City Council - Special Meeting

Okay, we're ready.

Good afternoon. It's Friday, August 14th. We're at Carmel-by-the-Sea City Hall, and I would like to open this special city council meeting of the Carmel City Council to order at 2.01 p.m. And I put my notes in my briefcase, so hold on one second.

Mayor, while you're pulling this out, I believe Mayor Pro Tem Dells has a statement.

All right, we'll start with Mayor Pro Tem Delv's statement. Go ahead, Bob.

Yeah, so I'm in an alternate location with Just Cause. As mentioned in the updated agenda, the Just Cause being item number one, child care, et cetera.

All right, great. Well, I hope everything's going well up there.

Yeah, thanks.

And we'll miss you, but we'll carry on with you on Zoom. Thank you. All right, so would you like to read the hybrid meeting?

I'll do roll call really quick.

Oh, let's do that first.

Council Member Booter?

Here.

Council Member Dramont? Here. Mayor Pro Tem Delves?

Here.

Mayor Byrne?

Here.

We have a quorum.

All right. So would you like to read the public comment?

Yeah, during special city council meetings, public comments are permitted on items listed on the agenda. After each item on the agenda is introduced, the mayor will invite public comment on that item. Each speaker has three minutes to speak unless otherwise adjusted. While stating your name is optional, it helps to identify speakers in the meeting minutes. Remote or in-person participants who do not comply with the requirements of the Brown Act will be muted.

All right, so we have just one order of business today, and it is to consider the proposed rebuttal argument to the primary argument against the transient occupancy tax TOT ballot measure. The recommendation is to motion to approve rebuttal argument to the primary argument against the transient occupancy tax TOT ballot measure or other direction by council. Is there a staff report for this?

I could present it unless nobody.

All right. I think the chief's got to go do something. It's car week. Was somebody speaking earlier?

Yeah, it was me.

Brian, go ahead. Go ahead.

We can proceed, okay. So I'll present staff reports fairly brief here. As the council knows on June 2nd of 2026, you adopted resolution 2026-042, it's attachment one in your packet. And what that does is submit to the qualified voters of the city a ballot measure to adopt a new 2% transit occupancy tax in addition to the existing 10% transit occupancy tax. On July 7th, the council approved the primary argument in favor of that measure. On August 7th, the city received the primary argument against the TOT ballot measure. And then on August 13th of 2026, the county elections department assigned the ballot measure letters for this item and designated as M as in Mary. The next point is that there is an attachment to your packet, which is a draft rebuttal to the primary argument. That's attachment four. The details regarding what information needs to be included in the rebuttal is set forth in the final paragraph of the staff report. I'll just mention briefly that it's due on Monday by 5 p.m. The rebuttals may not exceed 250 words. They can contain no more than five signatures, may be signed by the same people who signed the argument. And then finally that you need to submit an authorization form which the city clerk can provide to you. So it's our recommendation that you see if there's any questions from council and then take public comment and then engage in a discussion amongst yourselves about how you wish to proceed. In terms of the other direction beyond just approving the rebuttal argument, I would recommend that you consider authorizing Mayor Pro Tem Delves and Council Member Buter to make edits if necessary to this rebuttal argument after it's been submitted to the county in case the county has some comments about the rebuttal argument. just as an example, if they think it's 251 words or it's got some word it shouldn't have, hyphenate, whatever the issue is, that you could authorize them to make those edits. So that's the recommended action. I can answer questions if you have any.

Okay. In terms of the draft rebuttal argument, do we present that now and then ask questions or do you want to take public comment before we get to that point?

Well, why don't we put it up on the screen? Nova, could you do that? It might be too much to put the whole thing on at one time, so maybe we put it on in segments. I can't tell from the screen. Is that legible there to the council and to the public? Yes, it is. Okay. So I'm just going to leave it up there on the screen. I'm not going to read the entire argument. The council and the public can see it there. It's also attachment four to the agenda packet. And perhaps during council questions and public comment and council deliberation, we can just leave it up there so you can all Look at it. If you want to make edits to it or if there are suggestions from the public about it, then that can be considered by you as you proceed through this.

All right. Before we go out for public comment, anybody have any questions? Bob, you good?

I am.

Okay, good. So let's go out for public comment. Anybody like to speak today? Seeing none. We're gonna have a simple meeting here. All right.

We have a hand raised.

Okay, good. At least one.

Okay. Kelly, go ahead.

Hello, Mayor and council members. It's Kelly Brzozowski. I would just like to say that I fully support the rebuttal as drafted and submitted to council today. I think it's important to correct some of the facts that seem to be misleading in the rebuttal that was proposed, as well as clarify that CHID is not city tax revenue. Thank you.

Thank you, Kelly. Seeing as there are no other public comments, we'll bring it back to council for deliberation. Comments? Hans, you took part in creating this, I believe, as the Ad Hoc Committee. Do you have anything to say about it?

I don't really, I don't really have anything to say about it, but certainly if you have, if you all have questions, happy to engage. Okay.

Alessandra?

Thank you, Mayor. I'm fine with it. And I certainly agree with the comments that Kelly made that it's important to make that distinction and clarification so that the public understands that that 2% Carmel Hospitality Improvement District assessment is not money that goes to the city.

OK, good. Bob, do you have any comments?

Not much more. I mean, I think putting this thing together was an interesting process because the opposition's argument against kind of gave many things that are refutable and it was tempting to try to do so in 250 words and that was really the gist of our conversation when we were putting it together and we tried different ways to do it was what are the most important things to either correct but also to remind the reader, assuming someone will read this, but the reader that at the end of the day, this is about the infrastructure that, you know, I would never ask the voters to do a tax increase if I didn't fundamentally and absolutely think we have a need for more revenue because of the enormous deferred maintenance. And, you know, that's kind of The main reason for this, and we should always make sure we state that.

Okay, great. Thank you, Bob. And I would agree with everything that's been said. But in addition, that $100 million is growing with inflation. So it's not just $100 million every day it goes up. and we have to chip away at it. And the other, the flip side of that is I really believe with our financial stewardship committee plus the commitment of the entire council for financial sustainability that we have made improvements that I haven't seen any other city do around us and they need to. So I wouldn't want to do this unless we had done both sides of that. If we had the significant needs and if we hadn't cut expenses. But I think we've done a good job of that and setting up a long-term plan standing financial committee in open meetings goes one more step that we're going to have some really smart people coming in and helping us in open meetings. I don't think that's been done in a long time here. So I feel pretty confident that we're doing the right thing here. And unless anybody else has anything to say, I guess we need to... Make a motion to do this and then make a motion for Hans and Bob to continue their editing if it's necessary. Is that one motion, Brian, or do you want us to do two?

You could do it in one. I had a comment before you make a motion. I just want to make it clear that this is a general tax, so that the revenue that would be derived from this tax would be available for general government purposes. And that would include infrastructure as well as other government purposes. Absolutely.

I think we've made a pretty strong statement in council meetings that we're committed to infrastructure improvements. All right. Somebody want to make a motion? Okay, go ahead.

Sure. I'll make the motion to approve the rebuttal argument to the primary argument against the transient occupancy tax TOT ballot measure and also have council direct the ad hoc group of Hans Booter and Bob Delves to make any sort of edits or any other minor changes as required by the Monterey County Elections Department.

Very good, thank you. Second. Roll call, please. No further discussion.

Council Member Booter?

Yes.

Council Member Dramoff? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Delves?

Yes.

Mayor Byrne?

Yes.

Motion carries.

All right. Thank you. I don't think we have any further business. No further business from you, Brandon. All right. Things are good. All right. So seeing as there's no further business, I will adjourn the meeting. Thank you very much for coming here on a Friday afternoon. Appreciate it.

Thanks, everybody. See you.