City Council - Regular Meeting

good afternoon today is tuesday september 15 2026 this is a regular meeting of the city of marina city council recording in progress Good afternoon. Today is Tuesday, September 15, 2026. This is a regular meeting of the City of the Marina City Council.

Can we please get a roll call? Council Member McCarthy.

Here.

Council Member McAdams. Here. Council Member Vialla. Mayor Pro Tem Fisher. Here. Mayor Delgado. He's just entering the building.

Okay. Thank you. City Attorney, do we have any changes to the closed session agenda?

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. There are no changes to the closed session agenda.

Thank you very much. We'll open it for public comments. Seeing nobody in the room or on Zoom. We'll close public comments and we'll go into closed session and we'll reconvene here at 6.30.

Thank you.

Okay. Welcome, everybody.

Thank you.

To our September 15th, 2026 regular meeting of the Marina City Council. We began at 5 p.m. And I'd like to ask our city attorney, Renee Ortega, to summarize. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to our September 15th, 2026 regular city council meeting for City of Marina. I'd like to ask our city attorney, Renee Ortega, to summarize our 5 p.m. closed session.

Yes, thank you, Mayor. Council provided direction in closed session but took no reportable action. Thank you.

All right. Elizabeth, would you like to lead us in a moment of silence and Pledge of Allegiance? Special presentation for Tina O'Brien of our community development department in two weeks. So stay tuned for that. I think it's because someone might be out of town. So we're going to move to the Izuno-Kuni Friendship City and welcome Sayaka Sugio with a proclamation and our esteemed city council member Kathy Biala will lead us here. Thank you, Kathy.

Yes, and she's not here yet. She's arriving from Japan tomorrow, so she missed this. But City Council will be presenting the proclamation to her on Friday evening. But before I start, I just want to show you something that came from the city of Izunokuni and our Masa Yamashita mayor. I forgot to bring this and show it to all of you. But this was presented to us by the chaperones of the five Izunokuni high school students that came here last month. And these are handmade at a store, a very large one. When the delegation went to Japan, uh we were there uh shopping and looking at all of these things but these are all handmade and they have things like here is a samurai hat here with the the body uh the the outfit here they have um uh little uh kokeshi dolls there's uh gold some fish there's uh the koi fish here and this is my favorite here is There's three barrels of something here and two little mice on either side and, of course, the crane. So they're all different sort of symbols of Japan. Anyway, they presented this to us when the students were here. So let me get to our proclamation for Sayaka Sugiyo. So this is whereas is the proclamation Friendship City with Izunokuni Japan welcome of Sayaka Sugiyo. Whereas the Marina Sister City program was established by the City Council approval on June 6, 2023, creating a Friendship City partnership between the City of Marina and the City of Izunokuni Japan. Whereas in July 2024, izunokuni sent a delegation including their mayor to visit marina followed by a reciprocal visit of a marina delegation to izunokuni in march of 2025 whereas three successful academic years of a zoom student exchange program have been completed with six japanese and six american high school students participating every each year and a fourth program is beginning for this 2026-2027 academic year whereas during marina's official delegation visit to izunokuni in march 2025 nagaoka junior high school graciously hosted our delegation with 120 students performing the song, Best Friends, and teaching our American delegation origami and Japanese calligraphy, sharing a school lunch in their classrooms, and creating a once in a lifetime cultural experience. Whereas as part of this Friendship City relationship, Ms. Yuzuki Yamashita, school teacher at Nagaoka Junior High School, was sponsored by Shizuoka Prefecture and 27 supporting companies and organizations and they visited marina in 2025 whereas this year sayaka sugiyo a teacher of english from izunokuni's nirayama junior high school will be visiting marina september 16 to 20 2026 she will observe our educational system at all levels of marina schools including the japanese language school at los arbales middle school and marina high school she will also experience the beauty of our region and diversity of American culture. Whereas the City of Marina wholeheartedly welcomes Ms. Sugiyo as part of our continuing effort to fulfill the mission of the Marina Sister City Program, promoting citizen diplomacy and exchanges in arts and culture, youth and education, business and trade, and community development as a means to foster peace and prosperity worldwide. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the City of Marina, Mayor Bruce Delgado, and all City Council members warmly welcome Ms. Sayaka Sugiyo and affirms our commitment to the lasting friendship between the City of Marina and the City of Izunokuni. And this is dated this 15th day of September 2026.

Thank you, Kathy. And I think it's always appropriate anytime we discuss our sister city relationship to give thanks to Kathy for all the hard work she puts into support our sister city relationships. Thank you, Kathy. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

And Kathy, what do you call this gift? I have no idea. It's the first time I've ever seen something. Pretty awesome.

Yes, it is. All right. So we're going to move ahead then to a presentation by the Marina Fire Department regarding Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council. So October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and it's important that we celebrate breast cancer awareness because it's a health issue within our community. But more than that, it makes us very aware of the risks that firefighters face every day and our risks of cancer. The rates of breast cancer and cervical cancer are significantly higher in female firefighters than the general population, as well as testicular and prostate cancer for male firefighters. And those are just a few of the cancers total. We have about nine cancers that firefighters have more significant risk than the general population. So anytime a thing is a community health issue, we are very passionate about the health of our community. So it's a passionate issue for the fire service. And we are doing a fundraiser right now where we're selling breast cancer awareness t-shirts. And in the month of October, we'll be wearing those breast cancer t-shirts. I left some flyers in the back of the room that has a QR code for that fundraiser. It does close September 18th, so that only leaves us three days, but it's also running on the fire department social media website if anyone's interested in doing it. And it will help the breast cancer assistance group of Monterey County. So that's who we're fundraising for with this effort. So you'll see us in pink for the month of October. Thank you. Chief, thank you.

Now we'll go to staff and council announcements, starting with staff.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We do have a couple announcements, and I hope I'm not stepping on anybody else's toes here on a few of these. First one that we want to make everybody aware of is tomorrow night at 6 p.m. We're going to have our virtual Measure Q meeting to get informed and educate the residents. That'll be a staff-led event. That'll be at 6 p.m. tomorrow. There's links on the website if you wish to participate in that. on thursday at six o'clock then we'll have a tour of our city facilities and we'll be meeting here at the council chambers at six o'clock so if you'd like to see some of the facilities then you know please stop by and be a part of that Also on Thursday, prior to that, though, our own community development director, Persicone, is going to be putting on an ADU summit at 4 p.m. at the CSUMB Visitor Center. So you can visit that and check that out. Our multicultural festival is going to be on the 26th, and that's 11 to 3. And I don't believe in our council meeting between then, so we want to make sure everybody's aware of that tonight. Girls in Aviation, I believe, is going to be on Saturday, October 8th. Saturday the 19th, so that is this Saturday, I'm sorry. And that is, I believe from 3.30 to 6.30. Now I'm mixing up with the fire open house. That's why, I'm sorry, 10 to one. And then the fire open house can be October 8th from 3.30 to 6.30. So all these events are also noted on our calendar and our website. So please check those out. Thanks.

Thank you, Matt. Any other staff announcements? All right, let's go to council. Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to remind the community that the Teen Center offers a very affordable after-school hangout program. It's $85 for non-residents and $59 for residents for the entire school year through June. The Youth Center has memberships as well for the same price, but those spots do tend to fill up quickly, so make sure to reach out to our recreation center. uh department if you're needing assistance with affordable after-school care um also i just wanted to um you know with regards to the breast cancer assistance group of monterey county um i am a breast cancer survivor and my family was a direct benefit of that incredible group. And it's ran by an army of lovely women who are all survivors as well. And they make it very easy to receive support and assistance. And so it really warms my heart that our fire department just every year is continually, you know, raising funds and awareness for that group. So thanks so much.

That's great, Jenny. Thank you. Mayor Bertam Vischer?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Today is National Voter Registration Day. And there's a website for this, of course, and it's nationalvoterregistrationday.org. And they have a link to register to vote, a link for trusted voter registration, because nowadays in a world of everything from misinformation and disinformation to AI deepfakes, The fact-based, non-partisan election information from trusted experts is more important than ever. So the website offers trusted voting resources straight from the official sources, including the vote.gov website. And as always, the most reliable source for up-to-date voting information continues to be our state and local election officials. So our state's website is sos.ca.gov slash elections. The website for our county of Monterey is countyofmonterey.gov and you can find election information there. And the county election officials will begin mailing the ballots by October 5th and ballot drop-off locations open on October 8th. And those who are 16 or 17 year olds, you can already pre-register to vote. You cannot vote until you're 18, but you can already pre-register. So you're prepared. And the last day to register to vote online for the upcoming November 3rd election is October 19th. So please go vote. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Council Member McCarthy?

Thank you, Mayor. I attended AMBAG this week, as I always do. I'm the president of that organization. I actually brought the agenda and put it on the back table if anyone in the audience is interested in transportation issues. I want to start doing that more often because it's literally a couple hundred pages of otherwise wasted paper. Um, so, um, that's there. And then as much as I hate to be a kind of a me too, I'd be remiss not to mention that one in 100 cases of breast cancer occur in men and the cases tend to be more severe because men don't typically get mammograms as women do. Um, so I know we talk about this as being a women's issue and it absolutely is. Um, but, uh, remember that men are impacted too. And if you feel something, go talk to your doctor just the same. So thank you, Mary.

Thank you. I wanted to follow up on the fire department open house. As our city manager, Matt Mogeson mentioned, it's October 8th coming up. It's from 3.30 p.m. to 6.30 p.m. And it happens every year. There's a police open house. We call it National Night Out. That happens in August. And this fire department open house, is similarly about live demonstration, in this case, fire demonstrations. And all the firefighters will be there to ask questions, meet them, get to know them. There'll be a lot of food vendors and a lot of community organizational booths. So it's really a local community, support the fire department, fire department support the community type of event. intended for all ages. And I hope that everyone who can come, come. It's on Palm Avenue between 7-Eleven and the fire station. They close off the street to make it a festival type environment. And it's just great. So we hope that a lot of people turn out as they usually do for our fire department's open house. That's Thursday, October 8th. An item has come up. I often thank the volunteers of Sustainable Marina because every month since January 2017, on the second Sunday of the month, they clean up trash over 10 miles of roadside between the Del Monte Beach roundabout all the way to the Highway 1 off-ramp. out near the landfill. Anyway, about two weeks ago, some mattresses were dumped on Lapis Road in that neighborhood. And it was reported to the county who have cameras, two cameras on that road for this type of enforcement. And it led to a $2,500 citation being issued to the party that was found to be the suspect of those mattresses. The point is that it takes a partnership of volunteers, county, Regen Monterey, county sheriff, DA's office to work together to try to reduce litter and try to reduce dumping. So kudos to them. And I hope that we get the word out whenever somebody is cited so that other would be unauthorized dumpers would get the message that it's a $2,500 fine the first time. And it doubles each time you do it up to the third time, which is $10,000. And I wanted to mention that there's a committee of residents working with the principals, vice principals in the Marina schools and some district officials on what we call the ancestor committee to try to reduce absenteeism in our schools. Marina has a history of low attendance compared to the community of Seaside and Monterey. And so one thing that committee is doing is trying to make sure all the kids are fed, all the kids have transportation and all the kids have things to do before and after school with which they can feel that they belong and that they're connected. If they feel like they belong and they're connected to the school, they're more likely to come to school. And one of the products of this committee has been to put in one place all the places that you can get free food distributed in the city of Marina. And almost every day of the week, there is food being distributed somewhere in Marina. Not 30 days, but I mean, there's a Monday, a Tuesday, a Wednesday, a Thursday, a Friday, a Saturday, and there's no Sunday distribution. There are extra copies of this on the back if you want to take them home to give them to neighbors or people you think have food insecurity so that we can try to provide people with secure food. But it's a wonderful aid because it's so complicated. Even for us to put this together, it took a lot of effort to figure out where, when, who... And imagine what it's like for people who are living on the streets or people who are really struggling living on couches, et cetera. They're not going to have access to this information. But hopefully if we get this kind of information distributed, more people have access to it because sometimes there's a lot of food left over at these food distribution events. And that's a real shame. So we hope to help with that out. All right. So now we'll move on to... special present, I'm sorry, a public comment. Anything you want to say on the consent agenda items or anything else that's not on the agenda later tonight. And I wanted to mention that we're pulling the item on Marina Station, which is 10G3, 10G1, I'm sorry. And that is to get some more information, better illustrations or better maps and information on what how we can put more teeth into it in the long-term maintenance requirements of the lands that we're talking about approving in this agreement. So with that, we'll go to public comment. Anyone in the room, come on up.

Okay. Hello, Marina City Council, Mayor, and everybody here in this room. It's a pleasure to introduce myself. I'm the new Executive Director, CEO of AMP Media. We are your broadcast technicians that have been broadcasting this room for a number of years. including many other cities on the peninsula. AMP has been going through a transition with our administration and also our business model. And it's been an undertaking of mine to get more involved and step off the board and step into the operations role. I'm a volunteer CEO right now, so I'm running two full-time jobs. But what I hope to bring to AMP is... modernization to our services. AMP has always struggled with doing just government broadcast, but because of cord cutting, many of our public access stations have become a fee-for-service model. And so I would like you to think of AMP first when there's a festival. We can film that. Conferences, concerts, memorials, keynote speeches, live streaming of any kind. Not necessarily small business commercials. That's not going to be as sustainable. We'll let other... Production companies do that. But my name is Mike Buffo and my other company is House of Eight Media. And I've been operating successfully a video production company here on the Monterey Peninsula since 2014. And now I'm bringing those clients, those live stream clients over to AMP. the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership, the Aquarium, many of them. So this is my first time coming out into the public saying, hey, I'm representing AMP now. So I hope to develop a relationship with Marina. I'd love some FaceTime with you to talk about it. And if any of you have any ideas on how you'd like to embellish our services, if you have any concerns, now's the time. You know, we're in transition. I would like to figure out how we can move into this next phase together. So my email is Mike at Amp Media dot org. So send me a note. Shout out to Brian. Brian's been on our board for some time and he's been helping us through this transition. So thank you, Brian. And especially shout out to the man that you never see out here, Fred, in the back running this show for over four years now. So we're going to keep that going. Keep Fred going. you know, operating this boat. And so appreciate it. Thank you so much. And I look forward to working with you.

Thank you. Thanks for coming tonight. Anyone else in the room that would like to make public comments? Okay. Let's go online. I don't see any hands, but if you're online, let's go. I think I saw Nancy Amadeo. Welcome Nancy. If you had your hand up. Yeah, you did.

It's me. I'm sorry. Hello, Dan. Good evening. Good evening. I actually called to thank staff and particularly the new city manager for getting back to me and answering a series of questions I asked at the last meeting. They were specifically related to the costs for the UUT, where the money came from, and what alternatives were explored. Although the answers aren't complete, unfortunately, they were... ENOUGH TO GIVE ME INFORMATION THAT I THINK IF THE COUNCIL IS

Okay, so what do I do? Hello?

Yeah, we're going to have to wait for technical assistance from council.

It was like a brown age, right? It faded away.

I'm still here. Can you hear me?

Yeah, Dan, we had technical difficulties on our end, Dan. And after you complimented the city manager, you were starting to talk about the city council, and then you cut out.

Okay, so where do I begin?

The part about the city council after you spoke about our city manager, Matt.

I'm sorry. Again, thanks to Matt for getting back to me. We spent $175,000 on the UUT to date. That's not all inclusive because you've got four events coming up that's gained up more staff time. You've got a consulting attorney or consultant that you're going to have to bring online if the UUT passes. to help get that in place. And then the long-term costs, obviously, is that third-party consultant you'd hire if the UUT is actually implemented to assist the tax administrator who's, I guess, our finance director. So that's going to be pretty expensive. Whether it's money well spent or money wasted, I guess we'll all find out in November. But $175,000 is a pretty good chunk of change. The other thing I wanted to mention, and it's got nothing to do with the UUT, is, oh, wait, there was one other thing. If the council intends to, if the UUT passes, like they did with Measure U, to request reimbursement for expenses from the general fund, you should be up front about that. It would be good to know. Just information for people to understand. Last thing I want to say actually has nothing to do with this. When I was looking for one thing, I found something else. So I'm going to ask a question, don't need an answer. When you guys dissolve the Cypress Cove 2 landscape district, was any formal notification made to any one of the residents? Do they know it's dissolved? Do they know what their responsibilities are? I know it was in the ordinance. I read it. But I don't know that the property owners know that. And since I saw a couple members of the council when they talked about landscape districts last time, different landscape districts, there was great consternation about public outreach. So how about doing some public outreach to the Cypress Cove 2 guys? We would appreciate it. And this will come back after the first of the year because it opened up a whole new window. I want to thank two members of the council, I won't name them by name, on something that had to do with the dissolution of that district. And we'll talk about at length after the first year, see who's sitting up on the dais. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Dan. And either Scott or Edry or the city manager will get back to you regarding those questions about noticing residents and advising them responsibilities for the future.

What's going on?

I don't see any other hands up. We'll go ahead and close public comment. Thank you for that comment from those who made it. And we'll move on to our consent agenda. Except for 10F1, does anyone have any comments? G1, 10G1 regarding marina stations. Maintenance improvement, that's pulled. But any other questions, comments, wish to pull something? Council Member McCarthy?

Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to pull 10G2 outright as a PG&E easement. And I'm going to make a quick statement about 10G3 and see if I can get concurrence from at least another council member to pull it. And that is, I think there's a real opportunity here to have some language that allows us to use the equestrian center as a rescue center during all events not just these two fires that have kind of already happened in the past um and so you know i i look back to a time when we did this five years ten years ago with the mayor however long ago it was um so i'm just wondering if i can get at least another council member to agree that we should have that discussion now i'll pull it if people think that um

Yeah, we're always just able to come back for future events, not just these past fire events.

It sounds like staff needs to take some direction quickly in order to make it applicable for this event. But what I'd like to do is suggest that basically staff talk to NPS about allowing this for any future fires that we don't know about yet.

Okay.

But I think to do that, we need to pull it.

All right. Staff or city attorney, can we get advice?

yeah I mean you can always uh give us direction to and I think we heard it I mean probably negotiate something like this for any future events so we have sort of a standing MOU um but I think for this one probably noticed only for this specific event so right and what I'm saying is that

I've been around long enough to know that if I say, okay, let's create another resolution for future fires, it's just going to take too long. So I think now is either the time to address it or not from my perspective. So can I just give the advice that we changed the language of the resolution and approve it, or do I need to pull it to do that?

Well, I think... Just for noticing purposes, I mean, what was agendized is this sort of limited scope MOU, right? And so I think going beyond that and approving something that is broader than that could potentially be a Brown Act issue.

So why don't we just approve this tonight because there might still be some animals out there that need help and then direct staff to come back to make it futuristic.

Okay. In a given time. I'm going to hate to do that to staff, but just so that doesn't fall off the radar. Within two months.

City manager?

Yeah.

believe that sounds reasonable however the city attorney did a lot of work on this agreement so to make sure that so yes and I think you know starting from scratch we've got a model now so I think it's probably pretty straightforward to turn this into a broader agreement for sort of any emergency event of this type and very specifically as it relates to reaching out to the National Park Service and going through all this rigmarole about do you concur we know how tough that is I don't want staff to do that and then two weeks later be asked to do it again for a different

version of the resolution, right? So that's my concern.

I understand.

So if it's helpful, I would say that we can, by the end of, so two months would be the beginning of December. We can be back by the beginning of December with something that's more broad.

Okay. Then I won't pull it.

All right. And you had a question on 10G3?

That was 10G3. 10G2? Yeah, I do want to pull that one just so I can vote. Okay. Make a couple comments and vote separately.

All right. So 10G2, we'll pull that. Council Member Biala?

Sorry, thank you, Mr. Mayor. On 10G3 about the emergency evacuation for animals, you know, we are, I don't know what the time frame is for the RFP for the Marine Equestrian Center, but it seems like we should be addressing those two issues together because we are going to be getting feedback about what kinds of things could go on that property. So we can kind of fold it in. I don't know the timing of the two, but...

I think that's relevant to what Renee, our city attorney is going to do. And then what's on the agenda tonight is because there might be some animals out there that need help right away at our equestrian center because of these two fires ongoing. So tonight's about the ongoing fires, but your advice is relevant to what, so that the RFP is considered when Renee does his work to bring back this item.

So the MOU does have an outside date for the moment. It would have to come back to council to be extended. So I'm not finding it at the moment, but I think it was 60 days from when it's approved. So it would only be for 60 days.

Two months after tonight. Okay. I'll motion we approve the consent agenda minus 10F1 and 10G2.

I'll second that.

10F1 is 10F1, 10G1, and 10G2. Second holds. All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed? So that motion passes unanimously. Thank you, everybody.

And let's go...

to the public hearings. First one on the religious and institutional housing overlay.

Council, I don't have a PowerPoint. It's just we got direction from the council to make some significant edits to that housing element program to focus the housing element program on just properties within the downtown specific plan core. So we've done that. And there was also a request to get input from the city attorney about how to regulate sex offenders and whatnot. That was added to the staff report. And so that's really what we're here for today, just to redo the first reading. If you have questions about the sex offender issue, I would defer those to the city attorney and I can answer questions related to the housing element program, which has been now focused at the direction of the council.

Thank you, Guido. Question? Oh, let's open up to public comment, this public hearing, after we hear from our city attorney.

Yeah, just to summarize what's in the staff report, really the issue that the question the council had at the end of the last, or the August 5th council meeting, I mean, really is limited by state law. And so if council directs, we would... bring back an ordinance with any limitations we see and as described in the staff report so again a lot of these issues are governed by state law there would be the ability to bring an ordinance forward but that in and of itself would have its own limits as to regulating where sex offenders or others that have been convicted of serious crimes could live

At this time, we'll open the public hearing, and anyone wishing to speak who's here in person, you'll have the first opportunity to do that. Not seeing anyone rise, we'll go online. Anybody remote would like to raise their hand to provide comment on this matter? All right, not seeing any hands, we'll close the public hearing, bring it back to council. Questions, comments, council? Okay. Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. I'll be honest. I was so busy with the other issues. I didn't dive too deep in this, but so you summarized the changes was.

The direction from council was to try to do as close to what state law is encouraging and to focus it on the properties within the core of the downtown specific plan. So that's what we've done.

Okay.

Okay, I would like to motion that we introduce this ordinance amending the title 17 to implement program 1.4 the housing element and find that its adoption is exempt from CEQA. That's my motion.

Second.

Any comments or questions before we go to a vote? Roll call, please.

Councilmember McAdams. Aye. Councilmember McCarthy.

Yes.

Councilmember Biala. Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Vischer. Yes. Mayor Delgado. Yes.

Okay. Thank you. That motion passes unanimously. And now we're going to move on to consideration of an urgency ordinance relevant to data centers.

Good evening, Council. I'll be presenting this item. So as the Council's aware, there's been quite a bit of community and media coverage related to data centers. I'm a San Jose resident. I went to a San Jose community meeting. There were over 300 people at the San Jose City Hall. that had very strong opinions on both sides of the issue. There's also quite a bit of media coverage up in the Bay Area about Gilroy approving a data center. So that kind of piqued my interest. Spent a little bit of time doing a deep dive into our downtown specific plan, the Marina Station, and the zoning code. And it seemed that it would be prudent to adopt an urgency ordinance. The language is not strictly prohibited right now we do have some industrial properties that it could be allowed in and so it seemed like a prudent measure to at least give staff the opportunity to further study and research the issue i do have a powerpoint i can pull up i do have a powerpoint if you want to do without the power it's it's in the sharepoint we don't if you want to do without the powerpoint that's okay that's totally fine mayor that's fine Yeah, that's fine. I have printed off from the council. Also, I would point out that it's probably, once again, prudent to adopt this urgency ordinance. The assembly member for this area, Addis, I called their office. AB 2469 is on the governor's desk. And the governor, by law, is required to sign bills by September 30th. So that bill would potentially provide some guidance to cities in terms of how to regulate this use. So once again, it would seem prudent to just take this pause, see what potential inputs we would get from the state. Next slide.

Next, next. Next slide.

And the request is an initial 45-day moratorium. After Gilroy approved the recent data center, they did adopt a 45-day moratorium. And you'll see another list of cities that have also undertaken that. There are prohibited. So we just want to take time to study this issue. Next slide. So what the urgency ordinance does, similar to what this council did last year with the firearm sale ordinance, it creates a temporary pause. So those permits would not be able to be filed. It does require a four-fifths vote from the council. It will go for an initial 45 days. And if the council recommends adoption today, then we'll be back on November 4th to recommend potential another up to a year. and then a potential another year after that. So next slide, please. And so that is the recommended motion, and I'm here to answer any questions.

Let's go to the public. Anyone in person, come on up.

Hello. I'm Fred Nelson. Hello, I'm Fred Nelson. I live in Marina. I think you guys should go further than moratorium and outright ban these data centers. We spent a long time battling CalAM over our water, the safety of our water supply, all that kind of stuff. A data center would be that on steroids. It would be so much more of a significant threat to our water and a more direct active threat to our water. I think I would go even further policies against AI companies. banning materials from being produced with generative AI for events, for in schools, anything we can do to prevent that stuff from happening. I think AI is a contagion of idiocy and I don't want it to infect my children. And I want to create a literate, safe society where truth is still something that we value and our water supply and the environment. So thank you. Please ban them.

Thank you, Fred.

Ana Luz Acevedo Cabrera, I also echo the sentiment that has been shared here in regards to data centers. They're very energy intensive and this is not something that would be good for us. But I would also, as a form of thinking two steps ahead, I would also suggest that as part of this work, you also identify what happens in the scenario that it becomes a mandate and we don't have a say in this, right? Because we can put all the roadblocks in front of it, but at the end of the day, federal or state calls and makes it a mandate and we have nothing to override. That's where it also we also have to be prepared for that, right? Maybe this is me coming from an engineering perspective that you always have to think about all those edge cases. And so I think if we're going to be opening this as a form of preparation for what's to come ahead, we have to think about not just the best case scenario, which is where we get to say what we want and get to put the protection layer, but also what happens when we don't have that say because of a mandate. And I think in those cases, we have to decide where can we put pressure so that at least we can protect something to a certain extent. And so I think that needs to be also part of the conversation as a preparation for that. And to that effect, some things to keep in mind would be making sure that it is a closed loop system. Part of that could be them having their own renewable energy to operate independently. Part of that is only operating on recycled water and having to deal with their own recycling system. So these are things that Again, we don't want it to get to that point, but if it does because of a mandate, then we have to be prepared to set the tone for where do we draw the line. But I do echo the sentiment, and in my world, we shouldn't have to do this because this should be turned on the AI companies. They need to be running more efficiently. They need to be prioritizing tasks for real-world solutions like healthcare, not on things that are really not adding value, but we have... thrown it at the world so that you can do almost anything with AI and it's really becoming a waste of resources. So, but again, we have to think about all those scenarios, right? Because we can't just expect everything to go our way, but we also have to prepare for the scenario where it doesn't go our way. Thank you.

Thank you, Annaluce. Let's go online. Peter Kaiser. Welcome, Peter.

Hi, can you hear me? Loud and clear. Thank you. Yes, I'm concerned about this urgency banning of data centers. I think we need to be careful here. There are certain countries overseas, mostly Marxist countries, who are actually encouraging Americans to be totally against these data centers and not allow them to be spread through the United States, obviously because they want to have these data centers and they want to have our data in their data centers so they can misuse our information. So you have to have some kind of understanding. Are we going to have these data centers in our communities, controlled by our communities? Are we going to have this information sent overseas by different kinds of AI servers and so forth? And I think that these data centers, if they're going to be around, they have to be self-sufficient. In other words, They have to provide their own power. There are bus sized nuclear plants, many nuclear plants that are being utilized as I understand it. So you're not taking away from the local platform of energy and also the water should be recycled as was previously mentioned by a previous speaker. So I think we need to be careful. We need to control the data centers that have our data in them, and that can be done in the United States, hopefully, and not have it done overseas if we don't allow these data centers in the United States. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Peter. Anyone else online before we close? Public comment? Okay, we'll close public comment and bring it to Council. Council Member McAdams.

Thank you, Mayor. And thank you, Guido, for bringing this quickly and efficiently. I also wanted to put on record that the City of Marina does not have an application. And exactly what our director stated is it just is to give time for staff to develop a good policy. this city our city marina we have a history of environmental injustices we have the sewer so we have all the pee all the poo from the peninsula we get all the trash uh fort ord is a super fun site and so you know what i think about and i hope my my colleagues will join me um in this action tonight it's like how many regional burdens do we take on as a community? And, you know, the Cal-Am desal plant that's not going to, you know, provide our residents water. So, like, when is enough enough? And, you know, I mean, I don't know that anyone will propose a data center in Marina, but it's certainly not going to go in Monterey or Pacific Grove or Carmel or Seaside. So where's it going? It seemed that the likelihood would be it would be here or, you know, unincorporated county property near us if and when that were to ever come. So for me, yeah. I want us to be prepared with the policy, be proactive instead of reactive. And again, a moratorium is just, we're just taking a pause to figure out, you know, what do we want or not want in our city? But I am so tired of Marina. just taking on environmental injustice after another, after another. And at some point, we really have to be mindful and think about future generations. So there are a lot of impacts. And I think that communities are finding that out, figuring that out the hard way. the noise, the water usage, the contamination. And I think that potentially there could be other impacts in the future that we don't know about. So anyways, I am very grateful that we're discussing this and I am in full support of the moratorium and continuing this conversation. Thank you.

Thank you, Jenny. Council Member Piyala.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Council Member McAdams, for reminding us about the environmental justice issue. That is just so relevant, I think, for the potentialities of the future. I don't want us to be so anxious about it being an urgency ordinance. As you said, we have to be real clear. There's no... you know, applications at this point. But I think that waiting for AB 2469 is important, as Anna-Lou said, that, you know, there are laws that we are going to have to abide by. So let's wait and see. That's only September 30th. Gives us time to look at it further and be proactive about what needs to be done. But I think that from what I was reading, Guido, that the Gilroy is recently enacting in a moratorium. It was not about the 400,000 square feet Amazon AI that is now going forward, right?

I mean, they're retrospectively- That one got approved three years ago.

I'm sorry?

That one got approved three years ago.

So when you say that they are enacting 45, it doesn't stop that project.

That project is... I drive by that site every day.

Yeah. Okay. So it's so close by. They're our neighbors. So we get to see real time the impacts of this kind of a project being built in a small town in our region. So... I think we should be paying very close attention to it as we develop our own stance on these kinds of developments. But I would like also to know, in reality, not necessarily tonight, in reality, which sites could possibly be considered for something like this? And so do we have... sites in the future that you're worried about? Because right now, of course, you know, we don't have any applications, but I just need to know, is it M-Best site? Is it, you know, what are we actually talking about that could possibly be on the agenda for that?

It's mostly industrial sites, but within the downtown.

Within the downtown.

There's some wiggle room that cause concern.

And you mentioned Marina Station, Guido?

There is industrial land within Marina Station, potentially.

Okay. And Embest, would you consider that? Or airport?

I haven't looked at those sites yet. Okay.

I'd just like to know for, you know, because if there isn't any worry at all, then I don't want to worry about it. I don't have to. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Let's go to Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. First, thank you, Council Member McAdams, for bringing this up. What strikes me in the conversation is how we all probably think of what a data center is very differently. And I think that that confusion and lack of clarity is exactly why an urgency ordinance is absolutely appropriate so we can start to define those things. In fact, I reviewed our own ordinance language, and I didn't see a single definition in there. In my opinion, the city of Marina has numerous data centers already, right? CSUMB on their Twitter page indicates that they have two large data centers on their campus. The Defense Manpower Data Center borders our city. It's one of the biggest data centers in the region, holds all the military data for personnel records for the armed forces. And NPS recently announced that they have one of the largest supercomputers that does predictive weather modeling that is world-class, right? It's a data center of its own. The City of Marina Police Department has its own mini data center, what a tech person like me would call a data center, which holds police records and things of that nature. I have a data center in my house. I do a lot of cybersecurity work. I have test network area storage systems. I have what I call a data center in my house. I don't necessarily oppose any of those. I think what we're talking about tonight are some larger scale projects that have incredible resource needs that we may not be able to provide. But I do want to mention that even in those cases, it will be those data centers that will solve medical problems like breast cancer, that will solve climate change, that will feed millions of hungry people because it will figure out the ways that you can do that through agriculture advancements and technology. And so I just kind of want to provide a little bit of that balance that while, yes, I think this urgency ordinance is absolutely appropriate and we need to kind of make some of those definitions and understand where we're going. I've heard a lot of rhetoric that just the very two words put together data centers is an inherent evil, and I'm not sure that that is truth either. So let's just be methodical as we to staff as we approach these data center issues and and find out what's best for our residents. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Brian. Mayor Pro Tem Fischer.

Thank you, Guido. And thank you to all my colleagues here, because I agree with everything that was said. But the environmental injustice made me think about, wait a minute, KLM's plant will be, diesel plant will be built right outside of our city limits. So do we need to talk with our partners? And by the way, I also, of course, agree that we need to have definitions about do we have a data center, like in your home, or are we thinking about a giant structure? So, but yeah, that's just maybe for staff to consider to look at what happens right outside of our city limits, but also just environmental injustice for our city.

Thank you. All right. Would someone like to make a motion?

I move to approve to adopt the urgency ordinance 2026 to temporarily prohibit land use applications for data centers and the establishment and operation of data centers within the city limits pursuant to government code section 6585A and determine that the adoption of the urgency ordinance is not subject to environmental review.

I second. Any final questions, comments before I go to vote? Roll call, please.

Council Member McAdams. Aye. Council Member McCarthy. Yes. Council Member Biala. Yes. Mayor Tim Fisher. Yes. Mayor Delgado.

Yes. Okay. That passes unanimously with the five of us voting. And we move on to our third public hearing regarding... We're going to, that's continued. I was thinking about the special event ordinance. That's why it's not in the packet. Then we're going to move to our only action item tonight regarding the request, Marina Equestrian Center's request for proposal. And who will be presenting that for us?

Bain Long, our city manager. Courtney Lindberg, our assistant city manager.

I'm going to close the door for you. Good evening, Council. So this is the long-awaited RFP for the Marina Equestrian Center. To come back, let me just scroll down. So just some background. In March, Council directed staff to put out an RFP for a new concessionary. We conducted a feasibility study to consider alternative uses for the property and then also exploring interim caretaker opportunities so that it didn't just sit as a vacant lot. So the current draft RFP that you have in your packet calls for a concessionary that will offer multi-use recreational. There's a lot of words that describe a lot of activities for cultural, educational, equestrian, entertainment. It's a huge property. It has a lot of potential, which I think we all could agree to. The complexities is that it has to comply with our quick claim deed and the National Park Service program of utilization. It's a very multi-use property as we were just discussing before with the potential to house evacuated animals in the case of emergency. And then we also have city presence on property during this interim and ongoing. So the recommendation is for City Council to adopt a resolution approving the request for the proposals for the concession at Marina Equestrian Park to provide educational, entertainment, and recreational facilities to the public. And that said, if there's any questions, happy to discuss.

Thank you very much, Courtney, being succinct. Let's go to our public. Lisa Reich and anyone else like to come up? Are you still the chair of the Recreation and Cultural Services Commission? Oh, come on up, Lisa. Let us know what you like. Let us know what you think. All right. I see no one rise. We'll go online to Jeffrey Markham. Welcome, Jeffrey.

Thank you, Mayor. I had a question about the ability for the primary concessionaire to be able to basically subcontract out parts of what was being proposed on the RFP. And secondarily, if a concessionaire did do a significantly smaller portion appropriated to equestrian use, would that have a secondary RFP which would go out for any other uses?

Okay, so very good question. Yeah, because it is a huge property and there's a lot of words like I listed in what we were looking for.

Excuse me, let's just finish public comment. So let me just close public comment and then we'll address the public comment. Anybody else remotely have any questions or comments they'd like to make before we close public comment? Alessandro Salazar, welcome.

Hello?

Yes, go ahead.

Okay. Good evening Mayor Delgado and council members. My name is Diana Salazar and I am 19 years old and a resident of Bonneret County. I joined this call today because I wanted to share what the Marina Equestrian Center means to me and why I believe it can be a valuable resource for young people in our community. horses for about three years. When I first started riding, I definitely thought of it as a hobby, but over time it became much more than that. Working with horses has taught me patience, responsibility, confidence, and discipline. Horses don't communicate with words, so you learn to pay attention, stay calm, and build trust through consistency. Those are lessons that I have definitely carried over into my education. This fall, I'll actually be starting my first college-level veterinary courses with my goal being to become a veterinarian. And spending time around horses definitely helped me realize how much I enjoy working with them and showed me the many opportunities that exist within animal care and science. It transformed my interest into animals into a clear career path and gave me something meaningful to work towards. I was especially excited to see that the proposed RFP for the Marina Equestrian Center included opportunities for public writing lessons, equine husbandry instruction, youth and adult programs, educational workshops, and most importantly, hands-on learning opportunities. I think that's a really important part of the Center's future because programs like these can give others the same chance I had to gain practical experience, develop new skills, and explore interests that they may have never discovered otherwise. I feel like the Equestrian Center has the potential to be much more than a place to ride horses. It can serve as a community resource where people of all ages learn about animal care, agriculture, environmental stewardship, and equine science. By offering the educational and summer programs that they have mentioned, the center creates opportunities for learning, growth, and community engagement. I would also love to see opportunities for young women and students to become involved at the Center, whether that's through volunteering, helping with educational programs, mentoring younger writers, or assisting with community outreach. I think those opportunities have a very lasting impact. I will be happy to volunteer my time and help however I can because I genuinely support this project and believe in its potential and positive impact it could have for future generations. I know the council has many different factors in determining the future of the property, and I appreciate all the work that has gone into bringing this RFP forward. For me, horses provide a direction, a sense of purpose, and motivation, and my hope is that the Marina Equestrian Center can provide that same opportunity for other young people to grow, gain confidence, and learn, and maybe even discovered a career path that changes their lives. Thank you for your time and for considering the future of the Marina Equestrian Center.

Thank you, Deanna. And thank you for your email earlier. I hope you stay involved with the process of selecting the concessionaire. Really important that we keep getting your input. Let's go to Denise Turley. Welcome, Denise.

Hi. And a hello there to Matt Mogeson, city manager of Marina. So, yeah. My concern is fairly broad but brief. Do we have somebody with institutional memory like Margaret Davis, sorry Margaret, or someone like that who can do an outline for what we did horrible and never ever should do again and include that in what we're doing? Thank you.

Thank you very much, Denise. Anyone else online wish to raise your hand to speak who hasn't already before we close public comment? All right, we'll close public comment. And if we can first answer Jeffrey Markham's questions.

Yes. So thank you. So the short answer to his first question is yes, we encourage teams to be built to address all of the elements that you wish to address from RFP. Like I said, I understand there's a lot of elements to it. So, yes, definitely. And then also want to make sure that. It's very clear that this is not a rushed process. This is going to be very intentional. This is going to be, you know, include a lot of feedback from council, probably the community so that we can get it right. So if for whatever reason we're not happy with the proposals, we don't get any proposals, we will reassess. So to address his second question, let's just say we only get proposals for a small portion or percentage of that property. We would absolutely reassess, bring back to council what to do with the rest so that we stay in compliance with NPS. We're using the space. We're, you know, maximizing the needs of what the community wants and needs from that property. So I think that answers his questions.

All right. And then, uh, Denise's question about do we have residents experts with historical knowledge to ensure we don't repeat things we wish we would have done better in the past?

We've been having discussions about, you know, I'm hoping that we get a big, beautiful pile of proposals that we have to dig through, very similar to the Sports and Aquatic Center, where it's a wonderful problem to have of so many experts wanting to build a marina. So I'm trying to, you know, manifest that for this property as well. And if that is the case, we will, you know, look at who is the best to build. be as part of a panel. Maybe we might need to interview and try to narrow down who we're talking to. So that's going to be a conversation that we have after the bid close date and we see what we got.

All right. Thank you. Let's go to Council Member McAdams. Nope. All right. Maybe a question for the city attorney. I see in the staff report, the RFP paperwork mentions the word lessee. And we've always been kind of confused, I have been, between a concessionaire and a lessee. So whoever is the concessionaire, will they be a lessee or will they be not a lessee?

So maybe I'm not finding where that is, but we try to scrub it pretty clean to make sure that there was not a lessee. And maybe I missed one. But in any event, a concessionaire is not a lessee. A lessee has certain property rights. We are not authorized to lease this property under the quit claim deed that the city obtained as property rights. uh from the national park service so uh it is a concessionaire it's much more limited right they have i guess what you would call a license to operate their facility on the city property okay

And then I did send a couple of questions to city staff and one of them regarding maintenance and then page 9 of the RFP it requires the lessee to keep and maintain. Certain aspects of the facility, including all structures. And to me, that means roof, walls, windows, which typically in the real world, outside world, are the landlord responsibilities. And because this was a big deal that torpedoed our previous Marine Equestrian Center, we're not able to upkeep the property according to their agreement with the city, nor was the Water City Roller Hockey able to. Because they agreed to do things they never could afford to do, but they just wanted to sign whatever it took to be able to use the property. So the property was never maintained by the concessionaire lessees, and the city never maintained it because it wasn't, in their eyes, in our eyes, our responsibility. So to me, this perpetuates two problems we've had in the past. So I asked staff about that.

I can answer that. So that is a description of what it's... I guess the responsibility of the city would be, and again, it's not going to be a lease, but in this situation would be similar to a landlord in the sense that we're required to deliver the structures sort of in... you know, good working order. And then anything that outside of that, in order to maintain, it's the concessionaire's obligation, or if it were a lease, it would be the lessee's obligation to maintain those buildings in good working order after they've been delivered in that state. so uh structurally if there was an issue with the building then that would be the responsibility of the city as a landowner and uh owner of that property to repair potentially but again if i guess it depends also on the circumstances structurally you might it's almost definitely the city other issues that kind of are potentially and i think we talked about this example Broken windows, for example, if it's a broken window and there's unknown when and how that window was broken, the city would likely repair that. But if we knew clearly it was through an activity in session air, then they'd be obligated to repair that.

And that's currently a problem at Block Patton Park. If a bench is vandalized, is it the city's responsibility to fix it or replace it? Or is it just needs painting and then the city's responsible to maintain it, but the landowner is responsible to replace it or fix it? that's the kind of thing that we would get into. So right now it looks like the words are that if there's a leaky roof, their job is to maintain all structures. But typically that's not what we would expect a lessee or a concessionaire to do. Maybe, I mean, maybe it was Joby. We would have, I don't really know. But anyway, so will this language be cleaned up or will it be left the way it is for further clarification in the future?

Mr. Mayor, one thing just became clear to me, and I think that the city attorney's review earlier was based on his contract language as well, and now we're looking at the RFP materials. So I think we could make those two things match up before we release the RFP.

Okay.

So the maintenance provision reads a little bit differently than I think the contract term does that the city attorney drafted.

Okay, and then my other comment was the language in the RFP on page four about continuing to enable limited private comma self-care boarding and full care boarding. is confusing because that's what torpedoed our relationship with the Marine Equestrian Association and says the long-term or permanent boarding cannot be permitted. So it's confusing to me, and I've been through this for 15, 20 years. I think it might be confusing to RFP perspective submitters. And so I'm wondering if this can be clarified, if not tonight, before it goes out to bid.

Certainly, we can also take a look at that and make that as clear as possible.

Okay. And does the official, does Renee's exhibit cover that or describe it any differently?

Yeah. So let me just, if I can kind of add some clarity here. So there's an email from the program administration for the National Park Service. Uh, that wrote to the city about the self care boarding. He says that it would be allowed under some circumstances and he describes those circumstances and we used, we've used the language in the email to sort of. Mirror what's in the RFP and mirror what's in the agreement. So again, if any proposal came with a potential self-boarding or boarding of animals there, we'd have to work with the National Park Service to clarify to make sure that that is consistent with that email that we received. I believe it was in 2001. That's not Exhibit B?

From David Singenthaler?

Yes.

Okay, so that's January 12, 2017. The presence of privately owned boarded horses may not impede the public access to and use of the park, et cetera.

Okay.

Just wanted to bring it up because I know it's caused a lot of consternation for our city and our city council in the past. And this seems to perpetuate that a little bit. So confusing. Let's go to council member Viola.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In terms of maintenance, we know as a city the high price tag that maintenance will cost. And, you know, I know we have that language, but do we expect them to have – you know, an estimate of long-term maintenance of their facilities or the grounds or whatever. And is that built in as a fiscal responsibility as well as not just saying that, yes, I'm going to do it.

I know the short answer is yes, but then the longer answer is it really depends on the scope of what the agreement looks like. If it's a small percentage, if they're able to, you know, occupy the entire property, it's really going to depend. And so then once we know that scale, then we can talk about what the city is responsible for as, you know, as city attorney said, landlords and then what they're, uh,

desire is for longevity you know what I'm saying if they give like a 20-year lease they might be a little bit more inclined for a bit more investment so there's so many questions that we're not going to have the answers to until we have those proposals in front of us whatever is defined I would really want them to put a dollar amount to it because we've we've been as a city we've struggled with this it's been left out so many times and so we just want to make sure that this amount of property, whether it's small or big, that there is, you know, an absolute fiscal responsibility attached to it. Agreed. Thank you.

Mayor Pro Tem Fisher.

Thank you. And thank you, Courtney, for this. I'm excited about that we're doing something with this beautiful property that we have. But I repeat, I think we should look at the big picture. For this, you know, I know that needs to go and RFP needs to go out and we'll be happy if we get exciting proposals. But it's right next to the Las Animas site, which will become available. We have the Amateur Radio Association website. right next door to the question center. We're thinking maybe soccer might be possible at Las Animas, but it might have to spill over into this site. So there is also the former fire station site just across the street. Marina Coast Water District has a two-story building, office building, yes. So anyway, it's such an interesting area. And I would hate it that we do something that excludes combining what's around it. So I like how broad it is. So hopefully this will be looked at with the surrounding areas in mind. Yes. And then I see CIPs, you know, the projects. How will this work? You know, it says here... Any capital improvements made to the property shall become city property immediately after construction. How long are we thinking to have the leases for the city manager? What are we thinking about the term of the lease?

Councilmember, I'm not exactly sure at this point. I think it's going to be a lot to do with the proposals that we get back. We'll probably evaluate from there. And if they are putting money into it, they're going to want longer to capitalize that. So I think from my understanding, because I wasn't here when you guys reviewed this in April or May, the idea was to make it a little bit more broad this time so you can hopefully get the best mix of success out there to evaluate. So I think that's what we've tried to draft this as to kind of gain those types of ones that are a little bit more innovative and So I think the answer might be that when we get the proposals back, we'll have the opportunity to come back and say, do you want to consider expanding or doing additional things? But I think the way it's written right now is just on this property to try and get that interest of not making it so narrow that it's only equestrian uses that, again, we've heard that have not worked in the past and to try and make it so that it can be a long-term success. I think you're right. There are a lot of other opportunities and it's kind of exciting to see what some innovative people send to us.

Yes. I like how broad it is. And, but yeah, nobody in their right mind would invest a lot of money if they get a five-year lease. And then even if they're not sure if they will be, if the lease will be terminated earlier for whatever reason, you know, like we have encountered and, um, yeah, I keep keeping abroad. I love seeing the goats and the chickens there as well, because we don't have that in the city for, for families, especially children, but even grownups, we go look at the, look at the chickens and, um, Also, if we include or look at those animals, you could do private boarding there, I assume, because that's not deed restricted. So that might be an option for some revenue coming in to offset costs, just to throw it all out there and make it even broader. Yes. I just came up with that tonight. So that's funny. Okay. So, yeah, I'm excited and we'll see what comes in. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you, Elizabeth. Let's go to Councilman McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. I, too, am excited about broadening the use. I think that it's important to note a wide right. I mean, the sky is literally the limit of potential uses here, whether it's camping or youth hostels or concert venues or whatever the case might be. I'm not optimistic about the equestrian use. This council knows that I have supported it for many years in many ways and will continue to support it tonight. But quite frankly, fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, shame on us. Now we're in the third or fourth round of being fooled. And for that reason, I don't know that I would support more than a five-year lease, but I want to see what kind of proposals come back and I'll keep an open mind. But quite frankly, I think it's time that we start getting serious about looking at some future uses here as we evaluate any proposals that come in. So I hope that potential bidders are listening to this and will cater their proposals to some of these comments. That's what I've got. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Brian.

Council Member Biala? Just a real quick comment here, along with that caution. It says here, maximize public benefit and appropriate revenue to the city. I think that that's where it's going to find the footprint. Because if we're investing in large amounts of things that are lost leaders for us, the city can't maintain that. We have to subsidize that. sort of more non-revenue generating projects with something that will generate. So I think that the RFP folks will figure that out, hopefully. And so this is not going to be a losing proposition for the city. It can't be. It's valuable property, but it has to be able to at least break even and always ensure that financial feasibility. So I think that that would take care of some of it. So, yeah.

All right, I wanted to go back to something that Jeffrey Markham asked. It was, what if a bidder, an RFP submittal came in for only a small portion? Let's say they just wanted to do equestrian on five acres, not 27 acres, which is the size of this property. And I think that we, the city, would receive that idea and decide if we wanted to concessionaire that five acres to that applicant and then put out an rfp for the rest of it or if we say hey you need to get together with this other bidder who didn't even want to do equestrian but they want to do something with other 20 acres i mean there's all kinds of um combinations that could happen but that question was asked and i it might be because the asker of the question knew an entity that was interested in something small not the whole piece and so that was his question but uh but it's a staff what if a an applicant puts in a proposal for a small piece of that property

I think, I mean, there's a million what-ifs with a property this big and this dynamic, right? So we're taking calculated steps. We're going to have on-site visit, pre-bid meetings. Those are really good opportunities to network and build teams. You'll often see, and we've got another RFP out, and we know that there's a lot of people on multiple teams with all these different ideas. So there's a a million different ways that you could slice and dice that property. So I think to go down either one of those rabbit holes too early is not super productive, but I would like to encourage people to really think outside the box. I mean, equestrian is in the title because it's always been the equestrian, but it is recreational. It is cultural. It is right in the middle of two prime properties. It is part of the dunes, Imjin. I mean, that's a really... booming area. And if somebody did have a vision that was far beyond even what we put in this open-ended RFP, we want to hear it. So I would just encourage people to ask questions, attend the meetings. All the Q&As will be addressed. If they need more time and they want an extension, I mean, please ask. So this, like I said, this is going to be really intentional along the way. We're not looking to just get somebody in and sign a lease and move on. If there's a five-year opportunity, we can explore that. If there's a 20-year where we're looking at mutual investment into infrastructure on that property, I mean, literally, it's completely up for the most creative person. So I'm hoping that people hear this, people share the RFP when it comes out, that we reach far and wide because I think what I'm hearing from everyone is we all see what it could be.

Okay. And I know that mayor has been talking about the pot, the vision or possibility of soccer fields at the old stockade site. And today someone mentioned the big picture. So off of a 27 acres, there's, five or ten other acres that we have no plan for where the former stockade that's animus rock crushing facility was and one could envision shared parking between soccer fields and the equestrian center but if we cut off our thinking in this rfp to the 27 acres we might go down the path of developing that. And then later on when we went soccer fields, we see that we missed an opportunity to coordinate the two. So how do we open this? How do we explain to prospective applicants that they could think even bigger than the 27 acres?

I think that would be, an appropriate addendum to make sure that they understand taking a step back from that parcel, what's surrounding, there's an undeveloped non-restricted area, you know? And, and so I don't want to speak to the other side of the streets. That's not our property, but we know that it's not done.

No, I mean our property.

I know, but I'm saying if you take a step all the way back on both sides, so like you sandwich in the equestrian center, who knows what could flank it on either side. Yeah. um so i think that that would be good for them to know unfortunately we don't have plans ironed out we've got all kinds of ideas we've got several locations for soccer fields so we're not beholden to that area but that is an idea for that area so you know when i start when i want somebody to visualize something and i don't know exactly what it's going to be i want to give them more than one idea of what it could be just so they're not thinking okay soccer field soccer field so That is something I would like them to see when they're doing the site visit, when they're reviewing the documents online. So I think as we're looking at painting a bigger picture, including that as a what could be would be helpful probably for them and their visioning. So I'm glad you brought that up.

It'd be addressed on site visits.

Site visits and through an addendum. If it's not obvious to everyone, which I seriously doubt it isn't, then that's absolutely something that we could make part of the package.

Thank you. Mayor Bertrand Fischer?

Yes. Yeah, the city does own... I need to look at the city manager. The city does own the former fire station. It's the site at... And that's just across from 9th Street. That's the southeast corner of 9th and California. That's another area. I think it's owned retail. But anyway, that's another undeveloped area. It's right across the street. So look at the big picture, please. Yeah.

Mr. Mayor, thank you. As I'm listening to the council and the discussion, I'm kind of thinking myself that if we want to include a larger area and position this differently, you know, it's a little bit of a slowdown. Perhaps we want to take a step back and include that. And so everybody's bidding on a fair and equal thing, for one. I think we're also still dealing with some things on the Los Animas site that we might want to figure out or consider first. And I'll ask the city attorney to address it. It feels like that's necessary. But It's just a matter of fairness and getting apples to apples in your proposals.

City Attorney?

Yeah, just a limitation. If we're going to do anything other than a concession agreement, and if it's a long-term nature, we'll have to consider other potential limitations, including if we need to comply with the Surplus Land Act. So this is just a concession agreement for the current property, so we need to explore that.

Okay. I am not in favor of delaying this, but putting it out there to see what we get and letting people know to have a bigger vision. But what's the rest of the council think? Council Member Biala?

this seems like it's trying to plan for Cypress Knolls, for example, and we had little charrettes and stuff going on too. So if we're not going to delay this and we want to synthesize, you know, get maybe, and I don't know, if we can do all the ideas presented and then have public workshops in which you know a list of of many different ideas is put forth and then get some feedback from um you know the public in charrettes that we did like for cypress knolls okay thank you kathy let's go to councilmember mcadams

Thank you, Mayor. I mean, I think let's do this right. Right. Like I want to just piggyback off of what Council Member McCarthy said. And so I just don't want to see a future council in three years talking about this because it's a mess and there's all these issues and so on and so forth. And so I sort of said it before. I'll say it again. I don't know anyone who has horses. I would much rather see a use that could broadly serve our community and residents as a whole. And if Pebble Beach can't sustain an equestrian center, why on earth do we think that we can as a business model? So whoever's going in there, I want them to be successful. I would hope that they have their own startup money as a business and a vision, you know, like we really have been holding the hands of the concessionaires by having staff there and helping them with marketing and helping them doing events. That's not, we don't do that for anyone else. Why are we doing that for the equestrian center? So I really want to advocate for getting someone in there who will be successful if there's part like a horse component great and maybe the vision is not we're having a horse center anymore um i i think we have to have that conversation so thank you thank you council member mccarty thank you mayor um

So while I wholeheartedly agree with Councilman McAdams, I think the way we do that is with what you're saying, Mayor, and just put this out and see what response we get. And if we don't, you know, if there's not that person that's standing by with the Capitol to say, hey, we've got expertise in this, we're ready to do it, and this is what we're going to provide, and this is our plan, then guess what? Then that's when I think we say, okay, sorry, Courtney, this goes in the garbage, and we start... We start from ground zero, right? Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem Fisher? Thank you, Brian.

Yes, thank you. I do not want to hold this up. And I'm also, everybody's very interested in the proposal that we will receive, and we'll see if there are horses involved or not. And then, but like I said, when we get the proposals, when the city gets the proposals, just keep in mind, it will be so much more clear when there are proposals. And just keep in mind that there are surrounding areas that can be as spilled over or be combined yes very exciting yeah thank you elizabeth

Mayor, Council Member Biala? Yeah, just one comment. So if we're calling it the MEC area, then it's kind of like if you ask for it, then you're going to get it. So maybe we just say there's a historical nature to the property, but in no way is the RFPs dependent on equestrian use or that it has to be the majority. If any, I think we should, frame it in that way because otherwise you're gonna you're gonna force people to feel that they in order to have a competitive bid it has to have equestrian use

Yeah, and we felt that too. I'll defer to a city attorney for that, but we were, I believe, just going off council direction.

Yeah, and in many places in this document, it refers to a whole broad use. So it doesn't say that it has to have horses or that a majority should be horses. It talks about velodromes and all kinds of variety of potential uses. So I think the way it's written, it doesn't give one the impression that it has to be focused on equestrian use. But you'll see when we get the, like Brian said, when we get the proposals, we'll see. And if we don't like those proposals, we take a different direction. Okay. Would someone like to make a motion? I'll make a motion.

Let's see. To adopt resolution XYZ authorizing staff to issue a request for proposals to solicit qualified operators for a long-term concessionaire agreement and marine equestrian center to include educational, cultural, recreational, and entertainment events and programs in addition to equestrian uses.

Yes, I'll second that. Now, a friendly amendment could be that you modify that language to say what you want it to say, such as, like it doesn't need to include. It says in addition to makes it sound like you have to include it. So you could say to include or not equestrian uses. Yeah, that's I accept that. Okay. Is that pretty clear? Okay. So you're you're my second holds to that. And I think it's going to be staff. their successful outreach to get across the two messages. You could, but you don't need to have equestrian uses, and you could, but you don't need to just consider the 27 acres. Those are two really important points without having to delay this whole process. Okay, any further questions, comments before we go to vote? We're on record time tonight to get Shep home. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, say no. All right, thank you. That passes unanimously. And we go to an item pulled by Council Member McCarthy. Brian, do you want to speak to this 10G2 PG&E item?

Sure, Mayor. So this is an easement. It's... I mean, I think it's pretty straightforward. PG&E is asking for an easement across a parcel that we own, which very interestingly is outside of our city limits. And, you know, we held two closed sessions about this. City Attorney, stop me. Or maybe you can explain why we're allowed to have closed sessions on this, just so I don't say the wrong thing, and then I'll continue.

So closed session are for staff to get direction from the city council that in closed session so that it does not put itself at a disadvantage when it is negotiating a real estate transaction, an easement in this case. And so that's why it's held in closed session.

Thank you. And so in my words, we have limited city resources that we're trying to get the best value of. And then to do that, sometimes you have to negotiate in closed session. You know, I know the city council gave direction of... to proceed with this, obviously, which is why it's here today. I missed the last closed session. Upon reflection, I just don't see the benefit to our residents of granting this easement, just plain and simple. I think that PG&E can go around us. We talk about environmental justice. This is a for-profit company that's asking to basically take our land for fair market value, but it should be noted that fair market value doesn't necessarily mean we should want to do it. And so you know i'm happy just to be the lone no just to kind of to to make that point or as a council we could bring this back into closed session and decide if we really want to proceed with that and it's the it's the value that our residents are getting for what we're giving up we're giving up land right and people talk about not having land for a fire station and all of these things we can never build upon land which in which we grant a utility easement

if the majority of the council think that's that's appropriate then you know I think we've all had some time to think about that so those are my comments thank you mayor yeah I think that the majority of council thinks it's not appropriate to force ourselves into court if we're going to lose litigation but let's turn it over to our city attorney for information on this sure

Alex Blanche- Sure, I just I just want to say that the mean this entire easement there's an existing easement that runs through city property, and I think any direction that PG&E goes from this point forward, it would need to go through city property. and um all pro lane it's an existing paved road we say all pro lane all pro lane is the name of the uh road that's delineated on the map uh and the their proposal the easement that is uh requested to be granted by this council would follow that route through a paved area the surrounding land is either in conservation easement land or is potentially the subject of a future conservation easement under the city's incidental take permit program

Okay, so if we told them to pound sand, we say no, what are some of the consequences?

So I'm not going to speak in open session about legal consequences. But in terms of their ability, they have an existing easement. They would come back to the city and request other authority. I don't know. So I think what I've been told is that this distribution line needs to be repaired, replaced. And so that is why they've come to the city.

And typically in other situations when utility companies ask for money, easements to maintain utility lines, what recourse do cities have to say no in general?

So I do understand as a public utility, there may be, and I think there are eminent domain powers that this utility may have. So that's another potential alternative if the city were to say no. So.

Okay. Let's go back to Councilman McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. And I appreciate the line of questioning because I think it helps us all understand. But just to be clear, there's no known threat of litigation or they've not suggested that they will litigate if we say no. I mean, as far as we know, it's our decision to make at this point. Is that accurate or have they made a threat of litigation?

I know of no threats. Thank you.

Yeah, I'll just say that in closed session, we discussed every option and what we could do, and then we brought it to public session tonight with the city attorney's participation. None of us like the idea of what's going on here, so we explore alternatives, and now it's in public session. Council Member Biala?

you mr mayor i was just going to reiterate that um that i think uh we as you know we always do this is we look at everything very carefully in open and closed session in particular but i i hope that you can find out that the exact discussions you know from the city attorney about that closed session because We did a thorough review. So I hate to kind of in public discuss anything that we discussed in closed session, but I think you should follow up because you missed that session. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Council Member McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. Just for the record, I did have an extensive conversation with the attorney today. I'll just add, and I don't have it in front of me, but the amount is in the staff report, right? We can share that's public. Fifty-some thousand dollars, I believe.

That sounds very high. My memory was a couple grand, $58,000. 58,000, what does that include?

35,180 for the easement and an approximate staff cost of 23,000, but they've agreed to pay the actual cost.

So I'll just wrap up by saying, and I think I can share that the initial proposal from them was much, much less. And so I appreciate council's willingness to go along with me on this suggestion that we negotiate and good faith to get the best value for the taxpayer. For me, it's still a no. I just think that we're not required to do this. That's why they're coming to us. They could easily go outside of the parcel we've not exhausted all negotiating opportunities with PG&E. It's not personal against PG&E. They're great partners. We would want them to be great partners anyway, I'll say that. You know, we need to continue to work with them. But granting the easement tonight does indefinitely limit our land usability on that land in a way that it would not be limited if we did not grant the easement. I don't believe that we're required to. I don't even know that they have a legal, they've not expressed a legal basis to say that um they would otherwise litigate or or do it um and so that's just where i'm at but again i mean i i'm happy to be the lone no if that's where we're at but i wanted to articulate that for the record thank you right city attorney uh do you is it your opinion that it would be easy for them to go somewhere else so they have alternatives if we say no

I don't I don't see that as a viable path. I think there are. Other ways they can go, but those would have more impacts to the city. The city's land. That's.

Thank you. Would someone like to make a motion? A motion that we adopt a resolution approving the grant of the public utilities On city property of PG&E shown in Exhibit A, subject to the technical approval by the city engineer and review and approval by the city attorney, and we authorize the city manager to execute the easement substantially in the form as set forth in Exhibit B, and for the city clerk to record the easement in the Monterey County Office of the County Recorder. Is there a second?

I'll second.

All in favor, unless there's any more questions or all in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, please say no. No. Okay, thank you. That motion passes with council members McCarthy and McAdams dissenting. And as far as housekeeping, are there any council reports on meetings or conferences, Guido? No.

10 G one the Marina station was that pushed October 6 are you still got pulled from consent I wasn't clear.

Yeah I think.

Ernie say if the work that needs to be done can be done for the next meeting or you need more time.

So I understand that was pushed to October 6 is what you October OK.

all right uh the monterey county mayors association it meets once a month so the 12 mayors have lunch in one of the 12 cities so every month it's in a different monterey county city it was in the city of uh gonzalez last friday it'll be in the city of marina um in November. And it was interesting that that city has a moratorium on building permits through 2030. Can you imagine if Marina had a moratorium citywide on building permits? Because they don't have proper wastewater. So the Regional Water Quality Control Board has restricted them so they can't have and they can't approve any building permits. It's really amazing to hear that because you just You have empathy for a city that is in that situation. Nothing more to report on that. Any council reports on meetings or conferences? All right.

Well, then we are adjourned. Thank you, everyone.