concession or agreement with Chaparel, um you part of what we looked at was it it is something that not only our residents would enjoy, but it's something that would bring tourists to the area that would bring um sales tax dollars and and would be something that economically would be good for the city and and something that we could support. And and so at this point, staff at work recommending let's try um a concessionary agreement one more time and see what proposals we get and and evaluate them with staff and see where you go from there. Now, as a um alternative, um uh we don't have to have equestrian uses and uh and I've talked again with the National Park Service U representative and and he confirmed that we could look at other uses on the property. Um we could look at other parks and uh recreation uses as law as their their public uses. And I in the staff report I mentioned it um just off the cuff ideas. We could do a a big bike park there. We could do ropes course and and you could do camping. Um you could do kind of sports courts. There's a lot of different things you could do. Uh we'd have to go through different process with the National Park Service and and put together a new program of utilization and see if that is something that they would approve and and then go

through um that process. And so that's kind of where we're at. We want to get um feedback on council on where you want to go with that at this point. Okay. Before we go to public comment, I have a question for our city attorney. Um there might be some people that want to talk about whether to uh terminate uh the agreements with current the current concessionire uh agreement and and the staff that are there now. Is that within tonight's purview or are we just talking about the future?

So really the item is to get uh some direction to staff on the future of this park. So the agreement has been terminated. So that's not the subject of this council item. That's just background and is the basis for requesting direction tonight. Um given that there is no current agreement in place. So, if I'm um if I disagree with the termination that's already happened and tonight I want to say that we shouldn't have done that or I want to ask exactly why did you terminate them? Are those the kind of is that the kind of input we want or are we really just limiting input to um doing an RFP for equestrian or doing something alternative to equestrian use?

Yes, mayor. So, I wouldn't want to shut off anybody's first amendment rights to comment on something that is, you know, related to the item, but I do want to say that what is being requested here is again the future sort of direction of the Marina Equestrian Center. Uh, as to the specifics, those were provided in the staff report. Uh, if other information is requested, certainly uh anybody can request that information from the city to the extent it's public record. So, they can go that route. Okay. And can citizens get more information if they do a public records uh information request?

Yes. Any records that are disclosable will be disclosed and those that are not and that are exempt from disclosure would not be disclosed. But yes, the public records would be the way to get information from the city if they were interested uh in any specifics. Okay. Thank you, Renee. Sure. All right. Let's go to public comment. Starting with those of you that are here in person, you'd like to talk, just come on up.

Thank you. Um, my name is Gail Comr and I am the founder and the um, director of Hidden Hills Ranch in Prunale. We are proud to be se celebrating 30 years service um, to our community as a nonprofit organization. We utilized mostly rescued animals to provide educational and outdoor programs to over 200 kids a week as well as providing summer camps that were just voted the best in Monterey County including a student leader program, horse and pony lessons, preschool nature classes, as well as popular community events. We are also contracted with the county to provide programs to special needs children and at risk and incarcerated youth, taking miniature horses to them for therapeutic programs. We often have waiting lists. We have limited parking and we hear that it's far too far for some families to prot participate as often as they would like. If the opportunity became available, we would love to offer our services to Marina and the Monterey Peninsula. We have so many requests for trail rides, weight lists for riding lessons and preschool classes. The equestrian center would be ideal and easily accessible to reach more families with healthy outdoor opportunities and connection. We have success with executing fun family activities, safe and educational riding lessons and shows with zero incidents or accident insurance claims. And we do not and have not ever boarded horses. Marina has developed into such a vibrant community, why not offer sought out community and equi programs? We believe there is much to learn from history and that is why we have an historic village at our ranch for hands-on learning. I can envision an engaging museum highlighting the history of the war horses and dogs. My father is almost a

hundred years old, a World War II Purple Heart vet who will be laid to rest at the local beautiful veteran se cemetery. Our program's director's military father actually had a war horse at the equestrian center. The history of the property is invaluable and must be thoughtfully and respectfully preserved and accessible. There aren't many places that provide horseback riding experiences. The peninsula is a world-class tourist destination and without an opportunity to ride historic historic trails and view our scenic bay is unfortunate. It's funny, but even though we own 24 horses, when we go on vacation, we still pay ride horses. I am here to say that Hidden Hills Ranch has a long proven record of success and we would be honored to carry on sharing the wonderful world of horses and create quality community activities and events alongside Amanda Becker who was actually a beloved employee before you acquired her services. Whatever is decided, I truly hope it will remain a facility.

I'm sorry, I have to ask you to stop. Okay. But it was fantastic information. Thank you very much. Thank you. Especially that part about Amanda.

Good evening, council members. My name is Duchan Tatumovich and I'm a Marina resident and also a president of the Montre Bay Amateur Radio Association. And uh in that role I'm speaking to you today. I just wanted to um basically uh remind council members that part of the equestrian center is actually the uh the high frequency radio uh facility that exists in that one tenth basically of that of that 27 acres or whatever the the actual area is. And that is also a a historical resource because the building and the facility itself used to be the military uh auxiliary radio part of the military auil auxiliary radio system Mars and it still operates as as a Mars facility for the air force and the army. So uh I think that you know when when looking into into uh developing this property that element needs to be kept in mind because uh it is essential to to keep that that part of history just like uh it was uh demonstrated a moment ago and I would like to invite all the uh council members if they're uh if they have time to maybe uh visit the facility this coming Saturday um between 10 and noon. Uh and we can show them around and show them the the facility and its history because the uh the we are planning on uh setting up interpretive display to to highlight the history of the building.

Excuse me, Duchan. We we want to hear what you're saying, but can you tie it to whether we should uh issue a request for proposal or alternatively do other programming? I can and that was about that was about to happen. I was just going to say that when you do issue the the request for proposal, you clearly state that you know the if you if you will the the southern half of it is horse related more than equestrian related more than anything else that the northern part is has should have a different purpose or something like that. So that was my point here. Thank you so much.

Thank you for all the information you saw on it. Happy retirement. been retired for about three weeks now. Thank you.

In my research on the Marine Equestrian Center and the ham radio station, it was really interesting to see that that ham radio station was involved with the telemetry for the invasion of Normandy because the signal bounces off the ocean and it's excellent and strong. So, that has always thrilled me. I just want to urge you do not give up on the marine equestrian center horses. The horses are a unique and deep asset in uh this this uh city. There is a 200 plus page website online on the horses and the military history of the Marine Equestrian Center. I personally wrote the application that put the Marine Equestrian Center on the National Register of Historic Places for its um its unique identity in uh Army Military History. This was the last stand of the US Warhorse. This Marine Equestrian Center has enjoyed 86 years of continuous horse use. Um, my group, Friends of the Ford Warhorse, put on uh horse-based events that attracted visitors from all over the country. One man came from Ohio two years in a row, from Washington State, New Mexico, up and down our state. um there is huge potential there and um consider adding not eliminating activities. This can be done and I'm I'm uh grateful for this speaker who who uh attested to what she can do with horses there. Um you know the city when I s first started getting involved was always talking about Marina is a

worldass city. Well, it can be if we really capitalize on the assets we have, build it on the outdoor recreation we have. This can be a surprising realized worldclass city of its own little size and character that we can all be very proud of. But we have to grasp the elements that we have and capitalize on them. Don't kick them to the curb. Thank you. Thank you, Margaret and Gail. before you. Thank you, Gail.

Mayor, before the next figure, just a quick point of order. I'd like to get some clarification on the parcel. And I know we've talked about this privately, city manager, but it it's one parcel, and I'm confused how we cannot talk about the amateur radio station, but talk about the equestrian news. It doesn't make sense to me. I you know, the city attorney wants to chime in. And I mean I understand that we are talking about the RFP for the equestrian center but the the federal conveyance of the land was for one parcel which involved a ham radio station and an equestrian center.

So blind if you can pull up the map. Um what this kind of this shows the whole 27 to 30 acre parcel, but the equestrian center is really only 14 58 15 acres. And so this light area is the equestrian center and and and so the the the equestrian the concessionary agreement did not deal with any of that larger arsenal. But it but it is well it's one parcel. There's not a larger parcel and a smaller parcel. It's one parcel. APN 031251014.

Correct. It is one big parcel. The concession agreement is just on the 14 acre part of and I understand that we're talking about the concession agreement or the potentially the equestion use or other uses I think is listed in the staff report. But I do think it's certainly appropriate to allow anybody to talk about the entire parcel if if they would like. So, I just kind of want to put that on the record. Okay. Thank you, Brian. And welcome back. Sorry we didn't get to this Tuesday when you were here.

That's okay. Let me just Hold on. Let me put my thing up before you start timer. Where's Ne? My own timer so I can see where I am. Okay. Hi, my name is Natalie and thank you for having me this evening. Um, I um appreciate the comments that were made before me. Um, and I do, it was my understanding that this was supposed to be preserved as a, um, a, um, equestrian facility. And so, um, it works really well with the Ford Wildlands because that's an area that you can ride horses. And, um, so the the proximity of the parcel to the wildlands and the ability to get there is really important to an equestrian facility. Um, I ride horses in the past. I've ridden horses there before, um, up until, you know, they were they were told they had to stop. And, um, I will say that I am not really sure that Marina, the council, understands um, how rare this is. It is to have an equestrian facility. It's incredibly rare, getting more rare all the time. Um and you know Pebble Beach, Big Su areas of the valley, a lot of the um the stables have been privatized. So you can't even rent or use horses. This is one of the really this is the only facility where one can come whether you can afford to own a horse or not and you can rent or take lessons um go on a trail ride. Um, and it's a it's a beautiful facility and it is so incredibly rare. And I just want to let you guys give you a little background. Ecoourism is the fastest growing area of the travel industry. And people are

desiring unique experiences in the outdoors. And just as one doesn't need to be a surfer to enjoy the ocean, one doesn't need to be a horseback rider to enjoy the benefits of horses. And I have volunteered out there. I have um been a part of that community and I just hope that the um council um does a little bit more research about trying to make it something other than an equestrian center. Bikes and zip lines are not appropriate nearby an equestrian center and they can be put in another location. Equestrian center really can't because you need the access to the wildlands. It's very important and u Marina has a jewel here and I and and it brings me to Marina more and more. I don't actually live in Marina. I live nearby but um I was actually considering buying a home in that neighborhood and had made an offer so I could be closer but you know that doesn't look like it's going to happen now. So, the other thing I want to say is then an undue burden on the the the tenant that is there. Um, moving all those horses and then applying for a permit. Um, it it's just not realistic. They're thousands of pounds and it's just not very realistic. And I really wish that

I'm sorry to ask you to stop speaking, but I need to do that. Okay. I wish that the Sorry, Natalie. Thank you for your comment.

Hi, good evening, Mayor Delgado and the council. I'm Steve Barnett. I'm from 244 9th Street in Marina. Um, appreciate your time. Um, was privileged to be around horses growing up, not so much as an adult during my working years raising a family in the community in the Bay Area. was uh blessed to come here to Marina. Found a little home on 9inth Street with my wife in retirement. Um surprised to find that I have a horse trail, a dedicated horse trail in perpetu in perpetuity um in front of my um in theory in front of my house. Um and three blocks away, we have a historic facility. Um we certainly availed ourselves many walks up to the facility over the years. To be honest with you, we did not feel welcome by the prior folks that were there. We got to know the horses, but not really the people. We tried to trail ride. Um, I'll just spare you the stories. What thrilled when the RFP came about, we had an opportunity to change. Chapperel came in. Was a slow go. Things picked up about three years ago when Doug came on. Got to know him pretty well last year. I say, "Doug, I need a one credit of Social Security. I'm about ready to sign up for Medicare." So, I worked there hard for five months and then said, "That's enough. I'll do volunteer. I'll come every week. Don't pay me. I love being here. It's an incredible facility. It's been an incredible opportunity. The Easter event, I couldn't believe the people that came and the cultures that interacted and some people had never been around a horse. This was unbelievable. The vision that was there. Uh, I saw the mayor and of course Leizabeth at the uh um arts festival last fall line dancing with the college students coming out just picking up momentum with Cassandra coming on board to help her husband in the last six or seven months. Um, has everything been perfect? No. But I'll tell you this, it's an incredible opportunity in the

midst of weeding, watering, and shoveling. And you know what I mean? I always stop to make sure that everyone has an opportunity and realizes they're welcome there. I act as a dosent and everybody can't believe I said, "Do you realize what this is? What this was?" And they're in awe of that. There's something there for everybody. Look online at the comments from um um Grace Silva Santella three days ago. She and her husband Ray don't ride horses, but she said Doug and Cassandra, they're gems. They're they're a real asset to this community. I just want to stand by that. I've been around Doug a lot. I was there all last year throughout employee issues and whatever. I've never seen him say a negative word uh or a negative action to a horse or an animal. Um and so I just would just encourage and echo. I appreciate the comments before that this remain a horse facility. Nothing like this. Monterey Bay, the Army history and horses. It's unbelievable. They come from Germany. Thank you.

Thank you, Steve, for that perspective and all you've done there. Anyone else wanting to speak here in person? All right. Uh, let's go online. Jeffrey Markham. Go ahead, Jeffrey.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, city council. U, my name is Jeff Markham. I'm a Marina resident and a frequent visitor to the Marina Equestrian Center. Um, I'm having some problems with the characterization that the city of Marina has been a longtime good steward of the property because my experience in knowing the history is is quite different. For 27 years, the equestrian center was run by the Marine Marine Equestrian Association and uh was allowed to operate with a token rent and the city fully knowing that they weren't complying with the provisions of the quick claim from the National Park Service. And it really wasn't until there was the spectre of potentially losing the property from um David Siginthaler and and his patience with the city that that that that the city began to perform. And even then it took almost 3 years to get an RFP for a concessionire out the door. Um I was very concerned when I learned about who was applying for that concessionire agreement because I knew Chapperel Country Corporation from Levven Park in Militus and had experienced firsthand the poor care, the poor conditions. And as we've learned over time, all of their uh agreements with all the companies uh and and park districts have collapsed. The last one was uh Wonder and Woodside and they've been kicked out of there. It's not that it's not possible for a concessionire to do a successful job as we've heard from Hidden Hills and my grandkids have gone there almost every summer. It's a wonderful program. It's operational, appears to to be self-sustaining or profitable. So, it can be done. It's just that we chose an incredibly poor concession air and I don't feel like we followed up with them appropriately because when I went through a couple times, I think it was 2024, the horses looked really bad and it was about the time Doug and and his partners showed up and things turned around. It was very visible. The horses looked well cared for and things uh looked looked like they were really turning around. I think having talked to them that they think it's a going concern. They're not worried about going out of business. They were willing to invest more money in it. So it there are

concessionires out there who can do the job, want to do the job, and so I think it's behooven on us um to to let them have that opportunity. So my things is really to consider putting out the RFP. Do not consider any alternative uses that are going to replace the equestrian center. I think everybody's open to alternative uses. It's a fairly large property. But also to consider some type of bridge agreement that will allow Doug to maintain the property until that RFP comes in because they're going to have to move all the animals. Very disruptive. the place will go dark. Los Angeles is closed. The potential for vandalism and vagrancy are pretty high. And just think, you know, out of the box a little bit of what we can do to bridge until we go out again. So, you know, for the city to say, you know, we did everything right and, you know, uh I I just have a real problem with it. We we didn't really do our due diligence on on really doing the right things by that property, but we do have an opportunity now to do that. and to lose that history is and the opportunity for all of us to take advantage of that equestrian center is just such a loss. So, let's not make that mistake.

Thank you, Doug. We'll go back to the folks online. Please raise your hand if you'd like to talk. Okay, we'll close public comment. I didn't note any questions. Thank you everyone for commenting. I think we got a good um range of comments. We really appreciate that. Okay. So, let's come to council. Who would like to start off? All right. I'll I'll start off. Um I'll cut to the quick. Uh, I think horses are unique in a city. I think horses are even more unique on city property and available to the public for use. Whether it's to feed them a carrot or look at them or hear their story or talk to the people who work with them, it's an incredible environment to be present in, no matter your age. But especially for people with special needs and young people and vets with PTSD, you know, their special needs, the special opportunities are pretty pretty powerful and they've always been happening there, whether it be the Star Writers or Reser Equestrian Center volunteers or or Doug. I mean, just it's it's just been a great venue for so many reasons. So, I I don't want to give up on equestrian uses. I understand there's other alternatives that can be tried there, but uh although I wasn't in favor of the Chappelle Ranch, I prefer to have kept the Marina Equestrian centers choose their RFP proposal instead of Chaparel Ranch. You know, it was a it was a close vote and Chaparel Ranch won. Um so they didn't do a great job. We didn't do a great job. Doug took over. things

started to improve and there's been some circumstances that make it uh untenable for us to continue with uh Chapperel Corporation. Um and at this time even with with Chapperel Ranch which is the the um interim newer um manager of the horses and the the trail rides and the programs which had been going very well and circumstances have changed and that's why we are where we are now. Um, I think that Margaret and Gail and Steve and others, uh, Natalie and Jeff have articulated the hope that equestrians can be an incredible value to the community and and a unique offering. So, uh, you know, let's keep horses, um, is my opinion and to go to an RFP, um, and hopefully we can have a meeting about how to do this RFP differently that learns from the last request for proposal process, which seemed to be, in my opinion, and Christina Medina Dirkson's opinion, who was sitting on city council, seem to be marred with um, I don't know, potential bias or or ignoring some of the record of the the applicant chaparel country. It was just like red flags in some of our opinions and those red flags just continued uh since they came really and so um I hope we give it another go. Um and I'll turn it over to Mayor Brm Elizabeth Fisher.

Thank you and thank you to for all who spoke and who are here or online. Um, I agree. I I would love to keep the horses there and I'm not a horse person. So, I so agree with somebody who said you don't have to be a horse rider to appreciate the horses. Just yesterday, I found out I'm allergic to horses, but I'm also allergic to cats. So anyway, so um um and I was so uh happy to hear people talk about especially Steve about all the events because I don't think anybody here on the DAS has attended the question center as often as I did. I happen to live very close by even a little bit closer than Steve and Liz but um I I've seen wonderful things especially the last few years and I think it's unfortunate that the concessioner who was sele selected didn't work out and there were red flags as I understand there had been red flags so I don't know what staff missed we approved that concessioner my first week or second week on the council and we get the report and staff says this is the one we think is the best one. Who are we to say no they're not. So I don't know what was missed but I hope that it won't happen again. I hope that staff will really do a deep dive and um yeah I think for the rest um I cannot say anymore. I think I I just appreciate the the question center so much and it's a unique place. I oh I've seen visitors and not just from Germany there were Dutch people there once I was there and dog said look here people from the Netherlands they were visiting friends or family in the Bay Area they googled where can we go for a horse ride they come to marina I've seen trailer parks with um people who were unloading their little horses and they just park there and they can they told me they said yeah this is one of the few places where we

can come and we can just go ride the trails Um very sad now to see the the door closed. That office was always open. It was very welcoming. Um lots of the structures have the the structures are in bad shape. Ismail's gone. But uh lots of those structures that were falling apart have been dismantled by the current people. They didn't even just demolish. They reused whatever they could reuse to build more or better structures. I've seen a lot of improvements over the years and um I hope that we can keep the horses. I don't think we can discuss anything about arrangements for the current uh people there about somebody asking you know why do they need to can they can there be a temporary agreement? I don't think we can discuss that now. That ship has sealed I think. So, um yeah, I hope we can keep the horses and and the um the Mars ham radio, which I did visit a couple months ago. Also exciting. Also unique. Sorry Rene, that's not on the agenda. But um anyway, unique place. It's it's quiet there. It's people, even if you don't like horses, just go there, walk there. It's it's really nice. And also there were um there still are some chickens and a rooster and goats and baby goats. And I've seen kids, they just love to visit the animals. So this is a plea for let's go out for bits and um hopefully we can get we get exciting um proposals. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Let's go to Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, when this goes to RFP, I think something that I would request regardless of what um, the concessionaire is, is that they participate in our reduced fee uh, recreation program um, and especially if they're offering camps, uh, because the equestrian camp was like 9 to $1,100. I mean, it was just way expensive and very exclusive. So, I would want to see um a way for the vendor, the concessionire to be able to offer what is the pass call that we have an action pass. Yeah. So, so something like that. Um and especially for any camps, um or you know, family programming. Um, and I'm just curious, is there a way that we could accommodate maybe two concessionires? Like, you know, you could still have the the horses, but then also something else. Um, you know, for me, I don't know any Marina families or residents that have horses. I'm not necessarily sure um how popular it is as far as a a visitor serving ser I mean I don't I don't necessarily see tourists um coming to marina just for horses. I mean unless that's what we're you know they're marketing or doing but I don't know the numbers. So, we could say whatever we want to say, but until I know how many people actually did that, you know, I I don't have any, uh, it's

all speculation. So, um, also with the concessionire in the RFP, you know, I kind of think it's in there already where the city would come every year for an inspection, but I really want to see that happen. um as well as providing data of um how many people they have had visit or how many you know I mean we sort of got into this oh well there's people there all the time well okay like so it would be it would be helpful for when we and quite frankly equestrian is just not it doesn't make a lot of money if it was a successful business model, Pebble Beach wouldn't have. I mean, if Pebble Beach can't even do it, then I I don't know how the city of Marina is going to do it, but fine. Um, so just to have that data. Um, so when and if the city needs to come in and help the business like we did with the past ones, we would have that information that we've been lacking. So, let's learn from if we're going to repeat the mistake and do equestrian, then let's learn from what we've already, you know, seen with the concessionires who aren't successful and just have better information. Um, so I don't know if that's maybe a subcommittee or if the city manager like if you can recall the things that we have asked for that we didn't get. You know, do we start with the staff person already there right away instead of later when they're getting ready to close? You know what I mean? So, just all of that and and if we are going to start with a staff member there for

part-time or whatever, that's a share of cost. Um, I mean, I'm happy if the city wants to invest a little bit in that, but we don't do that with any other businesses. We don't say, "Oh, you're having problems? Well, here, take a staff person." We don't do that. So, the vendor, the concessionire, they need to know how to run a business. And you know if the city is going to um support etc then it needs to be an investment on both sides. Um and so I think that's enough for now. Um again I don't think that equestrian is uh money-making business model and we've seen it time and time again. So, you know, if we're going to make this decision, you know, I hope that what how however it's done, the city is going to uplift and support the concessionire that comes in because it's just has not been successful. So, thank you.

Thank you, Jenny. Let's go to Council McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, so and and at risk of repeating myself, I've long been a champion of the equestrian use. Um, and again, that's why I expressed strong concern when the city council decided to prohibit people from boarding houses, uh, boarding horses at their houses when you live on more than an acre, but yet we've done that. Um, I expressed concern. Um, and there are homes in the city of Marina that have more than acre that would be completely suitable for horse boarding. My neighbor used to have one as I've mentioned on the status before and it was it was fine. Um I expressed concern when the city council decided to prohibit horses on Hilltop Park um which is a park by the way designed for horses. There's even hitching posts up there but yet now we've decided no horses up there. Um uh and I have to say that in my one of my top 10 experiences of living in the city of Marina was during one of the wildfire events of of years past when people from all over the region came to shelter their animals at the equestrian center. Um I will never forget that experience of seeing panicked pet owners come to the city of Marina to seek refuge uh in a way that no other city could support. Um it was just an incredibly meaningful experience. Having said that, we're at a really unique crossroads, right? Um we have terminated the industrial use of Losamus that abuts this property. That's by the way land that the city owns that doesn't have this federal park conveyance restriction to it. Um could or could not be part of this park in the future. Um, and we just talked about an item earlier today where we talked about kind of the fiscal sustainability of it and and my colleague, Council Member McAdams, talked about equestrian use not necessarily being inherently fiscally sustainable and and I think that's okay, but I think that we have an opportunity tonight and in the future to really look at some other uses at the park. And I appreciate the member of the public mentioning that not all uses are

compatible. I totally get that and would agree with that. Um, but that certainly doesn't mean that there might not be some other uses that are compatible. Um, and so I think of kind of some low relatively lowrisk other uses like pouring some concrete pads and and maybe allowing RV camping there. And I think that that's something that we could work with NPS on um, and could actually generate a tremendous amount of money that could help sustain that park. Um, the RV park near my house charges $150 a night, you know, just to park your RV there. If we did a third of that or even half of that, um, I think that it could really help the sustainability of that park. I think that a food forest, a garden, uh, ecoourism ideas are are all absolutely fantastic. That's one thing we have a lot of expertise in the city of Marina on. Um, I could totally envision an equestrian use and also a component where we invite people from outside the region that might not be able to afford a $300 uh dollar a night hotel room, right, but can afford a $60 a night yurt or or camping experience and and come and work in the community garden, enjoy the horses. um and maybe just maybe allow this park to be fiscally sustainable as in a way that it is not today. Um so I would really encourage council regardless of whether you want to see the horse use, the equestrian use continue to really think about how we might be able to add some uses to the park as well. I'll keep it at that for now, but I'd love to hear what the rest of the council thinks.

Thank you, Brian. Council member Viala.

Thank you, Mr. Mr. Mayor. Um, so I don't have a lot of experience with horses. Um, and quite frankly, they do scare me. They're very large animals. And even when I go to um um uh one of the parks that allows horses when they're they're coming on the same path as the hikers, it it does I I I tend to move away. I'm I'm a little um uh anxious about um being there with such a large animal next to me. However, I do realize that equestrian um history is part of Fort Orard and you know the the um historical value of having a museum there. I would really love to see that happen. Um and I think that it does honor this the history of the region. So I I really support that. Um I have to say that if we go out to RFP, I would I would like to see a vendor who actually as someone said on the dis who who runs who can run a business successfully in equestrian um uh services. So, I was very pleased that there could be a lot of success of of ideas that we haven't yet tried. And I would like to see the the the vendor who wins the RFP to be able to exercise that ability um at first first, you know, to see to give them the options of exploring other ways to be profitable, other ways to build community. And I don't know if there's a way to separate out some of the areas of the current equestrian footprint here so that if given a certain amount of time, two years or so, if if they're still struggling, if if this business, as people have suggested, is not a popular thing. It's it's not necessarily a major

tourism attraction for uh for people and our even our local people don't have the money to sustain um or uh ownership. So, but that's up to the vendor. If you're successful and and you build it and it's great, then then you get to to choose the expansion of that property to have more equestrian use. But let's say we go down this road again and it's simply not not gonna pan out. Then I think after that and we base some parameters of of what we consider success after that then the city can begin to look look at some of these other um services that are different uses. Um and I I don't know many of these. I don't know what a cycle cross is or a bike park or bellow drrome. I don't know what these things are, but some of them seem like they're bicycle oriented. So then we can at that point expand what goes in there that that it shares a equestrian space and it shares with a a different kind of profitable tourist um attraction service. So um and I would like to see it only after uh the the equestrian vendor seems not to be able to make this a success. I it would be like having plan B. So now you can still maintain a limited equestrian presence, but really the city needs to move on and say, you know, we've tried twice and we need to maybe build in some other kind of um recreation and attraction. Um so I don't know if it's based on a footprint of actual um property that we we say you know within this confines the vendor can operate equestrian and in a year or two we see how successful they are. They can either expand it or we have the option to exercise another alternative um that

would maybe be more stable and more attractive for our tourist um purposes. So, I don't know if that's possible. Maybe I'm asking lang is do we have to have the the vendor be responsible for the entire lot or can we say it's phase two if you expand if you show you you've shown you've created enough of uh success. I

I I think our intent this time it' be similar to the last one. It's just the the initial 14 acres of the actual question center property. Um um but the other open part we could certainly include something in the RFP that would be open to ideas for other uh potential uses in that other other areas. Um one thing that we haven't done is uh we haven't inspected for endangered species sagilia. Yeah. Um, so there's an interest there. We probably need to do that.

But we could reserve that anyway and not and build into um that with equestrian uses at present. Correct. Okay. Because I would like to to not have to think about an alternative use. I'd like to see how successful another vendor in equestrian services can be knowing, you know, what we know um and and sort of the entrapments of of some of the barriers to success. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Kathy. I think we've seen the Marina Aquession Association do a really good job of managing the equestrian center. Unfortunately, the National Park Service opined that it wasn't compliant with the rules, but volunteers did an incredible job and their holiday celebrations were fantastic. Uh they struggled to give rides and camps because they weren't set up for that, but they tried. Uh, but I think they showed that there can be a lot of people going to a park that has horses. We had more people attending that park during the MEC era than any other park we had in the city. And that was great for the city at relatively low cost. One problem was the city didn't invest in that property. When the MEA left, the city, as we've heard tonight, contributed $650,000 out of 800,000 that we promised to help the new concession air that replaced the equestrian association. uh the job that they did, Brian, Council McCarthy referred to during the Sierra Selena's fire where they provided 24-hour care around the clock to go get the animals that were in trouble from fire, bring them to the equestrian center, take care of them while they were here. You know, emus, donkeys, goats, chickens, ducks, horses, they took any animal that was in trouble. And that kind of heart and that kind of soul was because they loved horses and they loved animals. And it's that kind of energy that makes a place succeed. But they didn't have the financial support from the city and they didn't have the financial means to do everything that is going to be required. Um, but they did a

darn good job. And um, if marketing was ever done in a incredible uh, ambitious way, we might get an incredible ambitious response by people wanting to go. Uh, just like the Germany example or the Dutch example where they saw it online and they came, but it wasn't us putting it online necessarily. you know, maybe we, you know, we did some online uh activity with Marina uh Chapperel Ranch, I'm sorry, corpor uh corporation, but anyway, Chapperel Ranch Country. Um, but we didn't we never did a really good job marketing. If you don't do a good job marketing, you can't really expect to to do a great job bringing in people and money. And money is not the the real issue. Although it'd be great to make a profit, all of our recreation programs operate at a loss because their point is to give citizens a quality of life and a service, not to make money. No different than our police department, fire department. They don't make money, they lose money. That's not their point. And recreation in the city, our recreation programs point is not to make profit, but it would be great to make a profit. And I love Brian's ideas of concurrent uh options with equestrian use such as RV, parking, uh camping, etc. something that brings in a different sort of people and they would love horses maybe too, but that's not maybe the reason they're coming. But it does help with camps and lessons and and and riding tours because now that they're there to do something else, they might see the horses and and join in on the fun. The the recent art festival, line dancing, some continuation of holiday festivals that's been going on the last couple years, not as good as when the MEA did it, but the line dancing was fabulous success. The art festival was a fabulous success and that's not making a lot of profit but it's providing a quality of life for all ages. Uh so I think that to

be a world-class operation uh we just need to do things differently than we have done them in the past. Um I'm really interested in Hidden Hills Ranch model. It sounds fantastic. I don't know how much how much financial wherewithal they might have to do all the things that would be necessary to spend money at this at our location. I'm not sure how much money we have. 150,000 we should have left out of the 800. But beyond that, I'm not sure that we can uh we can do our our share. You know, what we what we would be responsible for realistically and and ethically and morally to go into the next partnership, we have to do better than we've done in the last two partnerships. And our new partners would have to do better than the last two partners. Although I don't want to uh disrespect MEA because they were volunteers doing an incredible job. They just couldn't be expected to have the financial backing or even the professional administrative uh experience that is probably required here. But they did an incredible job for a long time. And I'm still not convinced that they uh weren't shouldn't have been allowed to continue with their private public porting because that's how it started in 1995. and it went on apparently without problem until all of a sudden it was a problem and they were kicked out essentially. So I I think we can do it better, but it's going to be dependent on getting a better our better concession and um us doing a better job if we were able to find a better concession. I'm really interested in the potential offline, not go in this tonight, but to see if Hidden Hills Ranch has any desire to do anything on a temporary basis over the next six months so the place isn't vacant and more vulnerable to uh problems than if there's somebody there doing something sometime. Okay, let's go. I'm not sure who's next. Um let's go to Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, I just wanted to support Council Member Viala's uh idea that if we do go back out to RFP that it's some subset of what the original 14 acres is. I, you know, again, turning to AI kind of asked the unbiased question, what's the average equestrian center size? And it said for small community equestrian centers are between five and 15 acres. So, I mean, a 5 acre equestrian center seems doable. Maybe it's somewhere in the middle, but I certainly would support any motion or maybe even make a motion that, you know, when we do go out for RFP that we do a subset, whether we immediately use that land or not, I I don't think we have to answer that question today, but um there's quite a bit of land out there. And um for the amount of land that's out there, I haven't seen an equivalent amount of uh people using that land. And so I just want to make sure that we're using our parks to the highest uh use, right? and and so if that means dividing it up a little bit, I'm certainly willing to go down that route. And that was just my comment. Thanks, Mayor.

Let's go to Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. And and I um agree to to that suggestion as well. I mean, I think for for me, especially when we talk about our parks and open space, I want it to be accessible and usable by as many as our, you know, residents and visitors as possible. Um, I'm also curious if in the RFP sort of another lesson learned. Um, could we do uh like year one we would have uh the city has the expectation that there would be one community event a quarter, year two, one community event every other month or something like that like a tiered approach. So obviously we're not saying we want an event every month or every week, but just something that's communicating that, you know, we expect to have the holiday events or, you know, the Mother's Day, something like that. I I think that that would be um if possible, you know, that that would be a good ask uh on behalf of the city. Thank you.

Good suggestions, C. Uh Mayor Bratam Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I don't know if you need to make a motion in a few minutes or now to go past 10 p.m. Um, let's say we go till 10:15 if necessary. I'll motion that. I'll second. All in favor, please say I. I. Okay, let's continue.

Just some replies to what I heard reactions. Um, inspections and data. Yes, we need inspection. We need everything in writing. We need uh and we need to hold tenants accountable. If there's anything not in order, they need to get it in writing so they have a chance to to make it right or if they don't then there's a thrill we can al anyway we we have spoken about it. Um the current people they already offered discounts but not in a structured um setting. So if we wanted as a city to make it clear for everybody, but I know that they already let people write for free and camps and um they also had special needs kids there and so they did a lot of that but not structured because they were not official concessioner. So there was a lot of mix up. So um uh the ninth street uh the the hilltop park where no horses can go or no we didn't allow that. There's also that horse trail that was mentioned. There are no horses there because I the city manager told me Second Avenue is way too dangerous for horses. That's the reason that there won't be horses on that Ninth Street horse trail ever. Probably. Yeah. Unless we built that in the past.

Are you talking Are you talking east of Second Avenue or towards the beach? I talk west towards the beach that we have that in through the dunes in the city owned area. There's that horse trail next to a hilltop park. all the way to Second Avenue and I've never seen a horse there. I've seen

I've seen horses in the neighborhood but they were going on Ninth Street. That was funny but that was with Santa. Okay, that was just a remark. Um so yeah the current people I will call them did have a lot of events already you know large events successful events they had yoga and um but in order for a any concessioner to invest to be willing to invest money and energy and their labor they need a long agreement you cannot expect to give people a one-year agreement and then say good luck because the structures I'll repeat the structures are in very bad condition. The only only building that the city remodeled, the windows still don't open. That building has the only decent restroom toilet, one toilet for that whole complex. We have that other toilet on a pedestal. But um so we have um there were trailers, which they were only allowed one trailer. that was an issue but there were traders because we as a city require people to be there overnight if I'm not mistaken city yeah we require people to be there overnight for security but we don't offer any uh decent overnight facilities or uh so regardless of who it will be that that's an issue okay I said all this wow oh no one more um so So, the current people had plans and I was hoping that because they were planning to invest more money, way more money than they already put into it because now there's a business person there as well. And uh I was hoping that the Marina Coast Water District structure, the only barrack that is owned by Marina Coast that doesn't have the restrictions from the federal government that can be whatever

you want it to be and and generate money can be for coffee, wine, beer, um anything. And the Forc trail will be there in a few years. This area will be I think it can be very successful. But the main thing I wanted to mention and then I'll stop is that we are also looking at maybe cons make uh installing soccer fields at the Los Anima site which probably will be tight for the space. So and I agree the action center has a lot of extra space that I don't think is needed for the horses. So this is the moment to look at maybe taking some of that area and add it to the potential soccer facilities. Okay, sorry that was very long but this is and I hope yeah sent Gileia we all love the little flower but I so hope that it's not in those areas anyway. So thank you.

All right thank you and we're looking for a motion too. Let's go to councelor Viala. Yeah, before I'm I'm want to say a few things first. So I think for me I it's an understanding of what this concessionire and what is what is our intent because I almost feel like we're saying that uh they don't have to run it as a profitable business and I want to make sure that even the sports center and the aquatic center those concessionires we we will be putting some pressure on them to break even and to to not give away all the programming uh to locals that they are responsible for making some kind of revenue. So I I I don't feel comfortable saying that they don't have to do marketing. I mean it's not to me it's if we hire a consens concessionire it's not the responsibility for marketing their business doesn't seem like we should be paying for that. We can post things on our website and stuff but if you're business marketing is like the number one thing you have to do it to run your business. So I just want to clarify that's how I think of of the RFP um candidates in my mind. Um but having said that we are the owners of the property and so we need to invest money to make sure that the toilets are are fine that you know the buildings are sound and that's our responsibility. I don't think that our responsibility is if they're failing that somehow we infuse money into that because uh that's a dangerous thing for us to the road to go down. Um

Kathy, I didn't understand that. I thought you were going to say landlord has to do some things some serious investment. Yes. Okay.

Yes. Of the property itself. Not to say you're failing as a business, therefore we're going to help you with marketing. we're going to help you with hiring another person or whatever. You know, I I feel like there's there's the different obligation there. Um and you know just as an idea for example on revenue generation I remember long time ago um you know I went to a a corporate sponsored thing and the these are from all over the state and uh it was like in Arizona and we went on this wonderful horse riding you know tour you know and and it was like a corporate sponsored thing and I think about how we have the fort or national monument here. And I don't know why we didn't have those kinds of horse riding tours. You could advertise it for corporate, you know, um, uh, gatherings and things like that. So, is there any restrictions that I'm not aware of that that we could have been doing that? We have this national monument there. I mean, going going horseback riding and offering group.

No, there's no restrictions like that. Okay. There's there's been years of horseback riding from the equestrian center, both private people and also tours. Yeah. Even the current concessionire had regular tours from the question center to the national monument. Oh, they did. Oh, yeah.

Oh, okay. I thought that was one of the things that wasn't really readily available, but there was. Oh, okay. My my lack of knowledge on that. But that is again that's not for us to decide. is for them to decide how they're going to revenue generate and those kinds of things you know are part of marketing working with C monterey etc. So, you know, all of that I expect as a business um concessionire. Okay, that's it. Thank you.

Okay, so looking for a motion. We're going to go to Council Member McCarthy. Thank you, Mayor. I think I'll make a motion. Um, and I think my motion would be not to adopt a resolution uh to authorize the city manager to issue an RFP for now, but rather to provide feedback that staff come back to us with some ideas of how an RFP can be created that perhaps divides the property. um partially for equestrian use and partially for another use that could offer a net fiscal benefit to the city. Um that staff engage a bonafide expert contractor to conduct a feasibility study on the use of part or all of the equestrian center for ecoourism and other uses compatible with equestrian uses including an overnight affordable lodging component that may include any uh any of camping, glamping or RV pads to reach out to stakeholders such as Citizens for Sustainable Marina and CSUB sustainability and ecoourism uh department. um to gauge interest in helping to plan and participate the implementation of a sustainable tourism camping program and that we ask the city manager to reach out to entities that may be willing to offer short-term equestrian services to the residents of Marina uh in the interim until an RFP uh until we go out to RFP such as Hidden Hills and any other service providers that may exist. I I'll second for discussion. Um I'm worried that that piece about uh getting a qualified Can you repeat that part about getting someone to

Sure. So I wrote down and and after I say it I'll explain what I'm thinking but I said engage a bonafide expert contractor to conduct a feasibility study on the use of part or all the equestrian center for ecoourism um and other uses that are compatible with the equestrian uses including overnight affordable lodging component that may include camping, glamping or RV pads. And my thought there is that I really see the potential there. I know that the use can bring in a tremendous amount of money that may actually help support uh the equestrian center in a way that we're not currently able to support it. Um but I hold my own right biases as I think everyone on this dis does. I'd rather have a independent third party person really take a hard look at the feasibility of it. Maybe they'll come back and say no that's not going to work. Um, but I'd rather that come from the outside than the inside because this has become such a divisive issue and I think we all kind of have this image of what that space may be that I think many of us have become a little tunnel visioned. Um, and I know it's getting late and I'm probably slurring my words a little bit because I'm tired, but um, but yeah, so that's what I'm thinking with that statement, but I'd be happy to modify it if there's something that if there's a particular piece of it that you don't like.

Council member Viola. Thank you, Brian. just have one addition and that's um uh because I like the idea of of um having two different um re uh spaces, but I I don't want to just assume that we wouldn't allow the equestrian vendor to expand if they're successful and we like what we see. I'd like them to have, you know, to be able to expand it. And if it's not appropriate, then to to switch it over and and look at other types of of um recreation.

So I could include that in my motion. And what I'm thinking is things like camping, really relatively low impact, right, uses that don't require a lot of infrastructure. I mean, they may require some, right, some water hookups, a trailer for bathrooms, for example. Um, but that stuff can be moved, right? to your point, if it's if the equestrian center is booming, right? Um, which I don't envision, but if it is, right, then yeah, we could so we could just add the words and or other other uses. So, they could be doing both. be happy to accept that if that's something Mayor Pam Elizabeth

just to clarify this is just to request staff to include it in the RFP but we are not deciding yet yet to allow uh RVs or not you just want to see well correct but my my particular statement was not even to include it in the RFP but rather for the feasibility have an expert engage in the feasibility Right? I mean, it's a super in the military, they call it a good idea theory, right? Like I'm being a good idea fairy because I think it's a great idea, but maybe it's not reasonable, right? But I want the experts to tell us that. Yes.

Okay. Um, a substitute motion and it pulls from Brian's quite a bit and I appreciate his your motion. My motion would be that concurrently we have staff uh uh put together an RFP proposal that we can look at, you know, before it goes to the public and that it uh requests that the submitters um contribute and submit an idea for a small footprint and a larger footprint. We'll let staff decide what the acreages are, what small and or large is. And I'll go over this motion in a moment. And that we ask staff to seek uh interim caretakers and concurrent with that RFP process and exploring interim caretakers that we um direct staff to get a feasibility study on alternative uses such as camping, etc. that we've heard tonight. Um, I'll I'll say that mot motion again in a minute. Uh, I want to leave as much room on the east side of the equation center where the star riders were for potential parking and soccer uh related uses uh because it is a little tight in space for soccer fields. It needs more parking space and that kind of a thing. So, uh, okay. So now I'll read through my my substitute motion again that we direct staff concurrently to uh draft RFPs uh an RFP and come back to us of course before it goes out to the public that includes um small footprint equestrian operation and larger footprint equestrian operation and that uh we embark upon a feasibility study for

alternative uses such as camping etc. And that lastly, we uh direct staff to explore interim caretaker opportunities between now and the time that the RFP or the next concession error use begins. So that would die for lack of second. I'll second them. Okay. All right. Let's go to Council Member Viala. Just a little clarification. So, in one of the sentences that you read, use the larger footprint, the smaller footprint, and both of them related to equestrian, right?

Okay. Um, that's where I wanted whichever comes first that we're going to go on the RFP, either the smaller or the larger. Then the the second footprint can include equestrian, but it can also include all the other the alternative ones. So, so you you just said or I mean you're saying both the pieces would be equestrian and I'm saying the secondary one that comes later is either going to be equestrian related or it can also be uh something else. Okay.

Yeah. What I was thinking is if the feasibility shows real good potential for alternative uses, we'd probably be more interested in a smaller footprint equestrian use than we have seen there. If the feasibility study isn't very favorable to alternative uses, then we probably be more um more more willing to continue a larger footprint use of equestrian.

So we move in two tracks. One is feasibility study of alternative uses. One is drafting an RFP that includes a small footprint design and a large equestrian footprint design. And then we take care of the interim caretakers, you know, on the side. I still would like to give the the the equestrian um concessionire the ability to expand before we entertain other ones. Um

we would because this RFP would say, "Hey, if you're interested, tell us what you do with a large footprint. Tell us what you do with a small footprint. And you tell us the same thing, large and small." We might say we really like both of their large and small and time 10:50. Um, I'll motion that we go another 10 minutes if needed. A second. Okay. All in favor, please say I. I. Okay. Please continue, Kathy. Oh, that was my only preference is that I would still like to see it wholly equestrian if it can be successful.

Right. And that would be the RFP piece that that asks for larger footprint use like we've seen, but there'd also be a B, a second part of the RFP submitt. You're talking about a small footprint. Now, when the staff comes back to us with an RFP draft that has what we're asking for at that point, we might say we're not so excited anymore about the large or the small, especially because the feasibility study gives us new information that that moves us into the large or the small preference. Okay. If you feel like that is clear, because the way you're reading it, I was thinking we've already decided we want another type of of service besides equestrian. If if you feel like that's adequate, then that's fine. But I interpreted what you wrote down there as being as being us favoring alternatives over the expansion, continued expansion of the current equestrian.

Yeah. I think our second bite of the apple would be when we get that draft back and we've get some feasibility information, then we can say, do we want to put an RFP out with both large and small design or do we just want a small design or do we just want a large design for whatever reason, including feasibility information that we don't have now. Okay. All right. Um, let's go to Council Member McCarthy and then Mayor Pertmp. Thank you, Mayor. And I think I'm saying the same thing along with what you're thinking is,

but correct me if I'm wrong. I mean, I'm thinking we do a potentially a smaller sized RFP, right? Maybe seven acres, six acres, 5 acres, whatever it is. We leave that other portion open with kind of an option, I guess, right? In a year, like you can expand into that if we've decided not to pursue something that might be feasible. Um, but if we lock in the whole 15 acres now, right? Totally. then we know we're not going to do that, right? I just want that secondary part to also u what somebody's uh hearing aid or something is going on.

Oh, okay. All right. Um just that that secondary one is either all alternative uh services or recreation and it could also be further expansion of equestrian. That's so you're saying that that covers that? Yeah. Speaking to my motion, the next step is maybe in two months we see a draft of an RFP that has a large design and a small design that could go out to biders. But it it's not just the large or the small. It's what of what kind? Is it equestrian? Yeah. The the large and small footprints would be equestrian. Okay.

Design footprints. Okay. Got it. Thank you. So, the difference that I think I have between yours, Brian, is that yours locks us into a smaller size RFP and mine gets an RFP draft that says, um, "Hey, bidder, what would you do on a small footprint? What would you do on a large footprint? And which one do you prefer? Tell us." Whereas yours just says, tell us what you do on a small footprint because you you're more in favor. you're more you're more you're more confident that alternative uses should be here

and I can get on board more that and second it my my bigger concern is ensuring that we go down some path to to really take an honest look about how feasible the other uses are and I'm worried that and I want it to be more than staff I don't think staff is necessarily in a position to be expert both our motions uh have your idea okay of a feasibility study so that when we get the RFP draft, hopefully we'll have a feasibility study also. And I think your motion is already seconded. Is that correct? Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I can get on board with that.

Okay. I do have an I don't know if it needs to be an a friendly amendment or not. I would like staff to really already look at which areas, you know, if you say smaller, okay, which areas don't we use because I really would like staff to this is the moment to look at the potential soccer uh park, whatever you call it, soccer fields. So, how do we put this in the motion?

Uh Lane, you have some input. Um, I think we're council's going where with the motion, I think a couple months is a good period of time that that we can work on the RFP that you're talking about about a smaller thing. Uh, what we would do during that period of time is we'd work at least with the two uh vendors that we know are out there and talk with them about the idea and get their feedback so that I don't want to waste time putting in a a smaller thing that isn't even going to make sense. So, I think we'll have time to be able to work with the existing vendors, get their feedback and information, and I think from a timing point of view, um, within a couple months, we could definitely get something back to the council on the feast building study. Um, I'm, uh, I'm not so sure on the timing of that because by the time, uh, it's going to be someone unique. By the time we get someone, they get through a study. I think we're we're several months into that process. And so I think the RFP would be coming back before we'd have the feasibility study completed.

Yeah. Now, if that's the case, and it sounds like it would be, I think by that time we could hear from the feasibility study consultant that their status, their their not crystal ball, but their their best estimate, you know, hey, we're finding some real things here, or we're only finding some dead ends, but we're not done looking. Okay. Yeah, I'll do that.

And maybe we give more time for that to be finished. And maybe we also have some comments on the RFP. So, it's not going to be ready to go out after we chew it up. You know, we might have some modifications as as long as uh that RFP has a small footprint design and a large footprint design because it's my understanding being at the Crescent Center last several weeks is since Star Writers left that whole area has been unutilized and some of the turnouts have been unutilized. And so it seems to me that there's a good likelihood the next equestrian concessioner could do with a smaller footprint than the MEA had and Star Riders together or or maybe in Chaparel because Chapperel had a bigger footprint but they didn't use it. So that's why I'm thinking it's a good idea whoever brought it up. It wasn't me to think about a smaller footprint equestrian use. So, let me go ahead.

Wanted to add there's also still that unused building with a parking lot, very old parking lot, of course, but I really would like staff to look into all the options for that whole area. The dog pound and parking lot with a dog pound and the parking lot next to the dog pound next to the u the ham radio. Um Oh, on the south end of there, there's a building that nobody uses and a parking lot. Yeah, it's an interesting area. Yeah, that's my understanding that feasibility study would be looking the whole side the whole parcel and we may expand it even to some of the Los Angeles just to yeah if they have ideas that would be compatible with that so we won't that's going to get into soccer field so we have to tread lightly

but this is the moment to do that and for the RFP will it be very clear for the the uh potential concessioners who put in a proposal will it be very clear to them what is expected from them in in order to uh do with the building the structures because council meal said we should put some money in there. Well, we don't have the money allocated. So, it is what it is. So, they know that they have one decent toilet and a toilet on a pedestal. That that will definitely be part of the Thank you. Yeah. Okay. I'll motion we go another five minutes. I think we have some comments from Brian. Second, Kathy.

All right. Uh all in favor, please say I. I. Okay. Let's go to uh Council Member McCarthy. I don't actually don't think I have my light on. No. Okay. Council member Viala. Katherine Viala. Is that what you said? I felt like Oh, I'm in trouble. Um I just want to say that you're just talking about soccer fields. I maybe I was sleeping at some of the other meetings, but I've never heard that we're we're planning soccer fields. Am I the only one that has never heard of soccer fields at the equestrian center? There have been people offline, but no. Okay, those things would come back to the whole council. So, there just been some talk.

Okay. Blame Elizabeth. So, I didn't see Renee put up his hands like you. But honestly, um you know, we're um we'll be starting our budget process before we know it. And I think part of that process, we will be talking about those other parcels and and big picture uses of what council would want. We'll have a new recreation director on board. Um, we think they'll be starting probably mid April, mid to end of April, and they'll certainly help them be part of that process.

Brian, are you getting your lights on? Uh, yes. I just appreciate your comment because I was thinking the same thing. I'd never heard of soccer fields. I mean, it kind of articulate and I'm sure you've never heard of affordable camp. I mean, maybe I've mentioned it once or twice, but um yeah, I mean, I just want to make sure that we're just being as transparent about all the potential uses and things that people want as possible and that we're, you know, avoiding any kind of going too far ahead of some plan and, you know, not in a public sphere. The public definitely deserves to to weigh in on all these things. So,

thank you, Brian. Okay, repeat the motion one more time that we direct staff to concurrently um draft an RFP that has a small footprint equestion design and a large footprint question design while uh launching a feasibility study with a third party that looks at alternative uh use potential such as camping etc that we've heard tonight. And lastly that uh we direct staff to explore interim caretaker opportunities.

So does the second hold? Yes. Okay. Any final comment before we go to a vote? All in favor, please say I. I. All oppose, please say no. All right. Thank you everyone. That motion passes. Thank you to the public. I made a big difference tonight. It might have gone a different direction but um thank you and thanks to staff for being here as well. Okay, we are in