City Council - Regular Meeting

I'm going to call the meeting of the Bayship City Council to order. Ms. Wolf, please call the roll.

Council Members Birdseye. Here. Largus Vada. Here. Misensky. Here. Scott. Here. And Mary Young.

Here. Please join me in the pledge. A plaque stating the fundamental rights of the public is posted at the entrance to the meeting room per section 4.04.03 of the City of Benicia's Open Government Ordinance. Under announcements, I have office hours on the first and third Mondays of each month, except for holidays. And if those times are not convenient, you can ask for an appointment by calling 707-746-4208. We have a proclamation tonight, and that's for the National Suicide Prevention Month. And I'll ask Barbara Gervaisi to join me at the podium. Hello? Yeah. So this is a proclamation in recognition of National Suicide Prevention Month, which is September of 2026. Whereas September 2026 is National Suicide Prevention Month, and whereas suicide is the 11th leading cause of death in the United States, on average, 133 people die by suicide every day, claiming nearly 50,000 lives a year. This translates to one suicide every 10 minutes. In addition, an estimated 2.2 million adults attempt suicide each year. And whereas after experiencing a decrease in suicides over the previous two years, Solano County recorded 26 suicide deaths during the first half of 2026, three more than during the same period in 2025. And the county suicide rate remains higher than the statewide average at 10.3 compared to 9.6, respectively. And whereas LGBTQ youth are more than four times as likely to attempt suicide than their peers, according to the Trevor Project, And whereas stigma and shame associated with behavioral health conditions, societal norms, and fear can undermine suicide prevention efforts by discouraging individuals at risk from seeking life-saving help and by further traumatizing those who have attempted suicide and those who have lost loved ones to suicide. And whereas the community can promote awareness and support efforts to develop and implement strategies that increase access to quality mental health and substance use treatment and suicide prevention services. And whereas the mission of the Kyle Hyland Foundation for Teen Support is to provide charitable and educational support to youth through mental health programs and other services and to maintain a safe and supportive space where teens can receive emotional support through mentoring, counseling, music, and art. And whereas the Kyle Hyland Foundation for Teen Support invites the community to join the KHF Community Walk for Suicide Prevention and Resource Fair, taking place on September 12th, 2026 at 10 a.m. at the Benicia Chamber of Commerce. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Steve Young, Mayor of the City of Benicia, on behalf of the City Council of the City of Benicia, hereby proclaim September 2026 as National Suicide Prevention Month in Benicia and encourage all residents of Benicia to learn more about promoting mental health and wellness and the detection and prevention of suicide. Thank you. I want to present this to Barbara. And George is here as well.

Sure. Thank you, Mayor Young and City Council, for recognizing September as National Suicide Prevention Month. And as you all know, I lost my son, Kyle, in 2014 to suicide. Kyle was 16 years old. And so... The foundation is a legacy for him, and we hope to prevent any other families from experiencing what we did. As Mayor Young had indicated, we do have our suicide prevention walk on September 12th. I invite you all to come out to that. It's absolutely free, although we are accepting donations and welcome donations, and all proceeds will be donated to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, which is a great organization that provides support for those struggling with suicide and those that have lost loved ones to suicide. We will start the event with a resource fair in the parking lot of the Chamber of Commerce at 10 a.m. And at about 11 a.m. we'll be walking out to the First Street Pier for a dub release, which is very beautiful part of the event. And this year we will be walking in remembrance of Kyle. as well as all of those other individuals who have lost their lives to suicide. So thank you very much.

Thank you, Barbara. We have no appointments, no presentations. This takes us to the adoption of the agenda. Ms. Schake is sitting in for Mr. Giuliani at the moment. Do we have any changes to the agenda?

No changes, Mayor Young.

All right. I'll look for a motion to adopt the agenda. Who to approve?

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Ms. Wolf, please call the roll.

Councilmembers, Birdside. Yes. Agaspada. Yes. Misinski.

Yes.

Scott.

Yes.

And Mayor Young.

Yes. This takes us then to the opportunity for public comment. And this is an opportunity for someone to speak on any item not on the agenda. And we would ask only that you limit your comments to those things that are within the wherewithal of the council to act upon. So is there anybody in the audience? Ms. Marchand, please approach.

Good evening, Mayor Young, city council members, city manager and staff. I want to express my sincere thank you to the Venetia Police Department detectives, Officer Wright and Officer Dam, as well as the other officers who assisted along with the flock cameras in the swift arrest in the targeted and intentional vandalism to Together We Rise, the mural on my building. Thank you to the city of Venetia and our community for standing together and Your support shows that our LGBTQ plus community and public art matters here. I hope that this arrest shows others not in Venetia. With tremendous gratitude for your part in sustaining our job of Venetia. Thank you.

Thank you, Vicki. Is there anyone else who would like to make public comment at this time on an item not on the agenda? And Mr. Moderator, is anybody online who would like to make public comment? All right. Then we will close public comment and move to the consent calendar. And we have five items on the consent calendar tonight. The first is support for the vision for our water future as a member agency of the Association of California Water Agencies. 14B is an approval of an increased contingency and contract change order. for the 2026 Citywide Curb Ramp Improvement Project. 14C is the second meeting and adoption of an ordinance amending various sections of the Venetia Municipal Code to update the finance director references and clarify procurement and contracting authority and make related administrative cleanup amendments. 14D is an award of a construction contract authorizing a budget amendment and approving a notice of exemption under CEQA for the Southern Pacific Railroad Depot Preservation and Maintenance Project. And 14E is an approval to waive the reading of all ordinances introduced or adopted. I'm going to pull 14D. Any other actions from any of the council members? Council Member Lagert-Spada. Yeah, I just did. Yeah, okay. Any other requests? I don't see any others. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to pull an item? Seeing none, is there anybody online who would like to call for an item to be discussed in greater detail in order to pull an item? All right, thank you. Then I will entertain a motion on 14a, b, c, and e. So moved.

Second.

We have a motion and a second for adoption of four of the items. Ms. Wolf, please call the roll.

Council members Birdseye. Yes. Marcus Spada. Yes. Rosensky.

Yes.

Scott.

Yes.

And Mary Young.

Yes. And that takes us then to 14d. and i wanted to sort of go over some of the parts of this project so as i understand it this is a construction project to re-roof repaint and replace gutters on the espy depot that's correct and we think it's going to take about up to 45 days maybe less and we did a competitive bid or We had five different companies bid a little bid was 192 thousand dollars everything looks Obviously correct and copacetic on that Which takes us to the construction management side, and this is where I have some? questions So we are being asked to approve a construction management contract that was not competitively bid and that is for $90,000 for a project that's only $190,000. If it stretches a full 45 days, which could be less, that works out to $2,000 a day that we'll be paying for construction management or reviewing, re-roofing, repainting, and gutter installation. To me, that is a large number. And I just sort of want to ask, why we would be asked to approve a contract of that scope and size without any kind of competitive bidding.

Very good question, Mayor. I would start with construction management is a professional service and not a low bid construction contract. THE OBJECTIVE IS TO FIND THE CONSULTANT BEST QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE THESE SERVICES OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FOR THE PROJECT. I BELIEVE WE'VE DONE THAT WITH A SELECTION OF UNICO. THEY ARE ONE OF OUR ON CALL CONSULTANTS THAT WE HAVE ON A SHORT LIST TO DO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FOR CITY CIP. UNIQUELY QUALIFIED FOR THIS PROJECT WITH THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES. THEY RECENTLY COMPLETED IN THAT ROLE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FOR THE CITY OF SAN RAFEL ON TWO LIBRARY PROJECTS IN THAT CITY. THE CARNEGIE DOWNTOWN BUILT IN 1909. VERY EXTENSIVE PROJECT. And so they were the most qualified of our consultants that we have on our short list to do it. So that to me was the selection, going to other consultants to get proposals. We were satisfied once we were able to get the price out of, or the proposal from Unico. Basically, when you do a CIP project, once you decide on the approach, the hours and the labor rates are similar. The labor rates are similar. So getting more proposals from other firms would not result in significant savings. I believe we have the consultant that's right for this job. They are the most qualified to do the work. And the amount of time that they've put in the proposal is the right amount. You broke it down to about $2,000 a day in the 45-day. Let's not forget the lead-in. We have the pre-construction work to make sure that they're up to speed on the project, and there's a pre-construction meeting. So there's the hours that, certainly a week of work prior to the contract starting, and then at the end, the closeout and all the documentation and the paperwork. And there's, they are not putting somebody on the job eight hours a day to sit on the job. a reasonable amount of inspection inspector time on the job. It's a historic preservation, so there's going to be a need for a close inspection of the project. We did contamination testing prior to the project to check for asbestos and lead. We found that there was lead in the structure, no surprise, a structure that old. So they're going to have to deal with the lead out there. We're going to need somebody to be able to to handle that issue and make sure that they protect the public safety. There's also 45 days is an aggressive schedule to do all the work that you identified, the roof, the paint, the gutters. And there's also unforeseen rot and repair of wood to do those elements. That's part of the work too. So they're going to be out there managing that inspection, making sure that it's documented correctly. And that is basically what it costs to do this work. $90,000 is the right amount, and it's the right firm for the job.

So you mentioned the library projects in San Rafael. Did you happen to look and see what the cost of those projects was versus the cost of construction management? I did not get a comparison, no. Have we done other projects where construction management exceeded 40% of the cost of the contract itself?

On these lower dollar construction, this is not your basic, simple $200,000 job. It's a historic building, so it's a complex $200,000 job. And there's a baseline price with doing any project that... so when you do these lower cost projects the percentage is a little bit out of whack. There's not a proportional decrease as you get into lower dollar projects. There's a certain baseline amount that's applicable to these projects.

All right, I'll turn it over for further questioning to Council Member Largasvada.

Thank you, Mayor. I 100% agree with every comment you just made. And so I'm going to kind of work out of order or backwards. And my first question is to the city attorney. And that is, on one hand, I 100% support the contract for the project itself. But I do not support spending $90,000 on construction management. In the staff report, it says the city manager can just sign these things. And so I guess my question is, does this council have any authority to put that second decision on hold and or have discussion where we potentially send it back?

You certainly have the authority to put things on hold. That would be more of a question for staff, the effect if you awarded the contract to the contractor, but not the design, the construction management services, how that might affect the contractor's work and the timing of the project. I would add something that Mr. Leary left out. When staff went and created these on-call lists, they did go out to bid for these professional services. So it's not like these haven't gone out to bid before. They did when we created our lists of on-call consultants. And then staff did, at this point, further vetting of which one would be right for this project.

I agree with that statement as well, and I also agree with a lot of the comments Mr. Leary made. I understand and value the construction management professional services. That's a real thing. This firm has a great reputation, and they are good, but $90,000 to, I'm just reading from the staff report, or to keep an eye on minor non-structural roof deck and trim repair as needed, gutter replacement, glazing, and so forth, is extraordinarily excessive. So I guess my question to staff is, why can't the city provide this monitoring service and what alternatives for competing proposals were considered. Again, not questioning whether this firm is up to the job. Their reputation precedes them. I think We can't compare the depot with all due respect to these library projects. Those are vastly different in terms of square footage and complexity. So again, the question is, why can't staff provide this project management or construction management oversight services? Because we're counting on the contractor to be doing all this work. I'm not saying they operate without any supervision. I'm looking for clarification on that. I'm also looking to have an understanding why we can't look at alternatives and or maybe breaking this proposal into those elements that definitely require some level of expertise. But again, based on the staff report, there's a disconnect there for me.

Okay, thank you. Council Member Scott.

I too am troubled with the single source bid, but I'm also troubled with waiting another year that this would delay on the $90,000 for the construction bid. Let me ask a couple of preliminary questions first and then come back to that portion of the project. Why was the project, which was approved by council back in December, why was the project split into two sections?

The project did get phased into two pieces. The phase one, as the mayor detailed, is the roof, the paint, and the gutter replacement. CAME TOGETHER LATE IN THE SEASON. WE HAD A VERY BUSY SEASON THIS YEAR WITH OUR CIP TO GET ALL THE PROJECTS OUT TO BID. WE HAD SIX, EIGHT PROJECTS THAT WERE IN THAT GROUP AND THIS ONE CAME IN. IT WAS A BIG EFFORT TO GET THE PROJECT TO THE POINT AT WHICH WE DID. up against a tight schedule and we were able to get it out so that it can be built before the rains came. We were not able to get the phase two pieces and we made a decision to phase that off and split the ADA and the deck work for phase two as we weren't able to put that together, but we were able to get the maintenance efforts that are part of phase one, and that was something we wanted to do and get it out and show good faith to get that project on the street. So it will be done at phase two next year, and we'll move quickly on that and get it done next year.

Okay, well, thank you for that, but let me continue on with that. Talking specifically to the management fee, will phase two require this management consultant to be on? And is this in addition to, or is this that $90,000 split between the first phase and the second phase? And in the first phase, can you explain, which is a question for the second, is why the bird netting, was not part of phase one, because the bird netting, without the bird netting, we're gonna have the birds come back after we just put a fresh coat of paint on, we get the windows glazed, and we get the gutters repaired. We're then going to have to wait because these are migratory birds. They're going to come back. We're going to have to then power wash and do everything else that we're going to have to do. Is that part of this $90,000 consultant fee? And all the costs of having the scaffolding there, the lifts there, the workmen there, everybody working on the roof, Why was the netting portion, when the funding was there, why was the netting not considered part of the first phase before we get to doing the decking, which is going to have all of the bird droppings that'll have to be cleaned up and then environmentally taken off and then the new decking put in on phase two? So is the 90,000 covered phase one and phase two and why wasn't the bird netting included in phase one?

Great question councilmember Scott. I'd like to circle back on the initial question of the $90,000 in the CM So I would either like to comment or our city manager would like to comment before we move on to the next question Well as long as you answer the questions You can comment as much as you want

Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I think it provides some context that will hopefully provide some clarity for the other council questions. I think it's important to remind council of context. This was not a program that was originally scheduled for this year. It's important to also remind council that we are undergoing more value in CIP programs than this city has ever done before with fewer people than we've ever had before. all while trying to realize a reduced budget of $7.7 million. Oh, and in addition, we also have more development coming into this city than we've had in 40 years. So the staff that we were allocated that could have probably project managed this was moved over to development services so that we can accommodate the 900 acres for signature development, the 500 acres for Rose Estates, addition to two four-story buildings for Eden. So staff was asked to put this on the schedule. They did. They were... reviewing it in their expertise on what we could get accomplished this year so we didn't have further delay. That necessitated breaking the project up into two phases. Staff is evaluating adding the bird netting. It will probably be an add alternative this year. We're not 100% guaranteed that can get done, but we're hopeful that will be done. We're going to try to attempt to do that this year. So moving forward and understood, when you look at this contract and you see the value of project management, yes, it's expensive. But as noted by your professional staff, it's not based on the value of the total contract. There's a certain baseline cost that is built into that. So if council is so aggrieved by that cost, we need not have to do this project this year. We can program it for next year, and we might be able to then program it in such a fashion that we'll have a project manager in-house, and then we will be relieved of the $90,000 cost. But that will delay this project by another year.

If I may. Please. Thank you for outlining all of the projects that we know that are in the process, and that does help provide context. But if we're in the process of considering as part of this renovation work, we're going to have a management consultant. Why is it a factor of city staff? We are having a $90,000 consultant there on site for $2,000 a day, replacing what would be city staff, acting as though it were city staff, ensuring that the quality of the workmanship is done. So why is it an issue to give me no offense, but recognizing all of the load that is on city staff?

It's important that you have... contract management project management to have the expertise to make sure the job is done correctly this is a historic building we don't have that expertise presently on staff now is it possible um in the confluence of events that happens with the other project managers that will bring on in the months to come related to the air district projects that will have a person of that expertise that can then do this project in addition to the other projects that may well be the case and certainly if council has the direction of staff tonight not to proceed with this, that will be a focus when we look for new project managers for which we are interviewing one as we speak. But it is for a variety of projects, water, roads, buildings, design review for development projects. So it's difficult to find that expertise all in one person. And it may well be that in the coming months, we find that person internally on staff, and then we can program that work in 2027 for current city staff, or the new city staff that would come on, to serve as the project manager. If council does not want to wait, then this is the cost to do it now.

Okay, thank you. Vice Mayor Miszynski.

I have two questions for you. One, the contract mechanism for the $90,000, is it time and materials or fixed fee? It's hourly. It's time and materials. Second question is, is there other technical experts that are underneath Unico related to the project that fall underneath that $90,000 scope, or is it just Unico staff?

It's two staff, an inspector and a construction manager, all under UNICO's shingle.

And the construction management contract for the library in San Rafael was $210,000, and it was a $2.1 million contract, so just for reference. About 10%.

Okay. Let's open it up to public comment, and then we'll bring it back to the council for further discussion and direction. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to make public comment on this item?

Ms. Strawbridge.

Hi.

Good evening, Mayor, city council members, staff. As you know, I'm president of Benicia Main Street. We are the caretakers of the depot. We have been lobbying, at least for two years, solid, about the condition of the building. We are under contract with the city to use that building as a visitor center in which we greet people from all over the world. that make their way to Venetia and give them information about our history, all sorts of things, where to eat, where to shop, that kind of thing. So the building, I don't know how many of you have been down there recently, but it is falling apart. That's why I've been here many times to talk about the condition of the paint, the gutters, They leak. They leak inside. The roof leaks inside the building. So it's getting to the point where we need to do something now. So I'm hoping that tonight you can figure this out. We do need that netting up there as this work continues. We had an infestation of birds like we've not seen before on all parts of that building. And they're just going to come back. They know it's a good thing when they built their nest there. So the birds are gone. That's helped get this thing on track as far as timing. We couldn't do anything with the birds there. So as I say, this is very important that we really, you guys approved this back in December. The funding comes from the Amport settlement. We've got the money. We need to use it now for this building. It's one of the few historic buildings in our town that's actually being utilized. And it's utilized daily. We're open every day of the year as the visitor center and as Venetian Main Street. So I really am hopeful that we can come to a consensus here that we can't wait until

Next year because there might not be a next year as far as funding All right, thank you is there anybody else would like to make public comment on this item All right, is there anybody online who would like to speak to this item All right, then I'll stop the public comment period return it to the council So my question is when i mean it's basically three elements to this contract roof paint gutters when somebody takes out a permit to do a roof city sends out a building inspector to inspect that work i don't believe that we do it for paint i don't know that we do it for gutters But why couldn't we simply send a regular city building inspector to inspect the roof after it's installed, like we would do with any other property?

That's a good question. It's a capital improvement project that requires active management of the contract, and it'll timely review of submittals that need to be reviewed. We've got RFIs that need to be answered, unforeseen conditions, and there's repairs that are going to need to be done to potentially unforeseen repairs that we're not aware of as we peel back the onion. And so they're going to be actively managing An inspector is not looking for the contract elements when they're in the field. That's why we hire a professional CM firm to go out there and to manage the contract, look over the city's best interests, make sure that the plans and the specs are being implemented as they've been written and drafted. And keep the project moving forward. The weather's coming. We have 45 days to get this job done. We want to get it done before the rains are coming and the super El Nino hits. So it's a significant concern. We need a manager that's going to actively manage it and make sure that the project stays on schedule. It's built for the plans and specs, and it's paid appropriately. An inspector would not be watching those things for the building department. They're just implementing state law.

And if we simply approve the construction contract and not the construction management contract, does that effectively mean we can't proceed at all?

That's correct. The city doesn't have staff to manage the construction this fall. So that would be a choice that you'd be making, too. cancel the project.

I got no issue with the contractor. You did all the right things in terms of competitive bidding, and then we've got a competitive price, and I'm sure the company is fine. I am not able to get to a point where spending this kind of money for this kind of work is what I believe is in the best interest of the taxpayers, frankly. Council Member Lagaspada.

You essentially asked my question. The only thing I'll add, just for further clarification, is does the status of the building, whatever legislation falls under when it comes to historic heritage, et cetera, does that require the... contracting of someone that supposedly is historic preservation expert. Again, Unico, familiar with that company, didn't know they were in the historic preservation business. So it's really a question of, I hear you, but do we have to use them? I'm not going to put it in the bucket of nice to have, but I am in a complete agreement with the mayor. Without even seeing what we would get for $90,000, it is very difficult to move forward on this element of the project. And so do we have to use a firm like Unico? Could we just find another construction management firm and or a sole proprietor who would do the exact same thing for probably 80% less? Because we're paying one person as opposed to, I heard you rattle off like five people. So there's a question in there someplace.

All right, thank you. I will make a motion sort of along those lines. But first, I will call first on Council Member Scott.

Thank you, Mayor Young. While I don't support single source bidding at all, we have to fix this building. We have to fix it now. Who knows how bad the weather is going to be over this winter. We've seen just on the national scene already that the weather is crazy. We have to protect this building for our historic future. So it's $90,000. I kind of hold my nose, but I also say that if this is what is required and you are making the recommendation that we need to have somebody on site watching what they are doing, I will make the motion. that we move ahead with this as staff is presented recognizing that we need to have professional management consulting construction management as part of the arrangements in order to make sure that the building is maintained and the renovations are done correctly and hopefully There'll be time enough to get the netting in because I would hate to have to do this again with having a consultant getting up because somebody has to get up on the scaffolding and get under there and have to pay it again on the construction costs or the construction management costs. So I'm throwing a motion to accept the recommendation as submitted.

And I second.

And I'm going to make a substitute motion. And my substitute motion is that we move to award the construction contract and direct staff to solicit new construction management bids on an enhanced process, go beyond our single source process, put it out there, ask for a 30-day response, an award only the construction part at this point with a direction to Find or to solicit from a broader broader community of construction managers, so that's my motion Well, let's see if we get a second first All right, so we that's a second So we have a motion in a second we can have discussion on that we have we're gonna vote on that one first That's the way it works So discussion on the motion on the on the floor Councilwoman bird sign our city managers lights been on for a while.

Can we let him weigh in?

Well, we can certainly listen to him, but it is the council's action at this point We've closed public comment, but sure we should always be willing to listen and if Mario has comments absolutely

And then I have a comment. Okay.

Mr. Giuliani.

Okay, a couple things. One, it's important to note these aren't taxpayer dollars. These are Amports dollars that we're using for the benefit of this historic structure. And it's a historic structure, and that requires a certain level of expertise and diligence. Two, it's... Important to know, as Ben alluded to, as well as Neil, there is a bidding process that we go through for on-call services. It's not as though we just picked Unico off the phone and said, come do this. They are on-call. They bid to get those services. It's also the process to be efficient. So that's point two. Point three is, Should the council provide direction to separate the construction management with the contract? You put in jeopardy the ability for us to do it this year in serious jeopardy. And I understand if council says go do this, and I would share with you as your city manager, as your staff, you are going to put an enormous tax on our ability to deliver on that. And as you suggested, Mayor, if a 30-day window to solicit construction management would likely push this out of the time period necessary to get it in before the rains. So I don't believe that is a feasible option to get this done this year.

All right. Thank you. Council Member Scott.

Thank you. I just wanted to reaffirm what the city manager said. The schedule right now shows that we have a month to go through all the awarding and get everything ready to do construction. Construction is not going to start until probably the first week or so in October. As he notes... A 30-day delay in schedule in looking to find another contractor, which would then take another couple of weeks in order to review it, to get it back to Council to approve it. We're at the end of the year. We're talking about doing this project in 2027 and allowing it to weather and continue to degrade. And I appreciate the fact that you brought that to the Council, that this is Amports dollars. These are not city dollars, and these were awarded as part of the settlement. I don't mean to say that we should be frivolous with those dollars because they're not our own money, but we need to recognize that any delay from tonight pushes this to 27.

All right, thank you. Council Member Vargas-Pato.

I would like to call for the vote.

Well, I want to make sure everybody has a chance. Okay, Vice Mayor.

It's actually a question for Neil. So Neil, in the procurement process when we identified Unico to be the CM over the project, you said you identified them because they were uniquely qualified because of their historic resource background, having completed similar work. But there's also, if I recall, four or five other firms that are on that same on-call roster. Is that correct? Maybe not with the same qualifications, but there was, I think, GHD. There was like three or four other firms. Am I right there?

We currently have three firms on our construction management on-call list. DCCM, Consor, and Unico.

And is it unrealistic for us to expect that if we put out a solicitation to the existing bidders, the three bidders, to ask them to quote the same job that they would respond within two weeks?

That would be, they would respond if they have capacity to handle it. I would not expect all THREE OF THEM TO HAVE CAPACITY AT THIS POINT IN THE SEASON. WE WERE LUCKY TO GET THE PROPOSAL FROM UNICO. WE WERE LUCKY THAT THEY WERE AVAILABLE. IT WAS A LATE SEASON ASK AND THEY WERE ABLE TO DO IT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF THE OTHER TWO WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A PROPOSAL, IF ANY.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU, MAYOR. ONE COMMENT AND THEN ONE SUGGESTION, WHICH IS RELATED TO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, WHATEVER Substitute motion. Thank you. So here's an alternative to going back out to procurement. If our friends at Unico haven't watched the meeting, they should tune in tomorrow, collect this feedback, sharpen their pencils, and come back with a scaled back quote that will meet the requirements of this project. That's what I would suggest. And I think everyone wins here. I'm 100% on board that this is long overdue. I do take exception with some of the comments. The fact that it's Amport's money, it's a moot point. The reality is... We should be taking every opportunity to put as much money back towards these projects. 90K is a big check that a consultant's going to get. I'm not saying we do this work without it, but that's where I'm frustrated. And I picked up on the frustration from the city manager. It's okay. We're not easy some nights. But I am also frustrated. You guys put this number in front of us without any context. So I guess if there's direction for staff is... You don't have to share the line item costs in a proposal. But it would be prudent, so we kind of avoid these situations in the future where it makes sense, to at least add what they're going to do for $90,000. Because if I could see that, whoa, it's going to be 50 hours to be on the roof, And believe it or not, we've got to pay one guy who's a paint expert to be on his knees, you know, crawling around checking paint for 20 hours. Then I might go, oh, okay. That adds up to $90,000. But we don't have that before. What we have is the staff report, which identifies a project that on paper gives no indication that it requires such a sophisticated partner to serve as the construction manager. So to bring it back, I hear you. I want this to move forward. My suggestion would be is send this back to UNICO and tell them to come back with a reasonable number that allows us to move forward. And that saves us the whole procurement process, which should be able to kind of get this thing back on track. I think that's what we all want.

All right. Council Member Scott.

I think we should call for the motion.

All right. I'm going to amend my motion along the lines of the Vice Mayor's suggestion. I don't really like these sole source specialized thing where we don't get competitive bids at all. I think this example tonight is another example of why I believe the council has to take a little bit more control over spending decisions. Bringing us this kind of thing with these kind of numbers is... difficult to swallow and my amendment would be to contact the three companies on our on our list by telephone tell them do it tomorrow tell them what we're looking for ask for something back in 30 in a week bring us the response perhaps at the next council meeting And maybe it is that they're the only one interested in doing it, and they're not willing to drop their price by $90,000. I'm not willing to support that tonight. So my amended motion would be to solicit quotes for the construction management piece, award the construction contract tonight, and return to us in short order as quickly as you can with These three companies having at least a chance to provide a bid And if that's okay with the seconder of the motion That's you okay. Well.

That's an amended motion and Yes May I offer suggestion that because Whatever we were to solicit, it would be less than $90,000. If it is less than $90,000, that in your motion, you authorize the city manager to execute so that we don't delay. Because if we come back on the 9-15, we may well not have the information in order to proceed. So if council... is most interested in trying to see what else is is out there if it's lower than 90 000 then you authorize the city manager to proceed and it was at 89.5 well well then offer some some direction as for because the other aspect of this is how badly do you want this done this year If the goal of the council, and this is a fair policy decision, if the goal of the council is we want to preserve as many dollars as possible so that we can invest back into the depot, understood. That may mean we have to do this in 27. If rather we're concerned about the condition of the depot and we want to do this as expeditiously as possible, you're paying a premium on that.

But the premium shouldn't be higher construction management costs. That has to be justified by actual work. And I haven't seen anything that justifies it.

Well, again, staff described today the need to have a type of construction management for such projects. There's an expertise that's required. There's not an expertise on staff to do that work. Okay? So it's, construction management happens all the time. This is not unique to any project. What is unique about it is the size of it as compared to the scope of the total project. And it's just because the total project scope is low. Vice Mayor?

You know, generally I would buy that argument because I do think that there's a mobilization cost regardless of the scale of the project. I understand that. I think if we had two other bids or we had proof that we had went out and had two other conversations, this would be a mute conversation because we'd be able to say, cool, so you talk to three people, one's 85, one's 91, and the other one's 90, and we're going with 90 because they're uniquely qualified. Okay, I feel like we're making an informed decision. I feel like, but for that, you might have somebody, one of the three come back and be like, oh, we'll do it for $60,000. And then... I mean, then what? So less than 90 is not acceptable to me because I feel like there's absolutely more room if somebody wants to bid on that job, and they're going to hear this conversation, and hopefully Unico pays attention and asks to submit a revised bid, and hopefully we consider it.

If I may, as noted by our city engineer, this isn't just a kind of low-bid contract. You have your professional staff that is evaluating the on-call folks that we have based on availability and expertise. And so it is also a judgment that you have your professional staff exercising their judgment to say, who is going to be best qualified to make sure that we do this correctly? And so it's not a matter of getting somebody that is just a contract manager and who's the cheapest person out there, we'll put them out on site. We want to make sure that we have a responsibility to treat this depot with the reverence and respect it deserves as a historic structure. And that warranted going with Unico because they have a demonstrated expertise in historic structures.

But they were also the only ones that were ever talked to.

Calling for the question or I will tell you why I'm not going to support the substitute motion and it's because we are Disrespecting our professional staff by making these calls by trying to make the calls that they have made and second-guessing their professional Expertise I couldn't disagree more okay allow me to finish without being interrupted second reason why I am NOT supporting the substitute motion is because we will put the whole whole project in jeopardy of not happening this year we have heard from from Benicia Main Street that this is a priority that we're jeopardizing the the building structure you're jeopardizing the people that are in that building and I find you know, all this second guessing of what we're doing offensive, and I call for the motion that I will not support.

Okay, thank you. Council Member Scott.

Too will not support this for basically the same things as councilmember birds. I noted we cannot disrespect staff especially on something as important as Understanding the nuances of a historic preservation. It's not putting in a new family room. It's a historic preservation these people are attuned to know the nuances required and in order to ensure that that building is up to code and protected for the long-term future of our community. And we are jeopardizing it because we want to ask them to sharpen their pencils. I would make the assumption that they did sharpen their pencil, that they looked at how much work is going to be required in order to deliver to the city of Venetia a building that will meet code and will be significantly repaired to the renovation standards that we need it to be and that by continuing this discussion it is continuing to to degrade I think the resources that we have sitting right there that have said they have done their job and They have done their job, and they believe that in order to deliver this, and I have disagreed with how they've done their job. So don't, this is not something about all projects. But in this case, we have a building that three to five weeks, if we wait, because this is what's going to happen. It's going to be three to five weeks before we actually get the bids in, we look at it, we make a decision. Is 78 the difference between 90? when we're talking about the depot, the single most, that and the Capitol building, the two single most reflective buildings of our historic nature, of our city. And we're sitting here and we're talking about pencils?

15 grand.

So, first of all, I'd like- I don't support it. Understood. Vice Mayor Misinski.

um so i think we uh we need to take some accountability related to the direction that we give the staff related to the contract first and foremost the reality is that we're expressing an expectation which was not set up at the time in which the contract was put in place so that's acknowledged right if we wanted to have a process Procedure related to that bidding it needs to be established at that time. It's very common whether it's San Francisco Center fell all these communities And I've worked with a lot of them I get requests to bid on projects all the time because that is what their procedure requires them to do and So I think we need to clean that up so that this conversation doesn't happen again, so hopefully city manager. Here's that feedback With that being said I too Not because it's not important. Not because we're going to miss the construction season. But I just feel uncomfortable when I don't have the information to make the decision. And if it's as simple as saying, hey, we move forward with splitting the contract, and Neil gets back to us and says, look, nobody else wants to bid on it, then that's the outcome. And then we can say, cool, we can move forward. That doesn't need to be weeks, right? So I'm happy... moving forward with the mayor's recommendation, because I think we can solve that problem quicker than everyone thinks the timeline is.

All right, thank you. Hope nobody on this side of the table thinks that there's by asking these questions. We're showing disrespect that is not the intent I don't think it's also member largest fodder or myself certainly or the vice mayor by questioning process by suggesting that we need to have a little more clarity by expressing our discomfort with a sole source bid may I finish I It's sole source if you don't ask anybody else for a bid on a project. That's my definition of sole source. And you're interrupting me. I apologize for interrupting you. Let's try to keep it civil. We started it. Really? This is where we're going? OK. Let's call the question. Do we understand the motion, Ms. Wolff? Okay.

Let me make sure. I want to understand the question. So it's my understanding you want to approve the resolution in the packet, awarding the contract to, as the lowest responsible bidder, to create a property renewals for their bid amount with the contingency stated in the staff report and in the resolution. However, you do not want, at this point in time, approve, authorize the city manager to sign the construction contract task order for construction management services and on so strike that part of the resolution out and provide direction to staff to return to council as soon as practical with the this is what i need help with yeah now is it to the vice mayor's suggestion we make some phone calls tomorrow there's only three companies that you're calling they may or may not be interested in bidding

If the answer is no, we're not interested, well, then you can just report back to us through the city manager that that's the case, in which case I think we can proceed. However, if one of them expresses an interest in bidding, then we need to get a bid from them and be able to compare. Correct?

And give Unicode the opportunity to revise their bid.

Yeah.

I think it's fair enough to be able to go back to Unico and all the other bidders and say, hey, look, you have seven days. We're asking for your best and final. If you'd like to submit a revised bid, we'll consider it. We know that there's one other or two other or no other that are bidding on it, but final is going to be made on Friday, and then we can move forward.

And if the answer is nobody else is interested, then I think we could give the authority to proceed.

That authority has to come back to the council.

It does have to come back. Yes. Okay.

Just additional direction just to kind of follow up with the Vice Mayor. I would also encourage staff as part of this communication to take a moment to revisit the scope of work you put together and passed on to UNICO to confirm that it is as broad or as narrow as it was initially presented. Again, we don't know because we never saw it. But If we take a step back, if there's an opportunity to take a step back and see where this can be kind of buttoned up to again deliver on what actually has to happen for this project, I highly recommend it and make that part of the conversation as well. Otherwise, they're just going to come back with a number based on this broad scope that probably is way more than this project needs. Because again, it's gutters, a ceiling, and paint. For starters, we will continue to invest more.

I think we are ready to call the question miss wolf.

Please call the roll don't some members bird's-eye. No Largus pota yes Musansky yes Scott no and Marianne yes motion passes And we will

MAKE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGES IN THE RESOLUTION AND ASK THAT STAFF MAKE THE CALLS TOMORROW AND ASK FOR A RAPID RESPONSE ON THESE THINGS. OKAY. THAT TAKES US TO THE BUSINESS ITEMS AND THE FIRST ONE IS A CITYWIDE PARK LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PROGRAM AND THIS WILL BE PRESENTED BY MS. MARTINEZ.

Good evening, council and community. Tonight, we will review our old LL&D, which will then lead into our new citywide plan. Our old LL&D was formed in the late 1980s and consisted of one district with five zones consisting of residential and commercial. It lacked an annual inflation adjustment factor and annual revenue received was around $427,000 a year. The new citywide plaid was adopted by council on November 4th of 2025 by resolution 25-127. The assessment rule was filed with the Solano County assessor in August of 26. The first assessment will begin in this December of 26 with our property tax bill. Additionally, the engineer's report is brought to council each subsequent year for approval to assess for the next fiscal year. This was also done in our prior LLND. Here we have a map for our citywide plan for a quick reference. Our citywide district services consist of maintenance and servicing of landscape medians adjacent to public streets, so trash pruning and irrigation. Maintenance and servicing of open space areas, including disk mowing and trash removal, public park sites with established landscape maintenance and servicing, so trimming, pruning, weeding, fertilizing, trash removal, sprinkler repair, plant replacement, and other necessary maintenance program, along with street repairs and maintenance within the district. Some examples of capital improvement projects are upcoming playground or upgrading playground equipment, adding or upgrading shade structures, upgraded amenities such as tables, benches, barbecue grills, improved quality of trails and or pathways, expand lighting for ball fields at community park and bocce ball courts, synthetic all-weather fields at community park, and enhanced public restrooms. CIP prioritization is based on deferred maintenance, safety, our POCS master plan, which was adopted in 2024 and had significant community input, and lastly, for efficiency in conjunction with other public works projects. Current initiatives for fiscal year 26 and 27. This list includes completed and in-the-works projects utilizing current funds, so nothing is related to the plot on this list. Jack London enhancements, which included shade structures, picnic tables, rental area, basketball courts, resurfacing of the concrete pathways, restroom remodel, concrete dugouts, and trash receptacles. We also did the gazebo stabilization at the First Street Green, Playground of Dreams toddler swing replacement, irrigation controller upgrades to cloud-based 5G, Skillman Park basketball courts resurfacing and striping, new bleachers, fence repairs, and snack shack remodel for the baseball fields. We currently are in the progress for Civic Center restroom remodel along with BCP lower restroom remodel. And then lastly, using the remaining five zone LL&D funds, which we'll be bringing back to council in two weeks. The citywide plaid annual budget. IS ESTIMATED AT 1.8 MILLION, WITH 851,000 GOING TOWARDS O&M. SO THAT INCLUDES PERSONNEL COST, NEW IMAGE LANDSCAPING CONTRACT FOR OUR MEDIANS, TRIMMING, TRASH REMOVAL, SPRINKLER REPAIR, SUPPLIES AND OTHER NECESSARY MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS. PLANNED BUDGET FOR 27 THROUGH 2030. ADDITIONALLY, ANNUAL UTILITIES COST AROUND 252,000, LEAVING THE REMAINING 788,000 FOR CIP'S. Estimated annual allocations are below. So we have the all-weather fields, expanded lighting at Community Center for Civic Center Park, replacement of outdoor amenities, add and replace shade structures, improvement of trails and pathways, and then upgraded equipment. So I would like to note that some of these capital improvement projects may be financed over 30 years, but could potentially be from our city reserves. Some projects will require savings over multiple years, so any of those additional funds would need to be saved to roll over for larger projects such as the Playground of Dreams. Staff will include fiscal year 27 to 2030 projects in the two-year budget and five-year CIP, which will be brought to council in 2027. Tentative fiscal year 27-28 projects will be BCP asphalt pathway, BCP fields, dugouts, shade structures, synthetic field design project scope, irrigation controller upgrades, Skillman Park playground replacement, and Francesca Park pathway replacement. These projects are pending costs and long-term budgeting strategies. That concludes the presentation, and we're on to questions.

All right. I see a light from Council Member Birdseye.

So by receiving this presentation and adopting a resolution, are we tonight approving everything that we've seen on those slides?

No, tonight's action is only to receive the presentation by staff on the Plaid and move to adopt a resolution approving the creation of the Plaid Citywide Fund fund 324 approving a budget amendment to establish a revenue budget in fiscal year 26-27 in the plaid citywide fund fund 324 and authorizing the administrative service director to make the necessary budget amendments so we're establishing a fund and these projects will come back to council before for our approval before we get started on the work correct they will be in the five-year cip and in the two-year budget

Yes, please to further expand upon that this is really the first opportunity that council has to provide staff some direction as to Programming the plaid budget tonight is really a preview and it's short because as noted those dollars once you start pulling back certain operation and maintenance lighting there there's not a lot there's you know three quarters a million dollars and so what is shared is some examples of programs that staff has put forward for council as a starting point THESE ARE THINGS THAT WERE DISCUSSED DURING THE PLAD REVIEW. THESE ARE ITEMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED AT COUNCIL. AND SO THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO THEN PROVIDE THAT DIRECTION AND FEEDBACK ON, WELL, THIS LOOKS GREAT, BUT WE'D LIKE YOU TO GO AND LOOK AT THIS. AND WE'LL COME BACK AT LATER TIMES FOR COUNCIL TO REALLY ZERO IN ON WHAT'S THE PROGRAMMATIC GOAL FOR THE PLAD. And as noted by Danielle, in some cases, there's going to be a requirement for savings for multiple years to have playground replacement. Jack London was replaced last year, and I think it was close to $800,000, if staff, I see nodding heads. So just by what was described, it's going to take multiple years of savings just to be able to have sufficient funds in order for playground placement. So this is really an opportunity for council to discuss as a policy, programmatically, what you'd like to see, give that direction back to staff, and then we'll come back and try to build an annual planned budget.

Okay, thank you. Vice Mayor Miszynski.

So I'm not going to try to pretend like I understand which pieces of park equipment are broken and what needs to be prioritized, but I did do some research to try to figure out how their landscaping lighting districts are funded. And I have a priority scheme that I'd like staff to try to evaluate and figure out how we can consider this. And I'm happy to send in a follow-up email so you don't have to take copious notes. But I think the first is like health life and safety issues like those should be priority number one projects like if we have an identified life and health and safety issue that should go first second preventative assessment of failure so for example if we have a pipe that's repeatedly broken every single year for the last five years and it's going to fail and we know it's being held together with bailing wire and duct tape like that should be a priority so that we can eliminate that maintenance burden which is a reoccurring challenge not only to execute projects but also for other assets you know and funds Restore, like I would say, if we can get to a point before we enhance things that we can restore existing function and service levels first. So before we go buy all brand new park equipment for a park, let's make sure that, like, all the sprinklers work in the park so that the park is still, you know, can be utilized as a park. And, for example, if there's already a bench there, before we go buy brand new play equipment, maybe replace the bench that's been red-tagged for a year and a half or whatever, right? And then ultimately, I think the efficiency and the new stuff comes at the later point in time. But like that is the framework of prioritization that I'd like to see us evaluate projects moving forward as much as I'd like to be able to say, let's give the community a big shiny toy every year. You know, I think that would be cool, but the reality is those big shiny toys aren't going to be coming into the community until we do the six things I listed off before we then get to the new stuff. And it's going to take a while, and I think this is the level setting conversation with the community. So, yeah, that would be my feedback related to how we try to identify the projects.

And, yeah. All right, thank you. I also had... Picked out irrigation lines as a issue What we heard we had multiple irrigation line breaks this summer and over the year and you know one of the thing we That was explained to me is that well these were all sort of installed at the same time They have a lifespan where at the end of that lifespan. They're all sort of breaking at the same time If that's the case irrigation line repair ought to be pretty high on our list of projects You mentioned the toddler swings. We had a discussion a couple of meetings ago. We have the swings. Are they installed yet? They are installed. Good. And the last thing was the all-weather field. And I think your slide showed it as financed over 30 years at $288,000 a year for 30 years. That's a lot of money. Are we really? Is it really? I haven't done the math, but... 300,000 times 30 years is $9 million, I think. Is that what an all-weather field is expected to cost? That much money?

The all-weather field was estimated at around $4 to $5 million for one field. That doesn't include maintenance, any of the studies that are required before the project even can begin, management of the project, and then as noted, it will likely, from my assumption, it would be potentially pulled from city reserves.

And one of the reasons you want to do all-weather is because you don't have maintenance. So that should be a Lesser number than a grass field yeah a lesser number for sure and replacement And do we have either I? Mean I'm not sure we have consensus on the location is we still talking about the middle school as the location for a all-weather field I

No, to be clear with regard to the all-weather field, what was reflected tonight was the same information that was shared during the plaid discussion as projects for which the plaid could be supported. And in that case, it was even a larger footprint for the field. This would be at Community Park on one of the lighted fields, I believe Field 1. I believe it's Field 1.

First field on the left.

It's the field nearest the dog park, which I believe is field one. And so we want to ensure that it's on a lighted field to increase not only the... Availability to both girls softball and boys and girls soccer, but to extend the season in which those sports can be played. And by having it on a lighted field, it would do that. To your point, yes, there is a reduction, obviously, in water costs and maintenance. But it's important to note that putting in an all-weather field does not relieve you of maintaining it. There is still work that needs to be done to maintain it. You need special equipment to maintain it. And you need to be mindful that these things don't have a forever life. They do need to be replaced. And so as part of that is the thought that you're going to, the moment you put it in, you're going to put money away every year thereafter for a replacement cost.

I'm supportive of all weather field but I also realize that there are people in the community or not who are parents who are worried about the rug burns that you get from sliding if you're playing soccer or whatever that there are and and the idea that it may kick up rubber and other kinds of things that are okay Yeah, so the decision to actually proceed with an all-weather field, I assume, is going to take a little bit more discussion with the public.

Correct. I think what would be most helpful for council, and we certainly understand there was a great discussion. Candidly, it was probably the number one talking point in the discussion of the plan. And it's important to note that both the high school and middle school All weather fields, the baseball and softball field that's being installed is turf. The high school football is turf. The middle school field that's going in is turf. So for really for the users that use it, there's great value. There is also concern for, as you just noted, folks that don't like to play on artificial as well as some environmental concerns. So there are pros and cons with this. My suggestion to council would be that we proceed to get the cost on what it would be to install so then the council can make an informed decision on how we want to proceed. because, candidly, the only way we pull this off is the utilization of the capital reserves. That's it. And so council has to be comfortable enough, and I'll remind council that you need four-fifths vote in order to do that, in order to at least borrow... from the capital resort reserves in order to do such a project and i think in order to make that decision you need the information on what it's going to cost what's the savings what's the savings on water you have that information and then council probably sometime next year and make a decision on a go no go if you'd like to proceed okay and then the last thing that stuck out to me was the shade structures talked about at community park and i know that

switching gears a little bit but the air district proposal that will be voted on by the board tomorrow involves a lot of shade structures already so do we have the ability to maybe move some money around so that the air district money can be spent on the shade structures and this money which has got different kinds of restrictions might be moved to something else so part of the um mentioned air district grant

Does include chase structures, but that in particular will be installed at the bocce ball courts Okay there, correct so part of our grant will Include shade structures as well as solar lighting, but it will be at bocce and so To your point mayor is it possible that we could? Deviate slightly you know shade structure from one park to the next certainly it's possible I would note however that I think the Air District staff is Take took great interest in the population that was being served in bocce on having that shade structure So I don't want to say no that the air district wouldn't allow us to move shade structures from bocce to community park But I just know that they took great interest in the population was being served and somebody who plays bocce as many of us do We want to probably like those ideas of shade structures and stuff council members con

Thank you. I appreciate Vice Mayor Misinski's list, and I agree completely with it. I think it's an excellent way to go forward, recognizing health and safety, failure priorities, restore what we can. I totally agree those are the top three, and adding the rest of your list was very appropriate. I have some issues with the... Commitments that we made in the in the selling of the two measures we talked about the use of synthetic and replacing in building to weather fields But at the same time I have this great app Difficulty and looking at our reserves, our capital reserves as a funding source for something that's going to last seven to 10 years. Yet we're going to pay over a 30 year cycle. I truly don't understand that. So I know you will be explaining that to us in future months, but I truly don't understand how we would be interested in taking capital resources, capital reserves, in a time where we know we have budget deficits and we may run into another water line break and get another $4 million issue there and how we would make a kind of a commitment right now or pretty soon on the all-weather field or fields. So I'm concerned just pointing that out, especially in light of needing a four-fifths vote on all this on a capital reserves...

Yes, but again, thank you vice mayor musinski for laying out that plan So we're just being asked to receive the presentation which we've done But I do want to open it up to public comment if anybody has anything We also have to establish the fund so there's a resolution But yeah public comment cool Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make public comment on the plaid? No one mr. Moderators anybody online who would like to make public comment on this item. I All right. So let's take it back to the council. And I don't see any. Well, Council Member Scott. No? Okay. Does someone want to make a motion?

I'll move the resolution as presented by staff. And hopefully they hear the feedback and look forward to fixing this place up.

Thank you.

All right. Second.

We've got a motion and a second. Ms. Wolf, please call the roll.

Members Birdside. Yes, Laura Spada. Yes, Miss Ensky. Yes, Scott. Yes, and Mary.

Oh, yes We should take I'm sorry say one comment on that I do think it's important to just reflect on to Terry's point the financial status of our community relative to kind of the budget uncertainty that we're in When would this does have to come back to us pull capital? We've got to be very cognizant of offering a shiny toy to our community when we have big problems on capital assets throughout the rest of the community that that fund was established for. So that's all. Thank you.

A shiny toxic toy.

Okay. We have a motion and a second. Ms. Wolfe, please call the roll. Oh, we did? Oh, okay. I was like, whoa. Okay. Sorry. 15B is the vacation of a portion of East End Street right away. Ms. Martinez.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Neil Leary, Deputy Public Works Director, will be giving the PowerPoint.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Here to present the East End Street right-of-way vacation public hearing this evening. So an overview. We have an applicant, JN Properties, California, LLC, and they recently submitted an application, which was filed under Subdivision 25-1, requesting the city to vacate approximately 250 square feet of right-of-way on East End Street It's a narrow strip, only five feet wide for the frontage of their property, 50 feet.

The location, 650 East End.

And the purpose is to facilitate the development of an ADU on that property. This next slide shows the location. You can see East End Street in red. It's an 80-foot wide right-of-way. And... You can see that there's been a previous vacation on the neighboring property shown by that jog out in the right-of-way there. It's difficult to see. The property in question today is in yellow, which is very difficult to see with the naked eye there. But that's right next to that area there with the jog out. The request is on that property for five feet of right-of-way dedication over the frontage width, which is 50 feet. And that's East End between East 6th and East 7th. The request here again, this is a blow-up view of that property showing in yellow the proposed vacation area and the actual ADU proposed on that property, which abuts right up to that property. that area of request. And this is to meet front setbacks. They need the extra five feet of right-of-way. And the significance on this is the distance from the back of sidewalk to the area of requested right-of-way. It's more than 20 feet. The right-of-way on this street is... well in excess of what the city needs to operate its facilities out here, the road and the utilities. And this diagram depicts that. So this slide goes through the legal framework. We follow streets and highways code. There's the governing law. The statute number is there. It's a two-step process. We went to the Planning Commission on June 11th to get them to – AGREED THAT THERE WAS CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. THAT HAPPENED. THE RESOLUTION NUMBER IS THERE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TONIGHT. WE'RE HERE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE VACATION DECISION. ANOTHER SLIDE SPEAKING TO LEGAL FRAMEWORK. THE KEY PRINCIPLE HERE IS BALANCING PUBLIC INTEREST VERSUS PRIVATE BENEFIT. AND THE KEY STATUTORY PROVISION HERE IS IF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY FINDS THE STREET HIGHWAY OR PUBLIC SERVICE SEASMAN IS UNNECESSARY FOR PRESENT OR PERSPECTIVE PUBLIC USE, IT MAY ADOPT A RESOLUTION VACATING THE PROPERTY. AND FINAL BULLET POINTS THERE SPEAKS TO WHAT THE RESOLUTION MAY ALSO INCLUDE AND IT MAY INCLUDE PROVIDE THAT THE VACATION OCCURS ONLY AFTER THE REQUIRED CONDITIONS ARE SATISFIED. THERE'S FURTHER BULLET POINTS FOR THE OTHER POINTS OF WHAT THE RESOLUTION MAY INCLUDE. So this slide shows that there was a requirement for a public hearing and a notice requirement minimum two weeks before the hearing that happened two weeks ago. There was a posting on the property of this hearing tonight and the content that was in that posting is in those bullet points there. So tonight is the public hearing. AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE COUNCIL IS TO CONSIDER ALL TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE. SO NEXT STEPS, IF THE RESOLUTION IS PASSED, THE NEXT STEPS ARE THESE ARE ALL TO DO'S FOR THE APPLICANT. THEY WILL NEED TO DO AN APPRAISAL, SUBMIT THAT TO THE CITY FOR REVIEW AND THEN THERE'LL Applicant will prepare a grant deed and a legal description and plat map prepared by the applicant would eventually be filed with the county after the review and approval by the city. Those are the next steps. And with that, I'll open it up to questions.

Thank you, Neil. Vice Mayor Misinski.

Neil, this is a question for you or Suzanne. I can't see Suzanne, but I see your laptop there. There you are. Is there actually, is there an application for an ADU that's in on this property, or is it just a stated want that they want to have one or process one there?

There's not an application for an ADU, but we likely would not accept it. Once we accept the application, we only have a certain period of time to act on it, and they can't file an application if they don't own the property.

But then they approached the city about how to make this feasible, and we're trying to help. They approached us with the intent of trying to develop an ADU on the property, and this is how this whole thing unfolded.

That's correct. I believe there was a pre-application meeting at some point.

Yes, there was a pre-application meeting. I just want to make sure that there is actual intent to deliver the ADU. That's why. Thank you for the clarity.

Any other clarifying questions? Seeing none, let's open the public hearing and ask if there's anybody in the audience who would like to make any public comments on this item. Seeing none, is there anybody online who would like to make any public comments on this item? No. All right, then we'll close the public hearing and return it to the council. I'll move staff's recommendation.

Second.

We got a motion and a second. Ms. Wolf, please call the roll.

Councilmembers bird's-eye. Yes Larkin spotted. I'm a sense key.

Yes, it's got yes Yes, and before we adjourn let me just mention that Tomorrow the air district board will be voting on the catalyst grant programs of which we are Expecting and hopeful to get 30 million dollars major major benefit and WIN FOR THE CITY. AND IF ANYBODY'S INTERESTED IN TUNING IN, THE MEETING STARTS AT 10 O'CLOCK BUT THEY GO FIRST INTO CLOSED SESSION. THIS IS THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO WATCH, YOU PROBABLY COULD GET THERE OR ZOOM IN SOMETIME AFTERNOON AND YOU'LL BE ABLE TO CATCH IT. AND WITH THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED.