City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the February 4th, 2026 regular meeting at the Larkspur City Council. I am Mayor Andre, and I will call this meeting to order. It's 630 p.m. Madam Clerk, can we get a roll call, please?

Council Member Kandel. I am here. Council Member Margulies. Here. Council Member Way. Here. Vice Mayor Paulson. Here. Mayor Andre. Here. Here.

All right, thank you. If you can stand, let's do the, let's leave with these.

I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right, thank you. So this is the time for public comment. So time for members of the public to address the city council on items that are not on the agenda. If you have any, if you would like to make a public comment, please approach the podium, state your name and which city you're from. And you have three minutes. Please welcome.

Thank you. And thank you. I passed out a text of this that I understand. I didn't know I had three minutes, so I will excerpt from the text.

Is the mic on? Sorry.

Do I need it? I mean, I can. Okay. So again, thank you for the forum. And this discussion is regarding the groups of preteenagers and teenagers that have been making a bicycle course in the area adjacent to the utility entrance. to the bike path that's at the corner of William and Chanticleers. And they're also building bike paths in the hillside beyond. And it's been going on for at least five years, but has dramatically, dramatically escalated in the last year. So I've lived at 304 William for 15 years. And for context, I'm a professor of PEDS at UCSF and an adjunct at Stanford. And I teach pre-adolescent and adolescent behavior and development to the doctors in training. And I'm also a father and a grandfather, which is more qualification. So I sent a few emails to the city over the last few years addressing these things on the paper and received a single response about a year ago that said noting the e-bike sign that was posted saying that the issue was resolved. And I appreciated the sign, but I said that none of the issues that I brought up were addressed with the e-bike sign. So there's three issues that, and I'll just quickly go over them and they're in more detail here. So first is a public safety hazard, which is of course the most important. And I did have pictures, which I guess we'll see later. And it shows that these kids have trenched down a fairly steep embankment from the hillside, right onto William and they ride their bikes right into the street. I've had to jam my brakes on several times to avoid hitting them. And last year, I saw a car swerve directly toward a woman walking a baby carriage to avoid a bike that had come into the intersection. They also, on the hillside behind, come at speed down the hillside on these paths that they're continually making, which is a danger, especially to small children and small dogs and the elderly. I'm concerned that an accident will happen because it will. And if it has a bad outcome, I think that the city could be held culpable and don't want that. Another issue is the destruction of public property. And as taxpayers, we all came here to be in Larkspur and the physical beauty that represents Larkspur. that is represented here and how everybody gets to enjoy it. But if you could see these pictures, it would be very clear the extent of the damage and erosion from these kids. They work in groups of two to six kids usually. The age range is probably, I would guess, 10 to 14 years. And they come with equipment. Two weekends ago, we counted 11 kids in a group on the hillside with rakes and shovels chopping away. because of the inactivity of the city, I've gone out, tried to talk to them. And I've actually called the police twice. The police came to talk to them and made them understand the illegality of digging. And they told them they could be cited. It did not affect their activity whatsoever, not even a little bit. other than they now post out, they post lookouts for the police.

Mr. Zaglin, I'm sorry to interrupt you. You've gone beyond the three minutes, but I do appreciate your letter. And so what we can do is we will review this. I will commit to reviewing this. And we will work with staff to respond and perhaps agendize this item so that we can actually have a full discussion. Because this is public comment, we're not able to respond to you directly right now. But if this is agendized for a future meeting, you can come back and then we can have a fuller dialogue with the rest of council.

Okay.

If that is okay with you. You know, we will definitely get back to you on that. Is that okay? But thank you. I did see that in your letter. So we will have the city manager, you know, reach out to you. Quite all right. But thank you. Thank you for coming tonight and making us, you know, aware of the situation. Thank you. Okay. Is there any other? Is there anyone else in the chamber who would like to make a public comment or anyone online?

Ready race answer the zoom audience members, and there's no public comment.

Okay, great. Thank you. All right. So now we'll go to item three of presentations, which are none. And then we are at item four, approval of the consent calendar. Is there any member of the public or member of council who wants to pull any item off the consent calendar for discussion? I see none. Can I get a motion to move the consent calendar?

I assume so.

I'll second.

Okay, great. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstain? Okay. Thank you. Consent calendar passes. Okay, item number five, the city manager's oral report.

I want to let the council know that the police council for the central and police authority met recently in a special meeting to help facilitate the installation of the electric charging infrastructure that we require to continue our path toward electrification of our police fleet. And so that was a major hurdle and I'm pleased to report that in collaboration with PG&E, we are now moving quickly to try to get that infrastructure in place. And in conjunction with that, as I think all of our councils are aware, and I hope members of the public are aware, We actually have two patrol vehicles that are electric blazers, police-rated blazers. We also have electrified quite a bit of our non-pursuit fleet and non-patrol fleet. And to our pleasant surprise, the patrol vehicles are far more efficient than we initially anticipated. So our fuel consumption on those two vehicles is lower than we projected. And so I think not only is the electrification of our police fleet going to continue because it's the policy decision that the police council made, but I think the economics are proving to make a lot more sense than we had even hoped. We had thought the payback might take longer, but we're finding we're probably going to have to remodel our payback time. So I wanted to share that with the council. Yeah, that's really exciting news. My understanding is we're a little, we're kind of first in line in our area to have adopted the Blazer as our vehicle, and it's working out really well for us.

Excellent. Thank you for that update. Any questions or comments? Okay. Any council members have any updates or reports?

I don't. Not today. No. Yeah, I have a short word.

So good evening, everybody. I just wanted to report out, number one, that next week on Wednesday, the 11th, we'll be having a Climate Action Forum meeting here in the city chambers, in the council chambers, excuse me. And a couple of items that will be on our agenda will have a featured speaker discussion. Director of Public Works, Julian Skinner, talking to us about operational strategies for the library battery storage system, using it as emergency backup versus continuous peak usage. So we'll also be discussing potential procurement of a diesel generator for emergency events. And then we'll be preparing our first annual progress report to evaluate the implementation status and prioritization of climate action items. So please come join us. It's open to the public. We welcome and would love to have everybody participate. I also wanted to mention that last council meeting on the 21st of January, we had a bunch of members from the Larkspur Marina show up talking about the King Tide floods and some of the issues that they suffered in their neighborhood. And as the representative to Ross Valley Sanitary District, unfortunately, their meeting conflicts with our council meeting. But I did have a chance to listen to the recording. And I did wanna report out to the public that a couple of things, you can absolutely watch this recording. It is a public meeting and all are welcome to participate in the meeting and show up for public comment. But if you review the meeting, you can go directly to about 54 minutes at which point in the meeting, the general manager Moore talks about the King tide floods and the RVSD's response to the floods specifically. to Larkspur Marina's neighborhood. And he reports that they felt they were very well prepared. They did all that they could, but nature overcame them along with an issue that was confronted due to the current bulkhead construction project, which has been discussed in our previous meeting. But He talks about some of the lessons they learned and what I thought was very interesting and our residents would find interesting is that they do have some long-term corrective actions that are more near-term than long-term. And that is that they're going to be increasing the force main capacity for the sewer system in 2027. And in 2028, they're... changing the gravity sewer improvement. So they'll raise the sewers to appropriate elevations, and that may result in the removal as many as four pump stations in that neighborhood. So they are going to be making some significant improvements that will update the infrastructure that is from the 50s and 60s. So that should really help mitigate these types of problems in the future. And that is all I had to report on Ross Valley Sanitary District.

Sarah, what was the date of that meeting?

That was January 21st. 21st.

Okay. So I can look it up online. Okay. Yes.

Yeah, I had a brief one. So this is a report out from the Transportation Authority Marin. So we met on the 22nd of January and the Measure AA tax, which is one of the big sources of funding, and it's also money that we get. for different projects is, you know, now being, you know, they're doing drafts for the amendments. And the one thing that may matter to us in Larkspur is the reimagined roadways project. So there's $35 million and, you know, Magnolia, as well as like in San Anselmo, their hub, that's all under discussion. So the timeline, I think here in February, uh, staff, I think our public works director and other staff are trying to reformulate the scope. And then it'll come to a vote back to TAM on the 26th of March. And then it'll come to us as a council. So they're going to need all the councils to approve it as well. And that'll be, I think, around April 26th or sometime at the end of April. So just a heads up, and we have a workshop coming up, but we know that our infrastructure, our roadways is something and we can bring that question up with staff and I have more details. But just a heads up, this is a fairly large sum of money and 11 jurisdictions all looking for different projects that they need to get done so we can make sure we have a seat and really be a part of that conversation. That's it. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry.

No, that's okay. I just wanted to add one thing. I did forget to say that the general manager Moore did say that at their next meeting, which is scheduled on 2-18, that he plans to provide a more detailed report of what happened and short-term and long-term corrective action for the Larchford Marina neighborhood. So if you're interested to definitely show up for that meeting and participate and learn what their preparations will be.

Can I do what she just did? I forgot about flood zone nine. So we had our meeting at the end of January. And, you know, the flood zone is, of course, including a lot of Ross Valley from Fairfax, you know, down to Loxborough, San Anselmo and Ross. And much of the discussion has been around building bridge two. So in the downtown, the plan was to remove that and allow more conveyance or throughput of the water. So there was an upstream flooding, but there was a lot of objections to the downstream neighbors because they might get elevation rise. And, you know, their homes could be in danger. So FEMA finally came back with a determination that if there's one objection, the whole project can't be done. So they got a funding extension. I think we're looking at around $20 million. You know, they bought the property. So I'm bringing it up partly for our council because with sea level rise, you know, with things like, you know, levees in particular, probably not dredging, but, you know, there are things that would be important to all our neighborhoods. And, you know, We may be looking at a re-scoping. So we have some more time until the tax measure expires. Details are still not there. And again, this is just the advisory board. Our supervisor and the rest of the board of supervisors can take the votes. But that flood district, we do have that input of what even the unincorporated like Kenfield around the College of Maroon, what we really want to do, floodgates and so forth. So I think this is timely, you know, the infrastructure of what TAM is doing and possible infrastructure implications for flood zone nine. So, you know, I might work with, you know, maybe see if we can agendize any of these topics. And it's been a kind of a slow moving issue, one that seemed to involve the upper Ross Valley. But now I think there's been a pivot. So we'll have to track that a little bit more. And that's it. No more.

Great. So can I ask a question? Because when you say that there's one objection, like from, what do you, from any, yeah, like from any homeowner, any, who has voted, who has actual, you know?

Yeah, so FEMA, they have a process. I think the acronym is CLOMER, Letter of Map Revision, Condition Letter of Map Revision. But, you know, there's been a lot of discussion with the town council, with the public works director. I think the one in Ross is actually a floodplain issue. you know, a certified or some kind of expert. So it's kind of been San Anselmo and Ross, you know, discussing it. And much of the preparation has been, you know, identifying through engineering reports when you take down this bridge and you're living, say, close to Winship or, you know, close to that corridor, you know, where you're by the magic Marin Art and Garden Center, if that level rises and goes up in your house into your floorboards, that's considered an impact that requires mitigation. And mitigation normally means raising the house. And the budget for all mitigation is $400,000. So, you know, they knew going into this that unless they get, you know, consent or there's some other way of doing this, you know, the project. But, you know, Public Works says, you know, there's a long history here and, you know, some I think recently in the IJ. But I think FEMA came back looking at the roughly 50 affected property owners and looked at the engineering reports and made the determination that, you know that they will not issue the letter until you know they get complete consent and I think the county might have you know thought about eminent domain I mean there's more than one pass at making this decision but uh I think the county now has come down and all of this will come to a head I think March 1st so it's really at the end of this month where you know next you know beginning of March City Council meeting we can start talking about if this means anything for larkspur thank you for the update

I guess I have one update and that's with MCE. It's been in the news a lot recently. I think most of it has been reported on. The difficulty with MCE is that it had operating losses in the last fiscal year, and those operating losses have continued for the first six months of fiscal 2026. And as of January 1, PG&E cut its rates by a substantial amount. And so MCE, in order to continue to compete with PG&E, is looking at cutting its rates significantly. But it is in a weaker financial position than it otherwise would be because it had, you know, a spike in its energy costs last year. And so there are going to be we are entering budget season and rate setting season. And so we are going to have to figure out the board is going to have to decide, you know, how much it wants to cut rates and how much it wants to dig into its reserves. in order to cut rates and stay competitive with PG&E. A lot of other CCAs have already cut their rates to match PG&E and are digging deep into their reserves to the tune of $150 million, which is a pretty significant amount. And so these are discussions that MCE will be having in the coming weeks. Next week, there's a four-hour budget session If anybody's interested, you can come and attend the budget session. But more to come on that front.

You're doing an exceptional job. I just want to let you know about MCE because I think your dive into it is more than we've ever done on our council. And your skill set, I think, is showing. And I'm very impressed with how much information we're getting them to share with the public. So thank you for that.

Thank you so much. It has been difficult. I mean, we have had, we are, you know, it has been traditionally been, you know, an agency where there are a lot of board members, decision-making has been difficult. And, you know, there, it just hasn't been as transparent as it could be. And so we are definitely working on that, just trying to be more transparent with the public so that the public really understands, you know, how the agency is being run, how these rates are being set. Right now, I think affordability is a very hot topic and it's very front of mind for a lot of people. And it's funny, I see a lot of complaints about PG&E and their electricity rate, but the reality is 80 plus percent of Marin And Contra Costa, 80-plus percent of residents have opted into MCE. And so most people don't realize that MCE is their electricity provider. And so when they're complaining about the electricity rate, you know, they complain that it's PG&E because they get the PG&E bill. they don't realize that they're MCE customers. So it does matter. We have a lot of consumers and a lot of customers, and so it will be important to see what the board does. Great, thank you. Okay, so we will move on to public hearings. So we are going to discuss the adoption of Ordinance 1096, amending sections of Title 15 of the Larkspur Municipal Code to adopt by reference and amend provisions of the 2025 edition of the California Building Standards Code, Title 24, California Code of Regulations. So can we get a staff report? Great. Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. So we previously had this item before you on January 7th and January 21st. We're here for a third time because of the pandemic. Hearing notice wasn't printed during the flooding in the newspaper. This is a local action to apply the state building codes that are effective statewide on January 1st, 2026. Those building codes are already in place. They're effective whether or not it's memorialized in our zoning code. This also carries forward our existing local amendments. Prior to the January 21st meeting, we did get one public comment on the item. The staff report has addressed some of the points made in that public comment that we did receive. We have not received a public comment since that time. And I think with that, I am here to answer any questions that you might have on the state building code adoption. So with that.

Okay, great. Thank you for the staff report. Anybody I'll open up for comment or questions from the council.

Hi. Thanks, Andrew. I just have a question for my own understanding, and this is regarding staff's response to public comments. So under Section 1508.020, Chapter 2, regarding different definitions for substantial remodel, Our public comment was suggesting a standard adoption of anybody who's going to make a change for 500 square feet, that that would be the minimum threshold to trigger some of these new Cal Green tier building codes. And the response says that, for example, a 500 square foot remodel does not add as much value to a 2,500 square foot property as it does to a 1,000 square foot property. And I just didn't understand what the logic is behind that. Given my basic knowledge of doing construction, right? If you're building at $750 per square foot, or more likely here, maybe $1,000 per square foot, why is it not the same value if it's on a 2,500 square foot home versus 1,000 square foot home? I was just curious. Right.

Well, as you know, and you are Our building permits are based on valuation and those valuations are based on square footage. So it is proportionate when it is applied. I can say that the comment implies that other cities are not consistent with this provision. I can say that Corte Madera has the exact same language San Anselmo and Fairfax do. My prior jurisdiction also has the 50% rule. So that comment focuses really on a very small scenario, very, very small homes, but In essence, the valuation is still based on square footage, so it's still going to apply equitably.

Okay. Sorry, can you repeat Corte Madera, San Anselmo?

Yeah, I did a quick check before the meeting, and Corte Madera, San Anselmo, and Fairfax all have the same language. And my prior jurisdiction, Millbrae, did. I know that Contra Costa County does. It's a very, very common standard used in cities throughout California.

So 50% the language that we have.

The common sense rules, what a lot of cities call it.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Sorry, just a quick follow-up. A lot of this is we are just adopting what's already been adopted by the state. For this particular section, what kind of discretion do we have as a local jurisdiction if we are going to comply with state regulations?

Very limited. If you wanted to make any changes, we'd have to bring it back to you at a later date. The state did pass some limitations on what we can do. We've made those findings to carry forward our existing local provisions. This wasn't a kind of code update where you're kind of reinventing and revisiting things. We're simply just caring for what's already on the books.

Okay, I'll also just jump in here and say Unlike prior local amendments that the city has had the option to do because of AB 130, we are limited now. So we have to fall, any local amendments have to fall into an exception. So it's a much more extensive process for us to pass local amendments.

Great. Thank you for that additional information. Any other questions from council? Okay, we'll open up to public comment in the chambers if anybody in the chamber has a public comment. Okay, anybody online?

The first commenter will be caller 1402.

Great. Is that Mr. Holmes?

Great. James Holmes, Larkspur. I'd like to offer two comments regarding the local provision for extensions of time to complete construction. This is a sensitive issue because sometimes construction can impact a neighborhood and construction concerns are often raised at the Planning Commission. When a construction plan is established as part of a public hearing process, then I think fairness suggests that neighbors get notice if the previously established time limit is proposed to be extended. Then if there have been problems, those can be timely brought to the staff's attention. I'd suggest that the ordinance require permittees to post a couple of notices of the proposed extension within 300 feet of the project property so neighbors will know of the proposal. And my second comment relates to the public comment suggesting that contractor non-performance be a basis for extension of time. I don't think this is a good idea because the contractor is the agent of the permittee, which is the principal, and basic agency law is that the principal is responsible for the acts of the agent, and the acts of the agent are imputed to the principal. Thus, allowing contractor action to be a basis for extension would be contrary to the rationale of the extension, which is supposed to be for things not within the control of the permittee, And it would also basically reward the contractor for non-performance and undermine the permittees incentive to control the contractor. So I would say give neighbors notice if their construction ordeal is proposed to be extended, but don't let the contractor's own conduct justify an extension. Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Holmes. Anybody else online who would like to make a public comment?

Any additional raised hands? There's no further public comment.

Great. Okay, so I'll bring it back to council. Anybody have any questions or comments about what we just heard?

I do. Great. Andrew, I guess a question for you. Taking the first thing that Mr. Holmes suggested, if a project is going to get an extension, that some kind of notice goes out to neighbors, would that type of change require the extensive process that we have just heard about due to the new state law?

Yes, is the short answer. Really, any changes that we make now to this law would fall under AB 130.

Okay. And not to go into the weeds too much, but could you just give us an idea, other than it's extensive, kind of what has to happen and the timeframe that we're talking about and staff time, you know, things like that?

Absolutely. So under AB 130, to do a local amendment, the exception that would apply here is that the amendment must align with the city's general plan. In this case, we have good news because You guys updated it in 2024. And so the provision, the sustainability provision related to greenhouse gases would most likely apply here. So that part the city has met. The second part of that is that the city has to incentivize all electric construction. So in this case, the city has not passed an ordinance doing that. So we would have to draft that ordinance, bring it to council for two readings and have that be adopted. At that point, we could come back and bring any local amendments to the 2025 Cal Green Code.

Okay, so just making sure I understand what you just said. If we are talking about something that has nothing to do with those two topics that you just mentioned, all electrification, you know, related to that new law, it's just giving notice if a contractor is going to go longer than they're supposed to. We couldn't do that unrelated amendment unless we first pass incentives for all electric new constructions. Am I hearing that correctly?

If we're doing, yes, if we're doing a local amendment to the Cal Green code, then that is the process. If we, if Larkspur separately wants to pass an ordinance regarding noticing that has nothing to do with these, with this ordinance, then it could go through a normal amendment process for a different provision of the code.

Got it. So if we wanted to follow through with what Mr. Holmes suggested, we could take an alternate path, just pass a separate ordinance addressing that issue if we so choose to, and then we would not have to go through that process that you just described.

Yes. If we decouple it from this, then that's the quicker option.

Got it. Okay. Thank you for explaining that.

Any other questions or comments? Okay.

I just have one comment, which is to Mr. Holmes, I appreciate that comment. And my suggestion is that we ask staff that if this becomes an issue where people are complaining because construction projects are going longer and the neighbors are inconvenienced, to please let us know, because I think it's a valid issue. I just don't know if it's... how often it happens and how many people are impacted by it, that would make it worthy of the time that it would take to do that. So if we can just track that and if it actually becomes an issue, we get some complaints about it, please let us know and then we can address it at that point. That's my suggestion.

Thank you. That makes sense. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions or discussion on this topic?

I think just to your point, Scott, we had that issue a number of years ago with construction projects going on and on and on and on and on. And we did pass an ordinance that addressed not notice necessarily in that, but requiring individuals to reapply for a permit after a certain amount of time so that we didn't have these perpetual projects going on. Am I correct with that? Yeah. And that was probably eight years ago or something.

Yeah, so Council Member Way is talking about we essentially passed a bad actor ordinance because we were having some high-profile bad acting. So we did enhance the penalty for missing your deadlines for your building permits. I do want to say that, you know, in my personal observation, Most people let their neighbors know, hey, my project's going to go a little longer than I thought. Maybe that's not everybody's experience, but I don't think we have a lot of abuse. We can track it, and we will do that. But I just want you to know, I don't think we actually have a big problem here in Larkspur of projects going on and on and on. And on the other issue, just while commenting, the provision about your contractor not performing, I think any of us who've ever hired a contractor, not everybody's wired to manage a contractor really well. And this provision allows staff to understand that a homeowner sometimes gets in a difficult situation where their contractor's just not performing and they're asking you for a little extra time to go find a contractor who will perform. I've never seen somebody use that provision as a tactic to extend their building permit. I've only seen it come in for the scenario I just described.

And just so we're on the same page, I agree with you. I think that Mr. Holmes has a valid legal point.

He does, and we can track it.

I just don't know how often it actually happens because I haven't heard of it. So I'm just saying, if there is a big problem that we haven't heard of, please let us know and we'll deal with it. As of now, I'm not aware that it's become a big problem. Thank you.

If I may add one point, this past year has been very difficult for builders. In my experience, the tariffs were very difficult because builders were not getting their supplies on time. I've had people who had to put projects on hold because they couldn't get garage door materials or just simple products that were imported. The same was true during COVID. And so one of the things that the public sees is a project that's not getting done. But what we see in the building department is oftentimes supply chain challenges, especially in the last few years. So I just want to point that out because that, in my experience in my last city, was a big problem, is that people just weren't getting the supplies they need to finish the job.

Thank you.

Yeah, great. Thank you for that additional color. Okay, so seeing no more comments or discussion, would anyone like to move this?

Sure, I'll move Adoption of Ordinance 1096, amending sections... title 15 of larkspur municipal code to adopt by reference and amend provisions of the 2025 edition of the california building standards code title 24 california code of regulations okay i'll second great all those in favor say aye aye any opposed any abstentions all right motion carries great

Okay, so now we are moving on to business items. Mid-year budget review. Can we get a staff report? Thank you.

As Amelia Gabriella, Administrative Service Director, takes the mic, I just want to acknowledge that The amount of work she puts in to produce what looks like a modest staff report is phenomenal. And I just want to acknowledge a lot of hours went into getting this information for you. And thank you.

Thank you. My name is Amelia Gabrielle. I am the Administrative Services Director for the City of Larkspur. And tonight, I'll provide your council with a mid-year budget review and go over some key highlights of the mid-year budget amendments for the general fund and special funds. So let me just... So we're a little bit over halfway through the fiscal year. And as of December 2025, the city had received a little over half of its budgeted general fund revenue and expanded about 50% of its budgeted general fund expenditure. So despite some uncertainties in the economy, our major revenue sources such as property tax and sales tax are holding up fairly well. Our costs remain generally contained within the initial projections with some exceptions. Overall, the city's financial performance is generally on target with the initial forecast. Starting with a review of the general fund revenue, the chart on the screen is a snapshot of the general fund revenue budget for fiscal year 25-26. Our property tax revenue is estimated at $16.6 million or 64% of the total general fund revenue. The next largest share of the general fund revenue is a sales tax estimated at $3.1 million or 12% of the general fund revenue. and this is followed by other taxes at 1.5 million, or 6% of total revenue. Other taxes include the transient occupancy tax, also referred to as the TOT, business license tax, and property transfer tax. Charges for services are estimated at $2.1 million, or 8% of total revenue. Charges for services include fees for services for planned check, planning, encroachment permit, recreation fees, and fiscal services provided to outside entities such as Central Marin Police and Ross Valley Paramedic Authority. The franchise fee is estimated at $1.1 million or 4% of total revenue. The composition of franchise fee includes fees paid by PG&E, cable, and AT&T, as well as garbage franchise fee. Finally, license and permits. Revenue is estimated at $1.1 million or 4% of total revenue. Licenses and permits include building permits, which represent most of the Revenue at $1,084,000. It also has residential inspections and tobacco licenses.

I'm sorry, can I ask you a quick question? I just want to make sure I'm understanding. These numbers are, even though there's a half-year projection, these are projected full-year number projections. That is correct. Based on half-year performance. Yes. Okay, thank you.

So on the next chart, you can see the City of Larkspur's annual property tax revenue that we received starting in 2014 all the way up to 2025. This is represented by the blue bars with the dollars and amounts and millions of dollars. The annual revenue forecast for fiscal year 25-26 through 29-30 is represented by the green bars. For fiscal year 25-26, current property tax receipts to date mainly consisting of the first property tax payment received in December 2025 from the county, and also the future projected receipts are pretty much aligned with the initial revenue projection of $16.6 million. No budget change is being proposed for property tax as part of the mid-year review. Next chart shows the City of Larkspur's annual sales tax revenue starting in 2014 all the way up to 2025. These are actual revenue received and are represented by the blue bars with dollar amounts in millions. The annual revenue forecast from 25-26 fiscal year all the way up to 2030 are represented by the green bars. For fiscal year 25-26, current sales tax receipts from July through November 2025 and future projected receipts are aligned with the initial revenue projection of $3.1 million. No budget change is being proposed for sales tax revenue as part of the mid-year budget review. On the next chart, you can see the city of Larkspur's transient occupancy tax, also known as the TOT revenue. And we can see the trends from 2014 all the way up to 2025. The annual forecast from fiscal year 2526 through 2930 is represented also on the chart. As we know, based on the annual swings we can see on the chart, TOT is a volatile source of revenue. So the current TOT receipts through December 2025 are slightly below initial projection. We are not proposing a budget change at this time, but we'll continue to monitor the tax receipts as we get closer to the end of the fiscal year. Next slide. You can see the annual general fund revenue for the city. The table on the screen is taken from Exhibit C of the Mid-Year Budget Staff Report. The middle column shows the actual revenue receipts totaling $13.3 million through December 2025. This compares to $25.1 million in budgeted general fund revenue. The column to the right shows a proposed budget amendment. The proposed budget amendment includes an increase of $787,000 in general fund to a revised total budget of $25.9 million. And the explanations are on the next slides for the increases. Okay, so item number one, we are proposing an increase in revenue for the building permit budget by $200,000 to 1.1 million to reflect the increase in building permit activities year to date. Item number two, we're proposing to add $60,000 in revenue to the other fines budget to reflect the increase in penalty fees levied during fiscal year 25-26 year to date. Item number three, we are proposing an increase for the plan check fees budget by $400,000 to $875,000. And this is to reflect the increase in plan check fees activities year to date. In this line item, we are also adding $79,000 to the charges for services budget to reflect the recovery of administrative service costs incurred in previous fiscal year. for the bulkhead lagoon project and bond issuances. So these are costs that were incurred in previous fiscal years and we are getting reimbursed in fiscal year 25-26. Item number four, increase other revenue by $46,746 to account for Cal OES reimbursement of $42,000 received in fiscal year 25-26 for expenses incurred in prior fiscal year. And we are also including in this line item a new library grant for $4,718 to fund e-books. I'm gonna move on to the next slide. So this slide shows a snapshot of the general fund expenditure budget for fiscal year 25-26. Public safety makes up 49% of total expenditure with $5.3 million going to Central Marin Police and $6.86 billion for Central Marin Fire. Fire expenditure also includes the pay-as-you-go portion of the other public employee benefits for health retirees, and that's about 200,000. Expenditure of $8.3 million also is for services such as library, recreation, streets, parks, engineering, planning, and building inspections. And finally, administration, along with city-wide contracts, debt service, city council, building maintenance, and CalPERS unfunded accrued liability are totaling $4.6 million. The total general fund expenditure on this chart is $25.3 million and does not include transfer out of $4.6 million for various items such as the pension obligation, debt service, insurance contribution, and the use of reserve for CIP projects.

Ms. Gabriela, if we have questions, would you like us to wait until the end?

You can ask now. That's okay.

All right, two questions on this chart. First of all, the debt service, can you explain what that is?

So the pension obligation bond is a debt, sort of a bond that we have, and then we're paying annually about $1.4 million. That includes reimbursement of the principal and interest.

Okay, and that's the portion that's interest?

That is the two components, reimbursement of principal and interest for $1.4 million. And this is part of the transfer out from the general fund into a debt service fund.

So I'm sorry, I'm looking at the column at about 12 o'clock. It says $242,000, 1% debt service.

So that is different. So that is the, I got to remember, that's the debt service for the corporation.

Yeah, so a portion of it was a private debt issuance that we took to improve the corporation yard when we moved in with the school district property. Okay. I think that's the bulk of it.

Yes, it is.

And that one, we're about two-thirds of the way through that.

Okay. And the other question I just had, we have 1.1 million for the library. Is that for the construction of the library or is that separate on here?

On the pie chart, this is the operating cost for the library. So that's an annual operating cost. Does that include construction or capital improvement projects?

And the projected operating costs of the library, are those increased due to the size of the new library? Is this the increased number, or is that kind of a consistent number from last year?

This is a consistent number from last year, plus a small adjustment that I'll be covering in a few minutes. Yes. Thank you. C-Manager.

Just get ready. The numbers are going to get bigger.

I have just one. What's the acronym TCCCRM? What does that stand for?

That is the old child care center. We take all of the different retirement benefits that we agreed to cover and we assign them to the departments and so that department couldn't be removed from the budget because we still have retirement obligations there. It was an enterprise operation and so we accounted for it in a very special way too.

And just for people to know, that center was closed during early stages of COVID in 2020.

Yeah. So this will start to shrink over time. Got it.

Okay, now I am on slide number 10. The slide shows the annual general fund expenditure for the city. So the table on the screen is taken from Exhibit C of the mid-year budget staff report. The middle column shows actual expenditures totaling $12.3 million through December 2025, and this compares to a budget of $24.6 million for general fund expenditure. The column to the right shows the proposed budget amendment. The proposed budget amendment includes an increase of $714,000 in general fund expenditure to a revised total of $25.3 million. And on the next slide, I'll go over these changes. Okay, so item number five on the table is an increase in expenditure for building inspection by $600,000 to account for an increase in building permit and plan check activities. And we have corresponding revenue increases in budgeted fees. I mentioned that earlier. Item number six is an increased expenditure by $113,000 for new library at the Commons to reflect purchases of e-books, children's books, material and supplies, utilities, relocation of the existing library supplies to the new facility. And there's also ancillary costs included in there and there's janitorial services for the new library facility. These costs are prorated uh to represent three to four months of operations uh for the new life at the new library so we're anticipating that there will be additional cost operational costs related to the new library that are not quantified nor included in this total at this time ms gabrielle yes again i'm sorry just one one more question uh if you can go back one page uh to page 10

Okay, so on this page, I just want to make sure I'm understanding that our expenditures are going up from 24.6 to 25.3. Yes. But our funding in the general fund went up to 25.8, so we're actually $500,000 better than we thought, even though our expenses have gone up, our revenues have gone up by more than our expenses. Yes. Am I reading that correctly?

Yes, you're reading this correctly. Thank you very much. Yes. OK, I'm going to go on to the next slide, slide number 11, actually 12. So slide number 12, so this is showing the annual transfer in and out of the general fund for the city. So the only item we see in the actual transfer out column, in the middle column, is the pension obligation bonds debt service that I mentioned earlier and the interest earned of the general fund reserve. So we've made our payments for the bonds, so that's why it's showing up here at $1,379,000. And then for interest earned on the reserve, we have earned through December 31, $395,000 in interest on the general fund reserve. The column to the right shows the proposed budget amendment, and the explanations are on the next slide. Just...

Okay.

So on item number seven, there's an increased transfer from other funds by $33,000 to account for library donations that will be funding the purchases, some purchases for the new library at the Commons. There's an item number eight, there's an increased transfer out from general fund reserve previously earmarked for the tenant protection ordinances program by $23,950. And this is to fund the program, the contracted services and subscription for this program. On item number nine, there's an increase use of money and property in general fund reserve by $200,000 to reflect the year-to-date earned investment income received that is above the budget amount. Item number 10, there's an increase general fund reserve transfer out by $1,778,000 for the earmarked library at the Commons general fund, at the Commons, I'm sorry, And this is a general fund that was unspent in the previous year that will basically be spent this current fiscal year, which is the last year of the construction for the new library. So we're going to be using those dollars that were allocated by your council. I'm going to go to the next slide. So this is a slide basically to present a mid-year budget amendment process for special funds. So for fiscal year 24-25, we closed the fiscal year. We have financial records that have been audited. So we did a reconciliation, and we did some revenue recognition for all the capital improvement projects. And so the city reviews, part of this process, the city reviews the expenditures and the revenue of all capital improvement projects over the life of the project spanning across multiple fiscal years. And we determine, the director of public works and myself, if any budget adjustments are warranted for the current fiscal year. So those budget amendments are presented in exhibit B of the staff report and basically it's to align the annual budget with the anticipated financial activities of the capital improvement plan for fiscal year 25-26. I want to mention that none of those proposed changes are to amend the LBD approved capital improvement plan dollar amount of funding sources in totality across all the fiscal years. essentially the total budget expenditure is increasing by $458,000 and the total budget revenue is decreasing by $795,000. Mostly those adjustments are for the library. They're transferring revenue out of special funds into the Capital Improvement Project Fund. There's also a change for the ARPA funds. So we spent the ARPA funds at a faster clip in the previous fiscal year, because the grant is closing as of December 31st, 2025, and we wanted to make sure that all those funds were expended. And the last item that I wanted to mention about the special funds is the city received utility reimbursements for incurred cost in previous fiscal years. And so we received about $595,000 in utility reimbursement that will be applied to the capital projects fund. So that concludes the mid-year budget amendment presentation. So I'm here to take any questions that you may have or the city manager and the director of public works is here to assist with any question you may have.

Great. Thank you, Ms. Gabrielle, for that very thorough presentation. Open up the questions here from council members. Okay, great.

If I may, my only comment is thank you. That was thorough, well-explained, you know, for somebody that doesn't have the accounting background. Really appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Ms. Gabrielle. The staff report was very thorough and detailed. Anybody else have any questions?

A couple of brief ones. So on the library costs, I believe, so we're allocating $113,000 for operational. And I know this is a mid-year report, but projecting forward, do you see that as something that will continue to need to fund at that level?

It's going to be at a higher level than that. Yes, yes, because we're factoring only three to four months of operations in this adjustment, and we know that utilities and janitorial costs will happen over the 12-month cycle in the fiscal year, so definitely it's going to go up.

When you open a new facility of the nature of a library, a caution for the council and the community is it'll take a year to truly understand the cost of operating the facility. So to be conservative, we will probably give ourselves some room To operate as we try to adjust to the new. The new situation, what's hard, which we won't know for a while is. With the improvement of technologies that we'll have in that building and other energy efficiencies. We won't know how much those savings offset increased operational costs only time the building to see that. I would say our top two increases that we aren't yet fully accounting for in our budgeting are increased IT costs that will go with this new building. And then the maintenance of the whole property. We haven't really got, we haven't really dived into what that looks like in our budget yet.

Okay. And then sort of more on the revenue side. So we had a bit of a windfall with the investment income, the $200,000. And is that, are we expecting that? I mean, I would imagine that's dependent on what, you know, the federal interest rates or something. But what are, you know, any projections on where that might go? Or is that being considered for the rest of the year, for next year?

We try to be really cautious with our investment projections as part of our year-over-year budgeting because there are fluctuations in the returns on our investments. So typically we're very conservative in that. We tend to yield better than our projections, and then that ends up in the reserve balance so that it becomes money that the council can consider for one-time use later on. And we typically treat investment return as one-time infusion into the budget. Our best opportunity for ongoing revenue growth is to start to realize our housing element and see more units come online with higher property taxes. So if you look at the structure of the city and you look out on the landscape, that's probably our best long-term growth opportunity.

And one last question. So I'm just checking an assumption. So we have the $600,000 increase in inspection costs. And, you know, if, you know, that construction activity winds down, that that cost will level down, because I'm assuming we're contracting that that's not staff. So that that's something that can wind down quickly.

Yeah, so the whole community development department is designed to scale as we have needs. So currently we use a mix that's a little heavier on the contractor side, and that's why that cost is a little higher than it might be if we were in-house. As we start to understand our development trends for the next several years, I'll be working with the director to figure out if we should be bringing more of those resources in-house. I am pleased to tell the council that we have a new building official that will be joining us in, I think, about 10 days. Is that about right? And so we're really excited, you know, having a building official in-house and the gentleman, Matthew Villas, his name, who's going to be joining us. He actually has a background that will lend itself to doing more work in-house that will over long-term be beneficial to the city and beneficial to our, our clients.

Okay. That's great. Thank you very much.

Yeah, question. You know, 64% of our budget is property tax. But I just think it's important that the public knows their property tax bill, the city of Larkspur does not get all of that money. So in fact, we get, what, is it 6%?

So as a general rule, everyone would have to open up their property tax bill, but this is timely, right? Because we're all holding our bills for our next payment. Right. The Marin assessor calls it the basic tax. And so if you pull out your property tax bill, it'll say the basic tax is X. It varies a little bit around town, but a good estimate is that we get 20% of the basic tax. 20%, okay. But that's, again, that's not your whole bill. Right. Your bill's loaded up with all those wonderful bonds and other things that we've approved over the years. So you really have to go in, find that basic tax number, times it by 20%, and then you would know what the city's getting annually. Okay.

Thank you, because I think most people don't know that, and they think we get the entire bulk of the property tax statement and the number that is there on the statement, and I think it needs to be clear that we don't. We get about 20% of the basic.

Thank you. Great, thank you. Any other questions or comments? Okay, well, let's open up. Oh, do you have something to add, Ms. Gabriel? Okay, well, I'll open up to public comments here in the chamber if anybody has any comments or online. Okay. Seeing no public comments. Thank you very much, Ms. Gabrielle, for your presentation. And I think we'll have, you know, we will be looking at the budget soon. So, yeah.

So thank you. We'll be seeing you again soon. Thanks.

All right. So I will move Resolution 08-26. I'll second that. And I just also, before I say that, this is a new change for us to have a mid-year review. I think it's been only four or five years, and I really appreciate it's a lot of extra work, but I think it's really an important way for us to keep track as a council, and I know we brought that forward I think it was in 2019 or maybe 2020, so it's not been regular, but I find that this has been really helpful to have that. I know it's a lot of extra work for you, but it lets us show the public that we're really paying attention to every dollar and cent. So back to Resolution 08-26 for the adoption of the City of Larkspur amending the fiscal year 2025-26 budget. I'll second that motion.

Great. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay. Motion carries. Great. Thank you. All right. So now we're moving to our last item, business item. Let's see. Review proposed exterior enhancements for the Library of the Commons, the enhanced parking plaza, water feature, and monument sign. Mr. Skinner, welcome.

Good evening. Julian Skinner, Public Works Director. The item we have for you tonight is a follow-up to the overall Library of the Commons update that we gave one of our last meetings. We mentioned a couple of exterior enhancements that we're still in the process of working through and said we would Make a little bit more progress on those and bring them back for you. So those specifically are an enhancement to the eastern half of the parking lot monument sign and water feature. We'll deal with the enhanced paving first. When I talk about the eastern half of the parking lot, if you consider that the parking lot is split right about in the middle where the walkway is into the building, we're talking about the portion of the parking lot that's beyond that entryway into the building. The idea here is when we talked about the commons area and we had the discussion about creating more space around the building for the public, we identified that a portion of the parking lot could actually be used for outdoor activities if we wanted. It's right next to part of the area between the parking lot and the building that we expanded as part of a previously approved budget amendment. And so what we're looking at doing here is some treatment to that area that makes it not so parking lot looking. and an area that we could expand outdoor activities onto in addition to the other outdoor areas. What we're looking at in talking with the project team is a method of stamping the top surface of the asphalt and then coloring it. So it has the effect of looking like pavers or cobblestones without the expense and the maintenance headache of paving stones or cobbles. It's used pretty frequently. You'll see it a lot of times as signature elements for entrances to new residential subdivisions. If they want to make an entry feature, they'll stamp and pave the entryway, the main way into the subdivision. You also see in some downtowns, they do their crosswalks with this to enhance them somewhat. So this product's been around for a long time. There's a number of patterns and different colors that are available and the project team has selected a couple of proposed options for us to look at that they believe work with the context of the building architecture and the landscaping. So they propose a couple of options for the patterns, a cobble, A British cobble or a different type of cobble, but mainly like a stone pattern. And then a series of different colors. And again, they're looking at something that complements the building and the landscaping and also sets it a little bit apart from the front area of the parking lot that will just be traditional asphalt. There are four examples. They did a sketch up based on the working model that we have of the building and the site. So this is actually their rendition of what the parking lot would look like under these scenarios of the different patterns and the different colors. These are all one solid color throughout this area in a couple of different patterns. And again, in selecting the color, they've looked for something that they think works with the site. And in addition to that, there's a little bit of a trade-off with the color in that the darker colors typically wear a little better and they'll hide stains, but The lighter colors are actually better because they reflect more of the sunlight and they're better for that heat sink effect. They don't give off as much heat because they don't absorb all the sun during the day and then give it off at night. So there's actually environmental points for having your parking lot be a little lighter in color than darker. So they've kind of weighed those options and landed on a couple of colors here.

So is the lighter one the sandstone and khaki or limestone and pewter?

Yeah, so these are all of the lighter variety. There are much darker colors than this that they didn't select. These are what they consider of the lighter variety, all four of these. Okay. And so it's basically kind of a light brown or a light gray is kind of the color they were trending to. So these are ones that they think are the lighter variety. So they stamp the hot asphalt and it actually creates little grooves in it to kind of mimic what a cobblestone pattern would be. And then an acrylic paint is applied over. It's flexible, so it moves with the asphalt. um one of the things to be aware of is even though it's um it's going to be stamped to look like cobblestones or pavers the joint where the stamping occurs ends up being the same color as the the paving stone so the One of their thoughts to add a little bit more texture to this was to do a combination color. So this takes two of those colors and kind of mixes them. And so it has patches of both the grayish and the beige-ish color here that they think shows off the actual cobble pattern a little better. And it blends the two colors. And again, if you kind of look at the grayish color, it kind of comes from the color of the building that has that gray siding. And then kind of the almost a tan color plays off of the decomposed granite or the granite crete that's the pathways. that are around the commons area. So they feel this is a good combination of two colors. The other thing this patchwork does is it also will to some degree hide stains because it's not uniform looking. If everything was the same color and you get a stain on it, the stain kind of stands out where this helps a little bit. It's kind of the idea with carpets where you see patterns on them. It helps mask some of those imperfections. It's a parking lot, so it will get stains on it. from time to time. This rendition does show traditional parking lot striping. We're going to do our best to do something a little bit different, again, to make it less parking lot-like and see if we can do something that doesn't make the striping between the stalls show up as prominently as it does here. There's other techniques that you can use, including just painting some of the individual cobble patterns or putting marks on the curbs. But for this exhibit, they did show the parking stall lines on there. This enhancement has been in the works for some time. So this was included in the budget amendment that you adopted a few months ago when we came with the last enhancement package for you to consider. We had a placeholder of $50,000 in that budget amendment, which is the estimate that we received for doing this work. The multicolor is a cost add to that. it's about another $10,000 on top of that because they basically have to do it in two processes and then they have to mask off physically mask off all of the one color before they go and do the other color so it is quite labor intensive but this is the architect's recommendation for what he considers would be the best aesthetic improvement for this area if we wanted it to look less like a parking lot so I can take these one by one or I can jump through the fountain and the sign if you want to keep going.

Well, I have a question about this. I do like the stamping or just making it look less like asphalt, but what's the longevity or estimated longevity of this type of treatment?

Yeah, so it very much depends on the traffic where. So it's a wearing surface. Where you see these on crosswalks and in high traffic areas, they say two to five years before you'll see it start to wear. This being a parking lot, it's not going to get nearly as much traffic. What we will be aware of in a parking lot is people that turn their wheels on the car when the car's not moving tend to be a little abrasive to these surfaces. But in general, a parking lot doesn't get as much wear as a street. And the recommendation for a street is somewhere between two and five years. You might be looking to reapply it. The other thing that they've noted is oftentimes if you do a cobble and there's a little bit of wear on it, sometimes that patina actually adds to the overall pattern too when you start to see some of the asphalt come through. So that's one of the things that we'll kind of monitor as it wears. But I would say in a parking lot, I would expect probably five to 10 years in that kind of range where we'd be looking at having to reapply it.

And when you say reapply, is it the entire $50,000 to reapply it or is there more of a fix it up cost?

No, it's roughly the same cost again or whatever that inflated cost is five to 10 years down the road.

So in this enhanced parking picture, it's the British or what? Let's see. That's an example of the British cobble. Can that be done in the Frisco cobble too? Yes. Okay. Just with that sort of pattern like that.

The British is more kind of like a shaker roof pattern. Yeah, they're smaller. Whereas the Frisco is more like pavers, but they're not all the same size.

Yeah. Okay.

Okay.

And if we decided to do it with one color, would you recommend any color for the longest wear, better, show less issues?

Not really. I think if you were going to do the one color and we were worried about the wearing through, I'd probably go with one that was more on the gray or the pewter side because the asphalt underneath will be closer to that color and it won't show as much. Not so concerned with the multicolor because there's going to be multicolors out there anyway. But the wear will show more if you just have the single color. And if we have one that's on the kind of the brown side, it'll show up a little bit more.

And I guess the last question I had about this was when we originally saw these, there was a multicolor that was more deliberate as opposed to random. Is that on the table or did we decide that that would be a problem because it wouldn't hide the imperfections as much because it's deliberate?

There's all kinds of different patterns. I think the one you're referring to was more formal and it had bands of different color that I think is maybe a little bit more distracting because it's more formal. This is what the architects picked as far as what they thought was the best setting looking at the site as a whole. And it being more formal with bands or stripes of solid colors, I think was a little bit too much focus on that area and not letting it work with the rest of the site. But if you pick most of the patterns that we showed in the past, it's the stamping. If it's one of their standard stamps, it's the same cost. And then the colors are mostly all of the same cost. So it's not really a cost difference. It's just the architect's vision for what the space, how it would work best with the site. Thank you.

So do we want to make a decision on this one now or keep... I like all of them, but if I was going to put forward the one that I liked, probably after hearing your report, I think I like the cobble, not the British, but the Frisco cobble, because I think that size just looks a little better aesthetically to me. And hearing that you think some of the darker shades, I would say on our image up here, probably Frisco cobble limestone, top left. would be one I would say we'd start with as a discussion point. The difference in the cobbles are they're kind of a little smaller with the British. The Frisco just... I'm not going to go to war on any of these. They all look good to me, but I have to lead with something.

I'm going to agree with the Frisco with the bigger tiles. I agree with the gray. I can't tell the difference between the grays on these slides. I would go with the multicolor for it lasts better reasons, but aesthetically, I don't.

Well, the multicolor is an additional 10.

Right, but if we say, hey, it's going to last, you know, we're not going to have to replace it as often because it's going to hide the imperfections, so be it.

Okay, so before we maybe get into the personal preference, maybe we should have public comments.

Okay, but hang on. Just going through, are we going to take these one at a time, have public comment on each piece, or do you want to have the presentation? I mean, it's up to you as mayor how you want to just think that through.

Absolutely. So... it's okay why don't we um finish the yeah finish the water feature and also the uh uh the sign and then we can have public comment and then we can bring it all back great thank you okay i will move on to the monument sign so uh the plans as approved for the project included a location a placeholder for a monument sign but the project

As approved, did not include a sign in it. So the location for the sign is shown as just outside of the main walkway into the building from Doherty Drive. Just to the left of that, if you're looking at the building from the street. So it's shown in the exhibit here in the yellow square with the red lines. around it. Initially, we'd looked at there's a monument sign in front of Hall Middle School across the way that has a scrolling message on it. So when we brought the budget amendment to you, we were interested and I believe there was interest from some of the donors as part of the Commons Foundation in having a monument sign out in front. So we put a placeholder of $50,000 in the budget amendment that we brought to you a few months ago for the sign. uh based on our quick evaluation of what it would cost to build something equivalent to what's at hall middle school um that sign's been there for over 10 years um doesn't really add anything aesthetic um to the to the project and so we tasked our project team with um there's interest in having a monument sign uh what would you uh envision a monument sign looking like uh for this for this building and so Don't just skip ahead a slide and present to you what the project team came back with. So, and they've worked with our planning department to get the regulations for signage for a building our size. And so this shows a sign that's about six foot high by eight foot wide. And instead of a scrolling LED message, if I go back to the hall middle school sign, you can see there's three rows of text and they just program it with a message that says school opens next week or something like that, but mostly text. What the architects have proposed is something that instead includes basically a giant TV screen, so an 84-inch TV screen that would be on both sides. And what this does is it allows you to display more than text. So if there's promotional material that the library is putting out that has some graphics in it that's eye-catching, it gives you the opportunity to display that as part of the screen as opposed to just three lines of text. And then also you can add things like QR codes if you want people to be able to walk up and get more information from it that you can't do on just a scrolling LED. So this is definitely an upgrade from what's across the street. They also proposed that it be clad in materials similar to what's on the building. So we've got wood siding and some metal. So they basically propose something here that would match the aesthetics of the building. It's bigger than the one at Hall. It's got more options in the display and that we can have graphics and things like that, as opposed to just scrolling text. um it does require a data connection it actually comes with a piece of equipment that would go in the server rack for the building so that this can be programmed from inside the building so when there's different flyers or if there's a message that we want to display for the public on the sign we're able to do it remotely it does come with a elevated cost versus what we were originally looking at so Depending on the level of finish that we want to add to the sign to make it match the building, you're looking at $170,000 to $200,000 for this versus a very simple $50,000 sign. This would require additional project funds. We do have some contingencies that we built in, but they're not sufficient to cover this overage. So if there was desire to have an enhanced sign at the site similar to this, then it would require some additional funds towards the project. And again, it would be wherever we land on this 170 to 200, depending on what kind of materials we want to finish this with, less the 50,000 that's already in the budget. So you would be looking at anywhere from 120 to 150 in additional project funds.

Julian, do we know how far the light emitted from this or the image itself will travel to residents that are nearby?

I have data sheets on it. I don't know that I've asked that specific question, but there are planning guidelines. For example, even though this is like a giant TV, we're not going to be showing moving images or videos on this. That's not the purpose of the site and that's actually not allowed per our code. So this is for still images. And so there's probably brightness settings and things like that that we can fine-tune on it to make sure that the intended audience sees it and it doesn't cast additional light beyond that range. But it won't be flashing images or moving or anything that's distracting to traffic is basically the intent on that not having moving images or blinking lights on the display.

So what gives example two and three, what makes that one So much more expensive is the size and the LED nature of it. But what are we gaining from that extra LED and sign size?

So in this example here, the one that the architects have proposed that tops out at $200,000, there's a couple of components to that versus the first one that I showed you. One is the enhancements to the finished materials that make it match the building. But the biggest chunk, the biggest cost there is these large screen TVs. They're outdoor TVs. They're rated for outdoor use. The TVs alone in this are $75,000. So that's a big chunk of the price difference is just the cost of the actual display units here. And again, it's because they're programmable. We can pretty much show any image on these as opposed to just the scrolling. So it adds the flexibility of what we can display on this sign versus just this model here is you're limited to text, basically. So it allows just more flexibility in what we want to display here. and share with the community. This is kind of the middle of the road option, which is if we have extreme sticker shock from the model that the project team has proposed, there is a compromise where we could stick with the scrolling text display and forego the larger graphic display. but still enhance it somewhat with some of the building materials. It would be a little bit smaller than the big TV sign. So this would take your 50,000 up to about 80 to 110, depending on how much of the building finishes we wanted to incorporate into the sign.

Question. Dan, this may be a question for you or for Ms. Morrison, who is sitting in the back. The Commons Foundation, is this something that they have raised money for, that donations would be covering this, or is this something that would be coming out of the city coffers?

So the Commons Foundation had a donor who made an initial promise, I believe, of $50,000. I'm looking back to Ann to check. Was it a monument sign? Oh, it's $120,000. So the city needs to make up any delta funds.

Oh, okay.

Was this donation specifically for a sign?

Okay. Sorry, so we're hearing from the audience. So yes, the donation is specifically for a monument sign. That said, Julian, why don't you clarify how we budgeted and what the delta is that the city would need to watch?

Yeah, so... When we did the last budget amendment and we added the Commons Foundation funds into the project, they were spread across many items, including benches and the Commons area furnishings and the landscaping improvements. And then there was understanding they had donors who were interested in the water feature that we'll get to and also in the monument sign. So what we did was when we presented the budget to you, we... provided a placeholder for the monument sign uh based on what our contractor based very preliminary estimates had given us that 50 000 and we basically split that cost in the budget that you've approved between the commons foundation and and the city um we were taking commons foundation donations exactly and applying them to specific items in the project. So that's how in the budget amendment that you adopted that line item arrived at $50,000 versus a donor's donation to the Commerce Foundation.

So that's a public works director's explanation that the city manager is going to translate into... Basically, whichever one of these price tags you pick, back $50,000 out of it, and that's what we're going to have to pull out of the capital budget to make up the shortfall.

Okay.

Can I go on?

No, I was just going to say I think what may make sense is during public comment to invite Ms. Morrison up to kind of explain the financial situation, what the particular donor had in mind, you know, because of, you know, depending how this is being funded, if it's – And I don't know if there's any more money still with the foundation. If this is funded by the foundation, I would give deference to their wishes as opposed to if it's coming out of city coffers, I think we may have to be a little bit more strategic with how we choose to spend our funds.

I agree that that should be what you deliberate on this evening. And I think when you invite Ms. Morrison up, you're going to hear that you know, the Commons Foundation has sort of started the process of ending its capital campaign. And so I do think you're essentially deliberating about city dollars this evening. With that said, I also want to note this item in particular, you know, and the water feature that you're talking about, essentially, they're not necessary to open the library. And although we want to work with our current project team to get as many amenities as possible. We always try to be aware of the distinction between one where the economies of scale of the contractor doing it are such that we really want you to figure out how we can make it work versus these are items where we've paid already to plumb electricity, for example, to this spot. Maybe we need to, if we decide, we could always come back and revisit this six months, for example. That said, it's always nice to have everything on opening day. Thank you for explaining that.

Thank you. Just, Julian, a couple of questions. I'm wondering about, you know, kind of if there's any, you know, data on effectiveness. Like, you know, we're talking about Doherty, 15, 25 miles an hour, so people driving by, primarily sometimes walking. You know, is there any... Is it your opinion that putting a picture of a book versus just saying Harry Potter, that there's any advantage to the large screen? And also, in addition, is there any other jurisdiction? Marin, I haven't seen anything beyond just LED text. Is anyone else using that?

You could talk about the drive-by effectiveness to that. I'll chime in.

So as far as we don't have any data, it's more about the flexibility that this affords based on messaging versus it's being strictly limited to text versus this has the option to have more text or text plus graphics. depending on what the message is. Sometimes the scroll may not be enough depending on what the event is. And then the text is limited. It's hard to get a website address in that string. This gives you additional options to get that across. I don't have any data as far as what people respond to graphics-wise versus text-wise. It was more the flexibility and the options that this would open up to us as far as what we might be able to display in the future.

And also how durable, like I imagine, you know, this is in front of a middle school and a high school. And, you know, I don't know what level of vandalism I've seen some tagging, you know, in the parks around, you know, it's a pretty expensive piece of equipment to replace. So I'm a little worried about, you know, vandalism or any durability issues.

Yeah, I mean, it is designed for outdoor use. So it's designed to withstand, you know, winds and, you know, light objects flying through the wind and hitting it. It's rated for outdoor use. I will say we have security features built into the new building, including cameras. And I did check, I had the same thought. There is a camera outside that points directly at this, the front entryway and the sign. So anything that were to happen to the sign, we would have... a record and image of that.

Okay, thank you.

So before we go to the next question, the other thing I want you to think about, though, in terms of the benefit, perhaps, of looking at a screen versus the scrolling text, if you think, for example, one of the ways the city now tries to communicate events is with banners, and you would effectively be creating a site where you could do digital banners. And so, you know, that's a powerful, simple drive-by message where a lot of times people see enough on the banner that then they come to our website to get more information. So that's the type of opportunity that this does present that we wouldn't necessarily be able to do with scrolling text.

Sarah, do you have any questions? I do. Thank you. Thanks, Julian. I just wanted to ask some questions about the lifespan of a TV like this that is rated for outdoor use, as well as the augmentation aspects that the architect would build into it, the maintenance and costs of upkeep of that, and how long we expect that to last. And then lastly, is there any difference in the cost of energy to drive any of these different features?

Yeah, I don't have direct energy costs, but these are all LEDs, so they're very low usage power-wise. The screen obviously has more LED lights on it than the scroll, but they are LEDs, so they're very low power consumption. As far as the durability, one of the things towards the higher end cost model is it incorporates components of the building so you're essentially building the sign to the same quality of material as the building so as you recall we did an upgrade to the siding where the siding is integral in that color throughout and it's a hardened wood So it doesn't need sanding. It doesn't need restaining. And then it has the same, they're proposing the same sheet metal that's in all of the trim that's around the building. So those are all very high quality, low maintenance components in the higher end version of this sign. If we were to make the sign cost lower towards the one, I go to the most expensive, we go down to the 170 kind of rough order of magnitude versus the 200, then you're using materials that aren't going to be as durable and will have a higher maintenance cost in the long run, as opposed to bringing in materials that match what have already been picked out for the building.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, great. Any other questions? Okay. All right, so we'll move on to the water feature.

Okay, the water feature is something that when you approve the concept for the commons area and, as you recall, there's kind of a formal side that has some. seating and some granite creek pathways and some trees and benches and then the informal side on the other side is for. But the architects had pointed out this would be a great place for a water feature. And we've definitely heard from Commons Foundation that there is donor interest in a water feature. And so in that plan, they had shown a location that I've highlighted here with the red circle of where the architects thought that a water feature would work well in the concept of the landscaping design that they proposed. We didn't have a budget item for that when we brought the commons budgets to you. We had a contingency allowance in the amount that we brought to you. And initially we were thinking a small water feature would fit within that contingency allowance. Here is initially what the architects proposed. It's basically kind of like a granite cube and it has a bubble in the middle that would fit within that granite creep area. Everything that we've considered and are looking at is recirculating water. So there's no water connection. There's no use or waste of water. And these fountains are not designed for people to interact with or touch or play in. And so all of the guidelines for these features are covered under the plumbing code. They require power because there's a pump in there that recirculates the water. They do need probably about a weekly cleaning where somebody goes and skims some of the dirt and puts a treatment in the water. There is testing that's required. Turbidity and E. coli need to be tested in these type of, they're called decorative fountains as opposed to interactive fountains. So there's about an hour's worth of work every week. Somebody has to test the water. And then once a month, the water needs to be drained. It needs to be cleaned and the water needs to be filled back in again. That's about the maintenance cycle typically on these. This one is kind of a little bit bigger maybe than your average backyard. fountain. Like it's a little, I would call this more residential size. This was about three foot by three foot. And again, these are, these are the architect and the landscape architect's visions for what they believe works with the site and goes with the theme of the furniture they picked out and the aesthetic of the building. So these are not big, tall, look at me, fountain structures that are, you know, going to be a focal point. They're more meant to be something that will work with all of the other architectural components on the site. But trying to get that sound that you get from a water feature. Rough order of magnitude of this is about 40,000 installed. Could probably be a little bit less than that. Part of this cost is some of these models actually require an underground reservoir because they're designed to spill over somewhat into the gravel. And so there's actually an underground, a small underground vault here that collects that water so it can get recycled. So there's more to it than you see here. These are not the types of models where you just buy them and you sit them on the surface and you're finished. There's a little bit more, which is why the price is a little bit higher. So we did get together as a team and chat about this a little bit, and we understood that they didn't want a feature fountain, but we thought maybe it should be a little bit more than this. And so we went to kind of the next evolution here. So we call that first one kind of the bubble up model. This one actually has a spill edge on it, and it's like a reflection infinity type of fountain. This is a bit bigger, probably about three foot by six foot. And this actually has one of the edges where the water spills over and goes into the gravel. And so again, there's a basin underground here you don't see that collects that water and recirculates it. This has a lot more of that sound quality versus the bubble up model and it's a little bit bigger. It's bigger, so it requires more excavation, a little bit more work. It's a little bit more expensive to buy. And so the rough order of magnitude for this is $75,000, which again, we had a small allowance for this in our budget in the contingency allowance, but it wasn't this much. So this is probably another $50,000 that we would have to add in the project above what we have carried in our numbers so far. If we wanted to go with something that ended up being $75,000, Again, this hasn't been designed yet. We worked really hard with our contractor, our architect, over the last week or so to try and put some pricing together for this. This is ROM, stands for Rough Order of Magnitude. That's their estimate of cost. We would obviously go through a value engineering exercise, and Kitchell reviews all of these to try and identify areas where we can have some cost savings. These are top-end prices for These two options. And again, there's all different kinds of fountains, just like there's all different kinds of colors for the parking lot. But this is what the architect, his vision for what works with the site. And that's what we're bringing forward. I think that was the last slide other than kind of a summary that talks about the enhanced paving costs and then the monument sign and then the water feature, just kind of a summary of some of the additional costs that we would be looking for. Again, there's no action item tonight. We're looking for your direction that you either don't like or do like some of these options and that we should further refine and then a budget amendment would come back to you to finalize these choices. But so for example, for the enhanced paving, one color, two color, we'd like some feedback there. If there's a color you really don't like, let us know because we're presenting to you some of the options that the architect is presenting for this project. So we want to hear if there's something there that you don't like. uh the monument sign obviously the the feedback on um you know whether we should go keep it simple or if we think we should um come back with a request for more funds to go with the uh the model that has the screen in it or should we try name somewhere in between where we've got something that's a little bit more aesthetically pleasing but we don't want to add the expense of the screen now or like the city manager mentioned maybe this is something we should park for a future discussion And then the water feature. Again, if there's one of those you like or don't like, and then your thoughts on adding funds in the neighborhood of $50,000 for the one with the spillover, or something more modest, $15,000 to $20,000-ish, if you want to go with something on the smaller scale, like the first bubble-up model that I showed. So that's the kind of feedback that we're looking for.

Okay, great. Any questions before we move to public comment? Okay, great. Thank you, Mr. Skinner. It was a very thorough presentation. All right, we'll open up for public comment here in the chamber. Please.

Yeah, great to see you. Good evening. Is this on? Can you hear me? Okay. Ann Morrison, the Commons Foundation. I just want to do a quick recap. So when we got the grant from the state, you asked the Komen Foundation to raise the $5 million, which we did. And the one thing the donors consistently said, please do it right. Make it great quality. And that's something that Dan, Julie, and Dame and I discuss constantly. And I had a tour of the library today. Oh, It's magnificent. It is so beautiful. And it's going to be used extremely often. It completes Larkspur. It brings the community together. And it's also an emergency shelter. I mean, it's something that's going to be standing there for years to come. So I really appreciate you guys doing quality work. with the finishing, with the building, and it's perfect for our community. And then we had an unfunded area, and we went to our donors. We found someone to donate the unfunded area, so then we handed over $1.5 million just for the landscaping. So that just tells you that it's very important for the donors in this community to to do it right. Everyone is going to come and enjoy just to see the sitting area, not the grass area. As you're walking towards the parking lot, that's the left, but to the right, you have the benches, you have the chairs, you got a beautiful trees, it's beautiful surrounding. Why wouldn't you go for the quality of running water? I mean, we raise the funds for it. That's what it's all about. And for the, for the monument site, It's needed. It's needed for many things. And, you know, having something like a cross from Hall Middle School, that's perfect for the school. But this is a building that's brand new, that's going to be here forever. I don't know if you've all done remodels. I know I have. And you want to go for the high quality, but you go for the middle. And it's like when it's all done and finished, you pay the bills like... Oh, why didn't I go for what we really wanted? So I just really hope you guys continue thinking quality. We have the money. As you all know, we are going to continue raising funds. We're going to become the Commons Library Foundation. We have funds to bring over with us to continue supporting the library, to continue supporting the staff. And for needs that we thought was needed, but we learned that more needs, more thoughts. What we have existing now may need to be improved. Who knows how whatever needs to be improved. or more programs, or more hours. We're here to support you to whatever you need. And we have the funds bringing it forward. So that's really exciting also. So with that said, if you have questions for me, here I am.

First of all, welcome back.

Thank you. And thank you, donors. Thank you, residents of Larkspur.

Absolutely. And we thank them basically every time this topic comes up. My question for you, and I kind of see you almost as an ambassador for the community, the funders, things like that, because they're all not going to come in here. We have a great team. Yeah, they're not going to come in here, everybody, and give us their opinion, so you kind of speak on their behalf in a way. Starting with the water feature, have you heard from your donors, and specifically the donors that wanted a water feature, what they're looking for? Do either of these features and your opinion match kind of what they had in mind? What is your thought about that?

Quality. So, yes, you know... The first one you saw that was $40,000. That doesn't make much sound. It makes a little bubbly sound. The donors wanted a nice water feature. They gave us $80,000 for that feature. They left it up to the city and to us, the Commerce Foundation. They're expecting something that's... that's going to last forever, that's going to make the water sound that we all want to hear as we're sitting amongst the benches and the seats.

Okay, so I guess my question is...

The second, the longer one, is what we're looking for.

Okay, and in the universe of water features, there's clearly more than two. You know, these were picked out... Is the longer one what you have in mind, or was there something else that you had in mind that is not one of the two options that we have here? I just want to make sure that, especially the donors who are doing this, that they're happy at the end of the day. I don't want to spend $70,000 on a three-by-six box, and they'll go like, eh.

You know, it's great you asked because what we really wanted was the features that, you know, jump up in the air and stuff. But, you know, Dan being legality features, we need to make it safe. And a feature that was second one that was shown by Julian, we had this discussion, we had a meeting that I favor.

Okay, so that is kind of a compromise that the foundation is happy with.

Absolutely.

Okay. And as far as the sign goes, I guess I'm struggling a little bit more with the sign because... It's a lot of money. How important is a sign? For $200,000, is there something better the city can do than put a sign up in front of the library? I don't want to put a lousy sign up in front of the library because that defeats the purpose and it actually brings down the quality of the library. But I'm struggling with spending $200,000 on a sign. Can you tell me from your donor's perspective?

Donors.

Yeah, the donor's perspective. Is this important to them?

It is.

Okay, can you explain why so I could?

Well, you know, and actually Damon had, bit of saying in this uh desire also so when damon mentioned i met with damon and damon mentioned his sign would be wonderful so i went to a donor donors and asked and they said absolutely it'd be fabulous so i'm not there's no image here i just really liked the quality of the larger digital And we raised $150,000 for that sign. So, you know.

Yeah, but I think we have that.

The City and the Commons Foundation is left-parket, right-parket, right, wrong. It's one combination. Okay. It's working, combining together to make a beautiful building, landscaping, and needs.

You have answered my questions. Thank you.

Nice questions, Saad. Okay.

Okay, can I ask a question here about, because I'm getting a little confused. So Ms. Morrison said there was 100 and, let's see, it was 150 or 120. I wrote down two different numbers. You know, I wrote down 120. Okay, so 120 for the sign, and then 80 for the water feature. But you're saying that most of this would come out of the city's budget? I'm a little confused. How should we be thinking about this? Like, who's actually funding?

I think the hard part in answering that question is that... At the end of the day, the way we work with the Commons Foundation is here's a lump sum of money that you're going to receive. These are the various things that donors gave us, donations saying they really wanted to be in the project. And I think dialogue like that is very dynamic. So when the Commons Foundation is giving us $1.5 million, for example, and saying that's the next lump sum payment, we didn't ask for itemized breakdowns of, well, this donor wants this, and they gave this amount, and it can only be spent on this. And that hasn't been the relationship that we've had with the Commons Foundation. We took each of these items that were on the wish list and we put in preliminary estimates of what we thought it might cost for those items. And then the rest got sort of put into the just general project budget. I think where we may have some disconnect is, as we've gotten to these final two items, I don't have the full picture, and you'll have to ask Ms. Morrison about exactly what those specific dialogues are with the donors. This is a long way around. Julian can tell you what's in the project budget that he assumed was allocated out of the lump sums from the Commons Foundation. Those numbers may not be the exact numbers that align with the conversations that the Commons Foundation had with specific donors.

Okay.

All right. So then we, when we're thinking about it in terms of funding, we have to use Julian's numbers because that's what was actually allocated out of the budget.

Well, in order... Anything over the numbers and... Yeah, I think another way to express it is in order to... work with the Commons Foundation to fulfill their goal to transition now from capital campaign to ongoing support of the library. We had to pick a cutoff. So essentially at this point, Julian can say this is how much I parked in the budget to go toward this element, and if we want to pay for that element, The money has to come from somewhere and it can either be the city's general fund reserve or some other source that we haven't yet identified.

Okay. Okay.

All right. Just so I'm clear then. So on the sign then, the budget that has been allocated on the sign is $50,000. Is that right?

Yes. When we brought to you the budget amendment that you adopted- It had an amount of general fund you added. It had an amount of Commons Foundation donations. And we gave you what those totals were, the 1.5 and some other general funds. And then we had a list of all of the features that were included in that budget amendment. And in that budget amendment, there was a placeholder for the sign and a placeholder for the parking lot of it. The water feature was actually covered in the contingencies. That's a little different, but there's a placeholder. Let's take the sign based on our understanding of what the sign cost. We didn't match individual donations from the Commons Foundation with pieces of these. We New there was 1.5Million coming. Um, they wanted the commons area. Um, they provided money for all of the landscaping. There were donors that specifically wanted benches. Um, but we put placeholders in the budget based on our understanding of those costs, not on individual donors amounts that they had given. So I think that's where there's the disconnect in the. In the in the numbers.

Okay. And so then it's $50,000 in the city budget currently for the sign and then $25,000, did I get that, for the water feature?

Yeah, it wasn't a specific line item because when you approve that amendment, we added a contingency allowance on top of that for unforeseen that may come up. And at the time, we thought that water feature would be something that would be able to fit within that contingency. We didn't have it as a specific line item. So it was in that it was less than twenty five thousand would have been probably been able to be absorbed in the project budget without.

saying we needed more money okay all right i was wondering if i might just add one more comment it's sort of listening to how this conversation is going and trying to think how someone who hasn't been immersed in the project the way the council and the staff and the commons foundation have might be perceiving it just want to be clear All throughout this project, the Commons Foundation and the staff have kept a very open dialogue about what the donors are wishing when they make donations. But we've never sat down and said, Mr. Smith gave half a million dollars and he insists on XYZ. It was... okay, Mr. Smith gave half a million dollars or whatever number he gave, and he expressed these wishes. Sometimes what Mr. Smith wanted is less than what he donated to the Commons Foundation, and sometimes it's quite a bit more. So we never did those sorts of We never approached this project where we were doing, we're going to do feature X, and feature X is going to get paid for by so-and-so. When the Commons Foundation sold naming rights, we didn't make those naming rights match the cost of an entire room, for example. Some people have purchased naming rights for a room. We didn't say to anybody, you know, that room costs... six hundred and forty nine thousand dollars and twelve cents. So that's what your donation has to be. We let the Commons Foundation sort of have their dialogue with their donors. And we just knew, OK, we've committed there's going to be this room that serves this purpose and we've got to pay for it. And I just want people to understand that that's how this dynamic is played out throughout. It's just we're at the end and we've got these extra features that there was a strong interest from certain donors for. And we have to figure out if we want to pay for them.

Okay. I understand. Okay. Yes.

Yeah, I had a couple thoughts. And to ask you questions as well. So I wanted to first say on the fountain piece, I do think the sound, you know, with traffic and whatnot, I mean, that makes sense. And I don't have a problem with the six by three. I think that is added value. I think it goes to quality. But going back to the signage, I think the one thing I really appreciate is the current library doesn't have great signage. And I think this is as a place for meeting and a place that has so many events, good signage is functional. not just aesthetic so i'm focused on that and to me option one is not really you know what hall has that's you know from from another era um but what i like about both option two and three is can be finished to match the building I think that's really important, the quality. I personally think that the LED with text messages only communicates without distraction. And I'm also concerned about ongoing operating expense because we have this beautiful garden. We've really taken something and we've seen a lot of scope creep, which is a good thing because it has now – you know, the refugia and it has the walkways and we've done so many revisions, but some of these things will continue to increase operational costs. And, you know, we have to have that. So my, my sense is, is the fact that the large screen is so expensive to replace at 75,000. I, I, you know, think it seems slick to, But I wonder, you know, I'm sort of settling more on, we still have to pony up more money, but the second option, you know, the LED text where you have the finished match and, you know, it's power only, no data connection. There seems to be less maintenance, less hassles, more robust, you know, that, that, you know, I'm wondering if, and now my question to you, you know, would that resonate?

Yeah.

Slide eight and slide nine, I think are the two. Yeah.

Yeah. Number two.

Yeah, so that's the one that I thought it gets information across. I don't know, Jillian, correct me if I'm wrong, but I can imagine lower maintenance, long-term total cost of ownership or total costs. And again, we're moving from a library that has nothing to one that has the aesthetic. I mean, the aesthetic and the beauty is so much the building itself, the gardens, the path, the mountain, the fountain. And here, I don't know that we need... a big, you know, Perry-sized football screen to make a library beautiful. And I think we're, you know, just bumping up and not saving our gunpowder for more important things.

Julian, is that sign going to be high enough for the Above the, you know, above the fence and trees and stuff. Remember, we're concerned about the trees. And low enough and high enough off the ground.

Yeah. So both of these signs in order to meet the city signing ordinance have to be below 10 feet in height. So they're going to be around eye level or a little bit higher. So that should be. Below the tree canopy of the trees that are lining. Doherty. The sign is a little bit. um smaller so it'll be a little bit um lower uh but uh you mean the led partially just the black um because the the the actual like um aspect ratio profile there is is the same between the two i think it's about the same because i photoshopped it and i just grabbed the other one and stuck the led on top of it but This sign with just the LED scroll will be a little bit smaller than the one that has the 84-inch TV. And that screen is driving the size of that sign. And it's a little bit bigger because the sign is bigger. You have options to put more things on it. So you may have smaller text. So the screen itself has to be a little bit bigger so that it can be read from further away. So this sign would be a little bit smaller than the other one, but the same finish. Yeah. So this is six feet tall. So it sits on a pedestal that's above grade. And then the actual sign itself is six feet tall by eight feet wide. That's actually the maximum size it can be for our coordinates. And then it's double-sided.

And I'm sorry, June, is it going to have that bar on the right there? Or is that showing something else?

No, that's part of the aesthetic. So the sign is basically where I've got the diagonal arrow across there. That's the screen that has the messaging. And then the architect's cladding of the sign to make it match the building is the metal trim where it says library below. And then the vertical wood siding element on the side is to mimic the vertical wood siding. um on the building so it's not functional it's the the screen is just that part of the sign where the diagonal arrow goes across the rest is architectural okay thank you so Gabe I get your point but the difference is um 60 000 I think

I think it's a little more, a little bit more than that.

Yeah. I mean, if you do the average, so that one would be one 85 and the other one is 95. So it's $90,000 difference. I'm just doing that. The average range there.

Yeah. And we've already put $100,000 and we've already put a blind item 50,000 for it already.

So we're no. Yeah. Yes, we have. That's correct. But the difference still is the difference though. I mean, we still have to go up even for number two. Right. Now, then we go up another $100,000 for number three, roughly.

Okay, so why don't we hold a discussion because we do have more public comments. Can I just emphasize one more thing?

Yeah, please. Once again, we have raised quite a bit of funds to bring forward to the library. So it's very exciting. So we're...

So in the question, I mean, is there a strong preference for number three?

There's not a strong preference.

Okay, because I want to honor what you just said, and I think that's completely true with the fountain, but I wanted to see if the donors would be okay with number two because it has the aesthetic and it gets the information out.

Right. I think it's fine.

Okay. Thank you.

And I want to say thank you again for doing, for choosing the right products for that beautiful building. And I really, I'm happy that we're going to continue thinking quality versus, you know, and length of years to come, not go backwards. Okay.

Great. Great. Well, thank you for all your great work foundation and, and to our donors. Yes. To our donors. All right. Okay. Next public comment. Mr. Mueller, thank you for being patient.

David Mahler, I live here in Larkspur, and thanks for the opportunity to comment before the discussion went too far. And I'm not going to comment on the signs, so we're all good. I wanted to comment on two of the three items. So the first one is on the enhanced parking. And in my opinion, The greater the difference between the enhanced parking area and the regular parking area, the better. Because the idea was always to create a larger common space, and especially to be able to use that space for events that can use part of the parking. So I just want to advocate, as you think about what it would look like, is to make it look different than the asphalt paving. So if the enhanced parking is a gray, it's really not going to look much different than the rest of the parking lot. If it's a light color, it's probably going to get all stained from oil dripping off the cars. So I want to advocate for the multicolored option because it'll be the most forgiving and it'll look the less like the asphalt parking lot in the other half. So I just like to advocate for that. The other thing is I just have one comment about the fountain. And that is, and Anne touched on this, Council Member Paulson touched on this, is that what people like most about having a water feature is the sound of the water, that splashing sound of the water. And even if you can't see the water feature, you can hear it. You'll be able to hear it all over there if it has that sound. Personally, I don't think either of the options as they're portrayed in these photos is going to have much of a splashing sound. The gurgle one at best is going to have a little gurgle. And the other one, if you've ever looked at an infinity edge, they put out a very thin sheet of water that when it hits the surface, it's just kind of a hissing sound. It's not a spicy sound. I'm not here to advocate for any particular size, design, color, let the architects figure that out. But I really would like to advocate for a design that has splashing water because that's the sound. I'm just going to give an example of this. If you go up to the Lark Creek shops, They have two fountains. You might like their design. You might not. But it's water spilling from one basin to another. And that's what gives that splashy sound. So whatever you come up with for a design, I'd really encourage that. And I think everyone would be disappointed to end up with a water feature that's basically silent or just a hissing sound. You want to have that splashy water. Thanks a lot. And great and such great work with the foundation and all of you. And isn't it great that we're to this point of this project? So let's get these little details right.

Thank you. Thank you for your public comment. Thank you, Mr. Mueller. Anybody else in the chamber? All right. Anybody online? OK, great. All right. So we'll bring it back for discussion at the council. OK. Parking lot. Okay, let's start with a parking lot. Okay, so I had Council Member Way put forward Frisco Cobble. All right, so why don't we go in order? Anybody want to say Frisco Cobble or British Cobble? Anybody have a strong preference there?

Nope.

Yeah, I like the larger ones.

Frisco, okay.

So I'm going to go with the Frisco.

Anybody else have a preference? All right. Okay. So we're going to choose Frisco. There we go. We got yay consensus. Okay. Frisco. I'm good with Frisco as well. All right. So now it's let's choose single color or multicolor.

I would propose multicolor for the reasons that it definitely sets apart the parking area. It's not that much more expensive. The multicolor allows for more wear and tear and it won't be as obvious. And it's the one that our architect is proposing because it's aesthetically the most pleasing and will work well with the building. So I would put forward the enhanced.

And Sarah, are you looking at the limestone and pewter? That's the example in the enhanced? Okay, I agree. Anybody else?

Quick comment. David, thank you. I was actually going with the single tone, and I listened to what you said, and I think you're right. So I'm on board for that, the multicolor.

Okay, can I make a comment? I'll just say that I like the multicolor idea, but I don't particularly like this scattered color. Random.

Randomness.

I don't like the randomness. So if the architect could maybe come up with some other design, I'm a little more like more not so abstract person.

random color so i think that's what random means no but that was my original comment is that i liked the multi-color when we saw the examples they weren't random and the ones we saw they were purposeful i don't know if that's possible or would work in this situation or would defeat the purpose of of making it so that if there was a stain it wouldn't stand out because now it's So I have the same thoughts that the mayor does on this.

Or a geometric pattern or I, you know, look, I'm not a designer, but I'm Yeah, so that's just my comment is I'm okay with the multicolor, but maybe something, a different pattern. Less random randomness.

Great question. I think what I heard you say was that the reason the architects chose this was because it wouldn't distract from the architecture of the building. And I get that. Did I hear that correctly? That was why they chose this?

That's part of the reason why it's more informal than formal, because they didn't want it to be a focal point. Everything is supposed to work together on the side, and they thought the banding might be too formal, but there are a lot of other options that they could work with. So if the direction is something not so random, we can work with that.

What about a labyrinth? Why don't we put a labyrinth then?

With a water fountain in the center. And that's functional as well.

And then just to be clear and to set expectations, this process needs certain conditions that mean it's not going to get done in the next two months. So we have time for, we will get shop drawings on what the pattern is that we can share at a future date if we wanna talk about how random or how, but we would like to get, the direction we're looking for tonight is that you would wanna move forward with the colored and the multicolored with a pattern. So then we can get the subcontractor on the schedule so that when the weather is, um appropriate for doing this it needs to be 70 70 degrees and warmer in order for this material to work properly um that if we get your direction to move forward we can at least get that subcontractor on contract so we can get them on the schedule and then we can work out the finer details of what it looks like down down the road

All right, and just a quick comment. In my years on the council, one of my lessons has been to listen to experts who say, hey, this is what we're doing, this is why we're doing it, and we're hiring them because of their expertise. I'm saying just on a piece of paper or on a screen, it looks kind of random and I don't love it, but... At the end of the day, I have to defer to architects who do this for a living. So I guess my thought is if the architects can come up with something that they would be happy with that maybe had a little bit more organization, it may go over better. But at the end of the day, I think if they say, no, it's going to look stupid, I'm not going to go do it anyway. So anyway, that's my thought.

Okay, so does that give you enough direction? So we picked cobble. So we picked Frisco cobble. We are going multicolor. Do we like limestone and pewter?

Good?

Yep.

Okay. And then the exact design or pattern is TBD. Okay, great. All right. All right, number two, the sign. Should we do sign last? It seems like water feature might be less controversial. So why don't we do water feature first? Okay, so there's 25,000 in contingency funds allocated for the water feature. What we heard from public comment was, you know, important to have the water sound and to have high quality materials. And I will open it up for comments.

Sure. Just a question for Julian. So it sounded like you had considered an option, like it was kind of the water was shooting up more. And, and anyway, I mean, when it comes to sound, was that really, you know, something that you saw as a requirement and even the design? I mean, I like these sort of, you know, flat basin, but, but what, what, you know, was referred to in the shops. I mean, a standing traditional looking fountain. I don't know if that's just completely architecturally out of place, but something more vertical you would think allows for gravity to create sound.

It does. And so that's part of the reason why those fountains make more noise is it's the length that the water's dropping that causes a splash that makes the noise. And so our initial comments back to the architects where we weren't sure, we knew that we wanted the noise was a big part of why this feature was wanted. As far as things shooting up and down, we're trying to avoid those because we don't want to invite children to go and want to play or catch the water. So we're looking for something that's more subtle, but we do want that sound. And so that's why we more, they set up going higher and having a bigger drop that would make a sound. uh we went with the infinity edge and i can take this feedback and go to the architects again we don't have to pick i've given you two models i think it was mentioned there's thousands of models of fountains out there um you know we can take your feedback tonight on something smaller and more subtle or yes we want to go a little bit bigger uh but also we want to we want to get some feedback on what the sound is going to be so i can get back to the architect and say, we're looking at either the smaller one or the slightly larger one, but sound is going to be an important component of what they're looking for. And then they can advise if there's a different mechanism for how the water falls and what it falls into that can create more or less noise and let them know we're looking for more noise.

Can I add to that that's something that would attract birds and butterflies as well? I think that would be a really nice feature. And I know that the habitat garden and the garden that they built at Hall is butterfly passage. So I don't think what we have today would do that. But it would be nice to see something that would add to the wildlife experience.

yeah there's also the where the water fountain is proposed to go is in that seating area but it's going to have landscaping around it so i can convey that to the architects too that that's a desire so i like the bigger one that um that eight foot or six to eight foot but three inches i have something like this in my backyard you can make the sound even more exaggerated by increasing the pump and the speed of the pump so I'm not worried about that. I mean, I think that's a nice water feature. I get the fact that we don't want it to be a play structure for kids because that's not the plan of this spot. So I'd go for this one here and, you know, perhaps take the larger one rather than the square. And perhaps they can maybe elevate it a little bit to create a little bit more sound. But, you know, I have one of these in my backyard. It makes plenty of sound. Yeah, it has rocks. It has nice blue stones.

And my comment, Julian, again, is these guys are the experts. I would tell them we would like the larger feature. We would like to maximize the sound. And what do they recommend? And let them come back to us with two to three options. That's probably my thought.

Okay. So, all right. So, summarize. Do we all agree? Mr. Paulson, is that good? Okay. So, larger. Sounds like larger. Okay. More sound, maybe vertical because to get more sound. Is that okay?

Well, I didn't hear the vertical. I think this one that we have here is a good example of what we need for that space. But they can enhance the sound on this type of... Okay.

So you're saying you're okay with this option? I'm okay with this option. Okay. I guess what we're saying is, do we want to see some other options?

Again, I'm just speaking for myself, but it sounds like at this point, the direction that staff is looking for... is more general yes we want the bigger one we would like it to make as much sound as it can could you please come back to us with a couple of options maybe this can be one of them and the architect may come back and say hey this one makes the most sound and we'll go great we'll go with this one but i just want to make sure that that's a factor that's in consideration when we decide which which fountain we go with but is that if we do all that is that going to mess up the timing of this project

Because if we keep belaboring a little fountain, are we going to stall everything else?

So much like the paving and we haven't got to the sign yet, but not to muddy expectations, but I don't think any of these three features are going to be completed by the time we open the building. The sign, for example, that we haven't got to yet has that's four months delivery lead time to order that sign. The fountain, it depends on what model we land on. And these are not things that are typically in stock. A lot of these are custom and you see them in a catalog, but these are expensive fountains that most suppliers don't keep on the shelf. So these are not things that are going to be installed within the next month. Okay. All right.

So it sounds like we have a little bit of time. Does that give you enough direction? You know, the medium-sized, you know, more sound. Yeah.

So the immediate direction I need is that we need to move forward with plumbing this. So I need general consensus that, yes, a water feature is going to include it. So we'll plumb for it. We'll make sure there's low voltage.

I think we're hearing great feedback about this. design elements that you want i think an important part of your feedback this evening is if you're comfortable with the orders of magnitude that mr skinner's given you because at the end of the day he needs to be able to leave this meeting and say the council's comfortable with a water feature in this ballpark of price and so architect go and designer go find us something that meets all these design elements that we heard about that cost this much so

Yes, so I'm ready to say not to exceed the $75,000 order of magnitude or whatever the ROM stands for, but rough order of magnitude. Does that give you enough direction?

That's enough for me to go back to the architects, give them the additional feedback you've gave me, and they'll come back with, does this fit more with the expectation? Yes.

Great. And it seems like we all want the water feature. Go ahead and plumb and get electricity and so forth for it. Okay, great. All right, so the sign. All right, so we can cross out option one. Okay, no option one. All right, we all agree. Okay, so option two or three. And the current city budget is $50,000 for a sign. So anything above that would have to be just additional. Um, and so, so far we are allocating another 10,000 for the parking and another 50 for the water feature. Yeah. So that's, that's 60,000 additional that we've allocated. Okay. All right. So the sign who wants to, I think council member Paulson, um, expressed a preference for the second option. Um, it does anyone. Yes.

Oh, I actually am in favor of the most expensive option. I think that I like the aspect that we can put a QR code on it. I love what city manager talked about in terms of using it as a banner for all the events that we have happening in town and that it gives us more space to put more information on. And I also feel like we owe it to our donors to, you know, finish this project off very nicely. And with the finished, finalized, finished touches that make it suitable for the beautiful building that we're building. And so I sort of cry once.

Okay. I'll confer and agree with Sarah on that. Yeah. I was mayor when we put up banner poles a number of years ago and had to take them down. So we don't really have a way of really using a visual space to promote various activities from the Easter egg roll to the Rose Bowl dance to anything like that. This looks like we would be able to maximize its use for much of the community needs, not just that we're having a library speaker event or something, but there would be an option then to simply use it also for the promotion of the wine stroll and all the other things that we want to engage people in. I think it's also, I mean, we're kind of being penny and pound foolish or whatever that phrase is, because we're also, this location is a central corridor down Doherty for all the people who are traveling to the highway, to Redwood High School, et cetera. It's our real opportunity to shine a lot of our events to the broader community that may be transferring, uh, traversing that corridor. And, you know, we saw our mid-budget, we're doing okay financially. And I think we, um, I think this one was going to last us a long time. I understand your concern about whether it gets damaged, but we might have to cross that bridge if we come to it. And hopefully we don't have that happen. I'm sure we'll be insured for damage, something like that. But I think the aesthetic of this would be much better than number two. My only thought, because I went to an event at a constituent's house at the very top of Greenberry Hills, and the bright blue light at the Lucky Shopping Center, it shines pretty brightly. And I just want to make sure we have an ability to control the actual volume of light, should it be interruptive to people. And it sounds like we can. with this LED have an ability to adjust the lighting because we may have residents that will be surprised at seeing a large TV out of their windows at night. And Director Skinner is shaking his head, so I assume we will have the capacity to moderate and modulate the amount of light that may be disruptive.

Yeah, this version offers a lot more flexibility than the scrolling letters. I didn't go into detail, but it actually has a data connection that will go into the IT room. And it has equipment that goes into the server rack because it has software that runs it that will be able to control all of those features, the brightness and the timing of messages and all of that stuff. A big chunk of the $75,000 that's for these screens is the software that comes with them to be able to control what's shown on the screen.

So just on that note, is that a subscription that we're going to have to pay for as part of the operation of it? Or is it a buy it once and you own the software?

I didn't see a subscription item in the quote that I saw. So I assume it's standalone software. Okay.

We should make sure of that. Yeah.

Those are the two arguments.

All right. Madam Mayor? Yes, please.

Go ahead, Mayor Kandel. Council Member Kandel.

Let me just start by saying that it kills me to spend $200,000 on a sign. It just, it seems like a lot. I mean, we are, you know, we go through our budget and, you know, somebody wants to put, you know, we have the wayfaring signs and we're like, well, it's $35,000, let's not do it. You know, we have just things that are a lot less that we've chosen not to do, you know, because we're trying to be, yeah, stewards of the finances of the city. Having said that, I am unbelievably grateful to the donors. And as Sarah said, I kind of think if that's what they want, they put a heck of a lot of money to this library. we kind of owe it to them to, you know, to, to use them. I know we didn't sign something saying this money's going to go towards your sign. This money's going to go towards this. But if the spirit of donations was this person's donating and they're, you know, they'd like a sign, they'd like it to be nice. I, I kind of think that's our responsibility and accepting those donations and saying, yeah, we're going to try to do something in the spirit of what you're, you're asking us. Um, Having said that, I guess I've come around to being okay with the price tag on it. I don't love the way it looks, which is making it even harder for me. This is one of those things that I don't know. The two contrasting things, it's just, I mean, again, I have to defer to people who say, oh, it's going to look great next to the building. I guess it will, but I'm just voicing that I'm not over the moon about the design, but maybe I'll be happily surprised when it's up. Those are my thoughts. Okay.

Um, yeah, I have very similar thoughts as well. Um, I feel like $200,000 is a lot for the time. So I would be more comfortable at the lower end of that. Um, at the one 70, um, I also struggle with not just the cost. Um, although I do understand having the, the TV screen will be more flexible, um, in terms of, you know, what we can show on there. I just, um, I just feel like, you know, if someone's driving down Doherty, you know, you pass the sign in like three seconds. So how much information can you put on, even if it's on the TV screen, like how much of it actually registers if it's, if it's just too much. So, you know, I feel like the scrolling three lines might be just as effective because you're driving by and that's all the time that you have to see, to see the sign. That said, I do agree. The Commons Foundation, we have all these donors. They want to see something really nice. So I vote for the 170. And in terms of our finances, once we get to the budget, I do want to point out that you know, we, we are sort of breaking even on, you know, on an annual basis. Right. So we're not adding to our reserves. So every dollar we take out of reserves, you know, on an annual basis, it's not getting replenished as quickly as it has been in the past. And so I, you know, I am very, uh, I'm cautious about how much we're taking out of the reserves. Okay. But that said, you know, it's, um, $100,000, let's see, how much is that? $120,000 plus $60,000. So it's $180,000 total. I'm okay with that. But I do think that we should just be cognizant as a council that every dollar that comes out of reserves, just given where we are at the point in the cycle, when you're running a break-even cycle, budget, like, you know, there's just less going forward for any other projects that we're trying to accomplish. So I guess that's where I'm coming out on this.

Yeah, and I, you know, I started this off, but I feel, Catherine, kind of to your point, like to be penny wise in the middle of this, well, to be penny wise in the middle of this is not foolish. Like, you know, when you're still, you have tons of stuff ahead. Oh, you know, another 50,000 there. I mean, that's, we're at the end of the project. We've done well. I mean, the one drawing point, and, you know, you and I both served on the, you know, the disaster Twin Cities and, you know, getting up these sandwich boards, Like, it is really hard to communicate. And we have a great website, and it's done that. So, you know, the part that got me is that big 84-inch, you know, diagonal on the screen. It's not really communicating information. It's communicating aesthetic. So if I'm going to say that there's, you know, some, you know, like the Rose Bowl dances going on, the question to hold in your head is seeing the letters versus seeing the letters with a couple dancing. Is that going to make a difference? Because the information's out there now and it isn't anywhere. It's a great corridor. It's like, you know, prime location for advertising, so to speak. So I, I get it. And, you know, the question, you know, is, is it's the, both are aesthetic and, And $100,000 is significant. You know, I don't want to be penny wise about it. If I were really missing something out, like, you know, option one is clearly ugly. But here, is it really, you know, is it going to, you know, help that communication channel by having a Perry-sized big screen TV? I'm not convinced it will. But I'm not opposed to this. If that's really your consensus, I'm, again, I think we're at the end. We want to support the donors. But, you know, I also, as, you know, you know, Councilmember Candell and Mayor Andre, I just feel like, you know, I want to keep our tradition of fiscal responsibility on all things. And, you know, by the way, remodeling a house, I don't know how many times everything looks so good and then you never use it. Like I have an island where we had to have a second sink and we haven't turned the faucet on yet. So I know that's the kind of thing I want to avoid here because, you know, we want beauty. We want to communicate a message. Do we need, you know, 256 color palette to get that across? I'm not convinced we do. and it will increase operation costs later. I rest my case.

Yes, I respect your opinion and I agree with what you said. I just think that driving down Doherty, you only get three seconds, right? You see the traffic sometimes.

Pretty slowly.

It takes ten minutes to go three blocks.

On the other hand, it does communicate we're in the 21st century. I see both sides. I'm okay whatever we do. I said my piece.

There are a lot of people walking and biking down Doherty too, right? True.

Okay.

All right. So does that give you what you need in terms of the screen of the, yeah, the sign?

I sort of interpreted that as a soft consensus for the digital world. The third option. I think so, yeah. Okay. Yes.

So we are going to try to bring that price down. I expressed a strong preference for the 170, the lower end of that range. I would second that.

Well, yeah, I guess I would love to understand the difference between the 170 and the 200. What are you really getting for that extra 30? If it's going to make it last longer or it's going to make it safer, obviously we don't want a nickel and dime on that. So that's, I mean, it depends what it is.

Well, I'll again chime in by telling us that's the ballpark where you want the price to land gives us the opportunity to figure out, is this something we do now with the contractor? Or is it something we do after the contractor's done with another party? That's something staff can figure out. and we will try to land in that ballpark budget-wise.

And just a quick question. I don't want to complicate it, but you have an 84-inch screen. I don't know how you came up with 84 inches, but I assume that there's lots of different variations, and I would assume at that size, coming down a couple of inches may save significant dollars. I don't know, but is this –

Oh boy, that one is so similar.

That's the question I asked when I saw the price tag is what if we go with a smaller size TV? And yes, they are a little bit less costly, but the consultant that does these signs for a living looked at our site plan and where it is and its relation to the traffic. And he said, this is the size that's recommended.

And I can't argue with that.

So any more questions?

Go ahead.

I want to have a closing thing, so I want to make sure if you still have any questions about this.

Yeah, I just wanted to thank the Commons Foundation and their leadership and Anne Morrison as president that, I mean, we have now have consensus that the two items that many of the people she's been working with are interested in that we agree, and that is a monument sign and a water feature. So now that we have shown and expressed real support for those ideas, I think that gives some opportunity for the Commons Foundation to communicate well with their donors and people who are interested. And that may also be an opportunity to provide more funding. So thank you, Anne, and thank you for the team who's really been really exemplary in this process.

Thank you. Thank you for those comments, Catherine. Okay. Yes, city manager.

So one of the caveats that you heard from Julian several times is that not everything is going to be ready on the first day that we're open. But all of these sort of extras are what we're talking about. There's a process that we go through when we're doing a facility or any capital project of this scale, what they call a poll meeting, where they all get together and they hash out how comfortable they are where they are targeting for their finish line for each part of the project that each party is responsible for. And that meeting has taken place. And we have some confidence about when the contractor side of the house is going to be done. So the other path that we have to work on is we're moving an operation from point A to point B. And so we tasked the library staff and our broader library community with what that move looks like timing wise. And so we're pretty excited to let you know this evening that we have landed on the date that we can open the library. And so tomorrow, staff will be issuing through all our different media that Saturday, March 28th is going to be our opening date. We also took into account spring break. So it's right before spring break. It's the weekend before. We're pretty excited about that. I'm kind of shocked. I really did think we were looking more like late April for most of this project. And I know Julian's probably, there's a little piece of him that's cringing right now because he's worried that the weather will screw up the fact that I said it's March 28th. But come rain or shine, we're going to have an event on March 28th. And I'm pretty confident that building is going to be open and ready for business. Damon Hill, library director, feels confident that that date works. The exact time of a grand opening ceremony. And all those details, we're going to be working out over the next week so that we can continue to inform people. But we do want people to start saving that date. And it's pretty exciting. And it's also not that far away. So there'll be a lot of scrambling by your staff. And I just want to acknowledge Julian and the project team, Alton Construction. I've had two major capital projects here. Well, I've had a lot, but two buildings. And both of them have worked swimmingly. And there is a common entity. So I do want to acknowledge because our rep from Kitchell's here. So when we built the police building and we're building the library, good project management is worth it. So we are right on track. And I thank them for that. So March 28th, mark your calendars. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you. Very exciting. Thank you to the entire project team. This has been a long process, but I feel that, you know, Public Works and Kitchell, you know, the city and Alton and Nolan Tam, my impression has been that you all have worked very well together. And so thank you very much. And when the new library opens, it's going to be so exciting. And I think our community is going to just be... We're just going to be overjoyed because I know many of us have worked for over a decade on this project. And so I think seeing it all come to fruition and it's going to be just a fantastic building and it will be a legacy building for our community. So very exciting. And March 28th, we look forward to the grand opening. And so thank you. Thank you all. All right. If there's nothing else, that is the end of our agenda. And I will adjourn this meeting until February 18th, 2026. All right. We're adjourned.