City Council - Regular Meeting

All right. Well, first off, thank you for your patience for waiting us to finish with the closed session. I appreciate that. Welcome to the Tuesday, June 23, regular city council meeting. Roll call, please.

Mayor Gilman. Here. Mayor Pro Tem Meng.

Here.

Council Member Rule.

Here.

Council Member Lange.

Here.

Council Member Whitman.

Here. And would you please lead us in the pledge, Mr. McKernan? Yes. Thank you.

Honorable Mayor, council, members of the community, please rise as you are able. Ready to begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

Any changes to the agenda?

I'll move approval.

Any objections? Second that. All right, no objections. We will proceed. And we are going to start off with a presentation from the Ojai Valley Fire Safe Council, providing their quarterly update. Hello, Mr. Dench. Welcome.

Good evening. It's ready to go. Yes, it is. Where do I point this?

At it? You don't have to point it anywhere. I don't have to point it anywhere.

All right. Council members, this is one of our quarterly updates on the professional services agreement. Did you recall that the cadence of the reporting is monthly updates to the city manager's office and then quarterly to the council? And the scope of work range between two main areas of community outreach and education and wildfire risk mitigation. In the months since this has been in action, we've made some steady progress towards more wildfire preparedness and community resilience. We just finished last month a two-day NFPA certified course in home hardening assessments, so that's like train the assessors. That was well attended. We had a full course, and that was very successful. We have another one planned for August. In the home hardening, we are 50% of our annual assessment targets set in the PSA. We have 62 pending, and our job is to get them done before the end of the contract period. And we continue to build our partnerships with agencies like the Forest Service. We have a new one actually with the National Forest Foundation, which is looking to help us work in the community defense zone that surrounds Ojai. Hopefully that'll be successful. They've given us a small grant to get us going on that. And the Ventura County Wildfire Collaborative is moving toward a large-scale regional fire grant from CAL FIRE, the $30 million block grant. So we're working on that. with the our lead venture regional fire safe council and then we're moving towards getting ready for the round two application for the community resilience centers this is a 10 million dollar round uh and again it's highly competitive and it's proven to be quite a stretch for us in the sense that the program received a severe budget cut they dropped five million of the available funding which we're kind of counting on and but we'll make it and they added a lot to our plate to be ready for round two because they removed a whole phase of the it was a three-phase grant program now it's a two-phase and so we have to make up now between now and September what largely would have done in the phase two aspect with of course obviously no additional funding to do that But we have an excellent chance of getting this. We're doing really well. And then we have other parts of our scope of work are in development. Just some stuff that you've seen before. We've given a number of presentations. We have really talked to hundreds of people about wildfire preparedness and home hardening and the importance of that. And we recently had our Wildfire Resilience Festival, which I believe Councilmember Lange showed up for. I hope you enjoyed that. And plan to make that an annual event. And then Ojai Day, we're joined by Mayor Gilman. I know this is outside the quarterly update, but it just was a lot of participation. And we've given, continue to give workshops that are well attended, usually standing room only, which is good. Here's some plotting of where the home assessments have been done, and we're looking at bringing in some contractors to complete the assessments so that we can focus on the Firewise development. That takes a lot of time to do that, so we're hoping that that is, we can focus a staff person on the Firewise aspect, because we've learned quite a bit doing these assessments and talking to people. So some scenes from the Wildfire Festival. In case you missed it, there's a little film. Sans, the music that goes with it.

Yeah, it looks great.

I have to ask people how it went because I spent my entire day inside the gym giving presentations. I missed the whole thing. And a lot of community support putting this on. Well done. As I said, we have another two-day course coming up. That'll be advertised and encourage people to come to it. You'd learn a great deal about home hardening and defensible space enhancement and things like that. And this is certified under NFPA. That's the National Fire Protection Association. It's really good. Here's some scenes from that training. So focus for the remainder of the time is to obviously complete our deliverables as set forth in the PSA. We do have two insurance panels coming in July and August. We're setting those up now. and we obviously have the new training coming as well we're making progress on what we call the urban core initiative that's looking at the block of homes and in the center of the core of the city targeting the single risk of an urban configuration uh we're in the process of being ready to launch the web page for the city linking uh and complete our wildfire readiness assessments Just moving on the Community Resilience Center's project. We think this is a very important project for the Valley and our community. And we'd like to have, I don't know how the city could be more involved if they'd like to do that. And would welcome the city's participation. And we've had a good turnout. We had, I don't know who attended the town hall that we gave in January that was standing room only. You were there. And I think it showed that people are very engaged in what we're trying to get done here. And we've had some focus groups and some other meetings which these photos represent. And for those who want to study where we are with this project, we have an extensive timeline of what we're up against doing this. And we continue to work with all of our partners, maintain our active partnerships. I'm sorry if I have a lack of enthusiasm in my voice right now. I'm coming off a medical condition, so I'm recovering from that. And I don't have a huge bundle of energy like I usually do. Thanks for being here. Apologize for the uninspired delivery. And we continue to add to these partnerships. And they really want to allow a very small nonprofit to do a lot of work in these partnerships. Are there any questions?

It's very impressive what you have done so far.

Thank you. Thank you for the work that Fire Safe Council does.

At some point, I mentioned this to you before, but it would be great to show this body and the community the dashboard when it gets to that stage, because I'm enjoying being a part of that, but it's amazing to see. I know it's a big effort.

It's better than before, too. Yeah, so that would be fun. just so what mayor gilman's talking about you know we created a dashboard that is the data portal all the risk and hazard mapping and stuff we did for the community wildfire protection plan while working off the coastal conservancy grant we have taken that vulnerability assessment and gone county-wide with it and then so enhance the the dashboard which now is hosted by ventura county fire so that transition has been done and funded uh and um We're gonna launch it pretty soon. That project's due to be done in September, so we'll come and make a full presentation because it's actually, it's looking really good. It's impressive. Okay, well, thank you. Thank you so much.

Yeah, thanks for all your hard work, and I see several members of your board and staff here, too, so I just want to give you all a shout-out. We've seen you at our meetings, and we've seen you at these events, and you really are doing great service for the community.

I want to say you made an excellent choice for the safety commission with our board member.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Deans. Appreciate it. Now, I want to make sure I have a speaker card correctly. I have one from Jason. Was it speaking on this item or something else? Do you know what it was speaking on? It says item one. The item one was what he just did.

11 good enough okay wonderful yep okay great thank you very much moving on city manager's report please thanks mayor just a couple quick things really quickly um some of you today may have received the ohio outlook our summer quarterly newsletter in your mailbox If not, I have copies for you here, and there might be some back at the end of the room as well. So look forward to getting that out to the entire community. Mine got in my mailbox today. Excellent. Secondly, just wanted to let the council and community know that we convened the disaster council on Thursday of last week. That is a committee required by the code, comprised of the mayor, himself, the assistant to the city manager, and the police and fire chief. We may be bringing recommendations for additional members to the commission to this body. Council has to review and approve that if we do decide to add some. We are going to be meeting again in July. This first meeting was really just a starting point. We will post and notice that meeting so that everybody's aware.

Thank you very much. Thank you. I missed one thing, which is any commission reports? None received, Mayor. Okay. Thank you. Now I'll go to public communications. I do have a few cards here. Sorry for mispronouncing anything. Linda, is it Thumos or something like that? Yes, please come up. And then I have Clay Creasy and then Brian Aikens. Linda? Okay. Then Clay Creasy, please. Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council. I want to talk a little bit about the decision, quote unquote, that was announced in the paper last week to go ahead with the construction at the maintenance yard location without involving the Department of Toxic Substance Control, as had been mandated in the motion that you approved last August when the Rincon contract was let. That motion and that action last August specifically called out that the DTSC involvement was going to be mandated. The actual admin report, which you all accepted, lists DTSC 13 times in that report, up to and including getting the letter of no action. Now recently we have heard that the DTSC has informed us that it will be an 18 month process potentially that long to do it and apparently the city manager has unilaterally made a decision that he's just going to not obey that important part of the motion that you passed last year. Mayor Gilman, last year, I'm going to quote you when you were discussing the topic of how decisions can be changed that the council has made. You said, and so as a council, when we vote on things and there's a majority approval on that, that's what we end up doing. Now, there's a few exceptions. If two-thirds of our council wanted to bring something back, two-thirds would be four of us, then we could do that. That would be the bar that set. So it's a very high bar to bring back in action. So the obvious question is in what world does the city manager have the right to materially viscerate an important condition in the council's approval ESPECIALLY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A SCENARIO WHERE ALL YOU WOULD NEED TO DO TO AVOID THIS PROBLEM IS CALL A SPECIAL MEETING, AGENDIZE THIS VERY ITEM, REVISIT THAT ISSUE, AND DECIDE AS A COUNCIL WHETHER YOU NEED FOUR VOTES OR THREE IS SOMEWHAT UP IN THE AIR, BUT THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE NO LONGER TO USE DTSC. It is a governance issue. Whether or not you agree with the decision to use DTSC is a separate item. But right now, what you have is, in essence, a mutiny by the city manager to completely trample your authority as the governing body of Ojai. And I, for one citizen, think that's a terrible precedent that you should resist 100%.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kesey. Brian Eakins, please, and then Dennis Colbert.

Hello. I'm Brian Akins. I'm trying to figure out, again, I have lots of hats on maybe tonight. So on Sunday, I was sitting at Casa de Lago with all of my family enjoying the food when all of a sudden a fire engine came screaming by quite louder than I'm normal and quite faster going through that intersection there at the Shell station. I wrote it off. Family went home. My wife's checking on Facebook, and she said, oh, there's a fire in Ojai. And then she said, in the arcade. I, not quite as nice as maybe I could, said, get in the car, and came up here to see what was going on. So tonight, I just want to thank those people that were there and worked with us, not aware of the details, but aware of their presence. And again, going on the reporting that I saw, aware of the training that they had been doing for this specific item. and every time now i come into town and i look at the arcade i'm going to say a big thank you because could have been worse so and thank you all for your support of the entities that are are protecting and preserving our lovely city and community thank you thank you mr aiken i appreciate it um dennis colburn please and then abra stewart

Good evening, council members. Dennis Colburn, Forty Years City of Ojai resident. I spoke with the disaster council meeting in regards to the need for a comprehensive plan for the emergency evacuation of Ojai citizens in the case of a wind-driven fire that starts in or near the city. was glad to hear their responses and that they will possibly be meeting more than once every three months i'm also glad to see that the safety commission will soon be in place and i hope to hear soon about how to contact and offer any assistance to these groups that might further the quest for a comprehensive plan that takes into account the quick and safe as possible evacuation of all ohio residents My first suggestion to all involved in the process is discussing how to utilize the Ojai Bike Trail as an extra lane of emergency traffic from the entrance at Vaughn's parking lot to Highway 150. I rode my bike this weekend on this route to check the conditions needed to allow, in extreme emergencies, auto traffic on this trail. I was glad to see that the trail base, which had recently been renovated, was nine-plus feet wide for the entire distance, approximately two miles. This is only a foot or so less than a county approved lane width with decently packed dirt and gravel shoulders. The only modifications that I would need be done, in my opinion, are the realignment of a few wooden fences at the entrance and at 150. There would be a need for a small portion of curb to be removed and at the trail entrance at both parking be realigned slightly to make the transition safer. the trail could also be utilized beyond 150 at least the woodland with minor fence modification i also would suggest putting reflectors reflective striping on the trail for better visibility and darker smoke conditions placement of a narrow center line demarcation with reflective material would also help in enhancing the safety of the trail for daily use Utilizing the path as another lane would increase the capacity of the emergency egress to another exit route by 50% in just a few weeks time. I believe this would not involve Caltrans in any way, just the City of Ojai and the Ventura County Parks Department. I also think that portion of the path running through the city should be considered. as a pedestrian fire escape route to the safe areas of Soul Park Golf Course. With minor modifications and creating a gated entrance at the pass connection with the course would provide a needed retreat for pedestrians fleeing a rapidly spreading fire due to gridlock on the highway. Due to limited time of the comment period, I will stop here. I have many more ideas, concepts, and suggestions, and I hope in the near future to have a way to easily transfer them to all interested persons.

Thank you, I appreciate it. Abra Stewart, please. Yeah, interesting idea. Hi.

Hello, good evening, honorable Mayor Gilman, city council members, staff. My name is Abra Stewart, and I am a longtime Ojai resident. I am also the program manager at a local nonprofit called Climate First Replacing Oil and Gas, or CFROG. We're a local nonprofit dedicated to shaping a just transition away from fossil fuels to protect our health, economy, and climate. And I am here tonight to share an invitation to the council, the staff, and also our community members for a really exciting community event that we have upcoming. It's called the Polluter Pays Central Coast Town Hall. And I'll give a little background on it and would love to see you all there. As many of you know, for far too long, massive polluters have treated our communities like a dumping ground, while families across the Central Coast pick up the tab with our taxpayer dollars. Between rising health care costs and cleanup costs after climate disasters, California communities are tired of paying. The Polluters Pay Climate Superfund ensures that big oil companies, not taxpayers or small producers, foot the bill for the climate damages they've caused. These funds would be invested directly back into our neighborhoods to build community resilience, support essential workers responding to climate disasters, and fund a faster, fairer transition to clean energy. There's been a lot of talk about fire tonight. I myself lived through the Thomas fire, had to be evacuated. That was a really traumatizing experience for I think everyone here. And so it's really important that we do everything we can to invest funds in a way that is equitable into protecting our communities from these issues. We are super excited to invite you to the Central Coast Polluters Pay statewide tour, which is coming to Oxnard this Sunday, the 28th at the Oxnard Performing Arts Center. This is going to be a high energy interactive town hall designed to build power and hold big oil polluters accountable. So we're bringing together Awesome educational events. There's going to be powerful stories from panelists, including local elected officials like Steve Bennett, intersectional allies, disaster response and recovery experts, union leaders, youth leaders, really cool stuff. We'll have some really amazing opportunities to take action while you're there and a really great chance to connect with other community members who are serious about climate accountability and winning the transformative investments that we all need. So the event is going to be this Sunday, June 28th, from 12 p.m. to 2.30 p.m., and it will be at the Oxnard Performing Arts Center. And I have a flyer that I will leave in the back in both English and Spanish, and we would love to see all of you there and all of you there.

Thank you so much. Please leave one for Weston over here. Absolutely.

Thank you very much. Thanks.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

That's the last card I have. Is there anybody online? Yes, Mayor. We have one raised hand from Mr. Miley. Mr. Miley, you have the floor.

Hello. Hi. If the Arcade Fire had been late evening or early morning, 2 to 3 a.m., a whole section might have burned down. This would have debilitated the arcade in bringing fewer tourists, less DOT, and the reserves might have been gone in two years, several years. We need a new review and planning for fire prevention of and in the arcade. Speculators? What kind of fire smoke alarms they connected to the fire department. Prevention reviews. Years ago, I researched building ownership. Several of is at least one owner that I remember own 6 buildings. Do owners carry enough insurance to successfully rebuild. They want to rebuild. How much control does the city have over rebuilding and the pace of restoration? I know we own the arches. We now have a whole new perspective for the future of Ojai, the arcade and the business buildings downtown. If we want to follow The recent example we had, which is scary, we should work on this to make sure that if it happens again, it gets stopped soon and doesn't spread. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miley. No more, Mayor. Okay. Thank you very much. What was funny? Oh, yeah. Okay. So moving on to the consent calendar, I know I would like to bring forward number 10 so we can hear from these commission appointments. But anything else to pull from consent?

Yes. I would like to pull number 5 and number 8.

Mayor, actually, sorry, I did forget one thing that I wanted to mention. I forgot to in my manager's report, if I could bring that up right now briefly. We have our new accountant, Matt Hutchins, here with us. And I neglected to bring him forward to introduce him to you. So I would like to do that. Matt, you want to come up just real quick? So we're real pleased to have Matt join us as an accountant. He was the successful candidate we selected in our recruitment. He's hit the ground running, really making a big difference in our department. Wanted you all to be able to put eyes on him and just be able to thank Matt for joining our team and for being here. Do you have anything you want to say real quick?

I just want to thank you all for the opportunity. And just working with Brenda and Leah so far, I've already seen the positive trajectories that the accounting department department is going on. Thank you.

Welcome. Awesome. Thank you, Matt.

Thanks. I appreciate that. Thanks for bringing that up. Okay, so I have five, eight and 10 being pulled anything else? wonderful so can i entertain a motion to accept two three four six seven and nine i'll move second that okay i don't want to move too fast all right roll call please council member rule yes

Mayor Pro Tem Meng. Council Member Whitman.

Yes.

Council Member Lange.

Yes.

Mayor Gilman. Yes, thank you. Okay, so number five, Ms. Rule.

Thank you. So I am the liaison to VCAT, which is Ventura County Animal Services. And while I support the recommendation before us to renew our animal services agreement, I support it 100%. I also believe right now we have the opportunity and perhaps the obligation to do more than simply extend that contract. In 2024-25, Ventura County Civil Grand Jury report on the Animal Services Commission raises issues that directly affect how Ojai's residents are represented in this regional partnership. I want to note that this grand jury findings does predate the current executive director, so it is not a reflection upon him or what was done prior to him. But the grand jury found that the commission's advisory role had significantly weakened over the past decade. And bylaws were not clear. They were not offered up. So essentially, what I'm asking for the city manager to do, I want absolutely to approve this item. But I also want to figure out and clarify what exactly as an advisory role we play. You know and I don't need to go into what those particular issues are because I have spoken briefly to the city manager About that, but I would like to work with him and any other council members who would be interested to undertake a focused review of the grand jury's findings and to evaluate whether or not in the last year and a half a things have substantially changed primarily I would say that it's public input and as an advisory member Commissioner I am clear that the public does not have easy access to participate in any of our meetings so that's why I'm bringing this forward I support approving it But I also support doing due diligence and writing, you know, getting together and figuring out how we can improve the advisory commission. I have had some failings in communication with them over the last year.

Yes. Mayor, I'm happy to take that in this direction. Wonderful. And Mr. Montgomery, please add that to the report of reports. Will do. Thank you.

And with that, I will make a motion to approve this item.

Second that. Thank you. I appreciate that. Want to do a roll call on number five? Thanks. Certainly, Mayor.

Council Member Whitman. Yes. Council Member Lange. Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Meng. Yes. Council Member Rule. Yes. Mayor Gilman. Yes. Thank you.

And then number eight. Yeah.

Okay, let's do it. So, let me see. Sorry about this. Let's do it on this.

The biodiversity? Yes.

Correct. That's all right. I've got to find my notes here. Okay, well, I'll just sort of ad hoc this. I support this. No, I'm not going to actually ad hoc this. I'm sorry. I did have to add something. Give me just a moment, and I do apologize for not having this ready.

Okay.

Essentially, the question is, once again, as I have broached before, we can have resolutions about protections, about respect for nature, about respect for waterways. But as we have seen in the last 18 months of this new administration, resolutions, protections, all of those can be wiped away so very easily they can be ignored. So while I support this resolution 100%, I'm here to advocate for something that is stronger than a resolution. It is, in fact, a rights approach. I realize that western jurisprudence does not make this easy, but it also does not make it impossible. This is happening in other parts of the country. It's happening in other parts of the world. And until we actually have a way to enforce rights we have no ability to enforce any longer protections. The agencies that are responsible for protections can easily decide that they're not going to protect. Permitting is about permitting how much damage we can allow to happen. perhaps what we really want to do is have rights that say damage can't happen to these natural waterways environment ecosystems things like that so I support the resolution I would I advocate for something much stronger as you know and I just wanted to bring that up so I support this and I'm willing to once again make a motion to pass it just wanted to No, I appreciate it. Make a comment here.

I would second that. No, I understood, and that's a bigger issue to bring forward, and I'm interested in that too. Yes, please.

Mayor Pro Tem Meng.

Yes.

Council Member Whitman. Yes. Council Member Lange.

Yes.

Mayor Gilman. Yes.

Council Member Rule.

Yes.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

So now on to number 10. So the first person, do we have Mr. Sims in the audience? Please come up. So we have basically two commission appointments for our Public Safety Commission. Here's one. Yes, please introduce yourself. Thank you.

Oh, well, Mr. Mayor and city council and staff, I'm Dr. Raymond Sims, and I've been a resident of the valley and the city for 64 years and also a medical practitioner for 40 years, now retired. And I'm very honored to be considered for this position on safety commission. and hope that those years of experience and going through lots of disasters here will help me in a role to improve the safety of our community.

We're very appreciative of your willingness to serve. Thank you very much. Any questions? Thank you very much, sir. Yes, and Brenda Furness is actually working tonight. You have her application on file. You may know her from her family, longtime Ojai people. And then finally, we have Ms. Taylor, who is a reappointment for our Parks and Rec chair position. So can we take these all at once? Yes. Well, I would move that we approve all three appointments. Second. Okay, wonderful. Any more conversation? Fantastic. Roll call. Please. Council Member Rule.

Yes.

Council Member Lang.

Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem May. Yes. Mayor Gilman. Yes. Council Member Wood.

Yes. So that marks a full Public Safety Commission. Look forward to their first meeting. Yay. Thank you so much, everybody, for volunteering. It makes a big difference. All right. We are on number 11. the City Council appeal of the Planning Commission denial at the 242 East Ohio Avenue address.

All right. Are you . You have to decide. I don't know. OK.

Welcome. Ms. Burgess, you want to say a few words?

Yes, I do. Thank you. So the first thing I want to mention for the city council and the audience watching, both in the council chambers and at home, is that this will be an appeal of a planning commission decision. It's conducted pursuant to section 10-2.3004 of the city's zoning code. The procedures for this hearing differ just a bit from the procedures for other quasi-judicial hearings in that your zoning code provides its own procedures for appeal hearings. So for anyone who's watched some of your previous council appeals, the process for this is just a slightly bit different. However, there are some similarities. So we will begin this hearing by making ex parte disclosures. I know there has been a lot of public comment. I think it would be helpful if you've been contacted separately from... From other council members. I know there's been a lot of public comment that's been submitted through the public comments I don't know that you need to identify every single one of those but if you could generally summarize the comments that you've received And if you've had any direct contact with the applicant as a party to the appeal that would be helpful Additionally, before we move into the public hearing, I wanted to mention that the scope of review in this appeal is a little bit different because it is also governed by the city's zoning code. So as far as what is on the agenda for consideration tonight is review of whether to approve or deny or approve with conditions a design review permit and a conditional use permit for an applicant located at 242 East Ojai. I won't dive into the details there, but your zoning code does include review criteria that council should consider as they are listening to the information that's presented tonight. I did want to point out for reference that the review criteria for the design review permit are included on pages 135 and 136 of your agenda packet tonight. And what you see there, just for reference, is that the language that is not italicized but is with the set paragraphs that are numbered with letters. It's confusing to say. Those are the criteria. The italicized language below it are the recommendations from staff regarding each of those review criteria. And then the review criteria for conditional use permits are included on 137 of the packet. So what council should be considering is the application of those review criteria to the information that's being presented as part of the application, the presentation from staff, the presentation from the applicant, and any public comment that you receive tonight. Are there any questions for me before we move forward with the ex parte disclosures? All right, so.

Would you like to start, Mr. Whitman, and we'll just go around? I'm trying to think if I've added communications.

I don't think I have.

I have. It's been several months ago. Myself and Commissioner Craig Walker went and met with Mr. Yano at his place of business.

Mayor Mrakas, Normal communications that we all received both for and against and then I went several times to look at the property over the past several weeks took some photographs, just to see how the back was going I went into the restaurant bought dessert at it there. that's that's the extent of my key.

I several months ago, I before this came before us, I did speak with Mr. Yano. But I haven't spoken to him since we brought this back. And I did go into the location as well. And I walked around several times in preparation for tonight's meeting. And I've also talked to local business owners in that area.

Yes. So at the same time as Mayor Pro Tem Meng and Commissioner Walker met with Mr. Yanao, Gina McHadden, who is chair of the HPC, and I also met with Mr. Yanao, and I went in there, we toured the property and saw the back and a couple of, maybe a month ago I went in and bought food for an Ojai basket that I was giving to a friend. Bought some pixie marmalade. Really good.

So I'll add to my disclosure that I have been to the location multiple times. Okay, can we proceed? We'll start with our city staff presentation.

Thank you. Before Mara, Mara will be going through the PowerPoint presentation, but I just wanted to also mention that as a part of the process and kind of the due diligence here, the Historic Preservation Commission provided comments that is provided within the packet as well as the Planning Commission as their denial that you see before you tonight as a part of the appeal. Aside from that, I'll let Mara speak to the PowerPoint presentation tonight, and then I may fill in some gaps as we go through it.

And let me just procedurally, is somebody running a timer? Yes. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Mayor and Council members. My name is Maura Macaluso. I'm your principal planner. And I'm going to mostly be going through the PowerPoint and speaking to it specifically. So this is a City Council appeal of Planning Commission denial for outdoor storage and use of an existing walk-in freezer and proposed modifications to the existing outdoor dining area located at 242 East Ohio Avenue, and it's for the Ohio Mountain Farm restaurant. And is this? There we go. There we go. Okay. Thank you. So there was an original approval through the director in 07 for outdoor dining at this location at 242 East Ojai Avenue. And it was for 360 square feet. It included six tables and 24 chairs. This approval was one of, or is one of at this time, seven approved outdoor dining permits in the plaza. The outdoor dining areas in the plaza range from 250 square feet at Sam's Place to approximately 1,286 square feet at Magic Hour. The proposed modifications that were recently denied by the Planning Commission were to increase the outdoor dining area to approximately 580 square feet and an increase in tables up to 14 tables with chairs, 28 chairs. And the use permit, conditional use permit, included an outdoor use and location for a freezer and a screen for that freezer. And it also included modifying a boundary for the outdoor dining area to include those additional tables. So there's a history of outdoor dining in the Arcade. The first approval was in 1997 for Rainbow Bridge. And I already said that there were approximately seven out there now that are approved. The most recent approval was for Bonnie Lou's, and that was in 2022. The way that the approvals for the outdoor dining occur, there's an outdoor dining approval or an encroachment permit that is processed through the Public Works Department currently. AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECENTLY HAS SHIFTED TO A PROACTIVE CODE COMPLIANCE EFFORTS WHICH WILL BE LOOKING AT THESE EXISTING OUTDOOR DINING AREAS. AND THE COMPLIANCE WAS PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. This is the location map. So the existing outdoor dining, oops. The existing outdoor dining area that was approved in 07 is shown here and the dining area is highlighted in red. You should have a plan at your seat that was given to you prior to this meeting that includes this area along with the proposed area. So the proposed expansion from the previously approved 360 square feet in 07 is proposed now at approximately, can you hear me, approximately 580 square feet, and it was presented and denied by the Planning Commission in May of 26. The requests included a conditional use permit for the outdoor storage and use of an existing walk-in freezer and, as I already mentioned, proposed modification to existing outdoor dining. The reasons cited for the denial were based on inconsistencies with the Ojai Arcade Plaza architectural design guidelines and also an increase in the proposed footprint of the outdoor dining area which exceeds beyond the original boundaries um i'd like to note and as you'll see in the the plan that was before you when you walked in this evening um the area is smaller than what was previously there for the previous restaurant that expansion um kind of happened over time and most likely during um covid when they couldn't have dining inside Part of the plan currently includes a proposed roof plan. What you see here are existing roof equipment pieces. The only thing on this plan that is not existing is a five foot high roof screen that's adjacent to the existing parapet wall. And if you look at the plan, that's what's to the right and it's labeled as number two. So the proposed outdoor dining elevations are up on the screen right now, and they include a 30-inch high solid steel fence that is also a combined planter, an 11-feet, 6-inch umbrella, and a metal gate. I don't have a pointer. That doesn't matter. And then also you see here is the existing screening that's around the freezer. However, I'm going to get to another slide in a moment that's going to show you what the applicant is actually proposing to do. So here are existing photos of, on the left, looking west, you see the existing screen and within it you see the oak tree and also the freezer, you can see a corner of it. In the center photo you can see a bit more of that freezer and then again looking east. The table and chairs that you see there are not the ones that are proposed. This slide is the proposed screen, and it would be the same height as the freezer. It's described as an overlap lap screen panels and the posts that would be used would be the existing posts that are currently out there so as not to disrupt the earth any more than it already has been for the oak tree. It's a lightweight design and again to minimize any impacts to the tree. The color would be painted dark to match the outdoor dining boundary. So there are project findings that are in your draft resolution and they are supported in that draft resolution and therefore the requested conditional use permit which include the support includes zoning compliance, consistency with the general plan, land use designation, access to utilities, CEQA compliance due to no potential significant negative impacts, and also findings to support the design review permit, which includes zoning compliance. It's a different zoning compliance. These include the physical ones like the setbacks, height, area, site coverage parking. And also lighting and signage that are in compliance, access to utilities and fencing and landscaping. And then on the next screen. There are also in your resolution conditions of approval, and a couple of key conditions of approval that we want to note are that the discontinued restaurant use for a period of six months would result in removal of the freezer by the property owner, and also required maintenance and repair of the freezer. It would be required at the property owner's expense within 30 days of any malfunction diagnosis. and need for replacement would result in replacement also within 30 days. Those would be required by the owner. Also in your packet is, discusses, the report discusses CEQA, California Environmental Equality Act. There are three exemptions that apply to this project. There's section 15301E1, that includes minor alterations of existing public or private facilities, and that would be the outdoor dining area. Section 15303E, THIS RELATES TO CONSTRUCTION OR LOCATION AND OR LOCATION OF SMALL FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES. THIS INCLUDES THE WALK-IN FREEZER, THE SCREENING OF THE FREEZER AND THE UMBRELLA. AND SECTION 15.3.11 WHICH INCLUDES CONSTRUCTION AND OR PLACEMENT OF MINOR STRUCTURES ACCESSORY TO EXISTING, WHICH ARE ACCESSORY TO THE EXISTING RESTAURANT FACILITY. AND THAT'S THE WALK-IN FREEZER, AGAIN THE SCREEN AND THE UMBRELLA. The project is located within a state-designated historic downtown district. The existing brick facade is identified as a contributor to the state-designated historic downtown district. And the existing Edison panel, which is a utility panel, The walk-in freezer and the screen do visibly alter the rear brick facade Of the of 242 East Ohio Avenue. However, they do not alter the material material of the Physical characteristics of the resource as there are temporary and also reversible they do not permanently modify the physical characteristics of the structure and therefore not significant and So the recommendation this evening is to receive information presented and concluding soon by staff, because the director will be speaking after me. And then the applicant will have a presentation, then open a public hearing for public comment and input. and then consider the draft resolution and associated conditions of approval that I've somewhat discussed for the modification of the outdoor dining and the use and location of the existing freezer located at the rear of 242 East Ohio Avenue. And before or whenever, before going to the director, if you have any questions of me, please feel free.

Yeah, I have a couple of questions. If I've heard you correct, you've made determinations that CEQA doesn't apply to this project. Isn't that our role to decide whether CEQA applies?

I didn't say that CEQA doesn't apply. I said that we were able to use some exemptions that are provided through the California Environmental Equality Act.

wouldn't that mean that it's exempt so it doesn't exist well it's exempt but isn't it our determination whether it's exempt or not um with if if council moves forward with approval of the application um council would make a determination that the categorical exemptions or would need to make a determination that the categorical exemptions apply to this project. Because it's an application of a categorical exemption, it generally should be determined or the findings should be made at every level of the review process. So that would be a decision for council. And I would interpret staff's findings as a recommendation of staff.

So my next question is, in what way is the electrical and the freezer temperer? I don't understand any plan to remove that whatsoever. So how is it tempered?

Well, if they're required for the freezer, then they will be removed when the freezer is removed.

Are you assuming the freezer is going to be removed?

Well, there's a condition of approval that it be removed once the use is no longer there.

But the applicant is entitled to have that use forever if it's granted. So it can't be temporary.

It's a conditional use permit, so if it's granted, it's conditionally approved, yes, until it's no longer a restaurant, or until the use is no longer there.

I have a hard time viewing that as a temporary use.

So I think it's a definitional thing, temporary meaning that it could be removed. In other words, it's not a permanent alteration that couldn't be removed. I mean, that's what I understood you to be saying is that it's not a permanent alteration. It is something that is there that could be removed that would not, you know, I mean, that's the idea behind temporary, not anything else. Am I correct in that understanding? That's correct. It can be removed. It can be removed. Thank you. So that's what we're talking about. We're not talking, okay, thank you.

I'd like to ask council, is that the definition of temporary? If at some unspecified date, 100 years in the future, it might be removed, that makes it temporary?

I think, obviously, from a definitional standpoint, I would probably want to look it up before. I mean, temporary is a means of limited duration without looking in a dictionary. But what I will say for purposes of the CEQA findings is that for each of the categorical The way that the CEQA guidelines work is that they provide criteria for consideration to determine whether or not that particular exemption applies. And then there are also exceptions to the categorical exemptions. And so for a categorical exemption to apply, it not only needs to meet the criteria to qualify for that exemption, But then the exception would not you also have to make a finding that there are no exceptions to the category And so so as part of these three categorical exemptions, and I believe we did include In the staff report a description of what each of those categorical exemptions is and we also included I believe, a description of the listing of the exceptions to those categorical exemptions. And so what council would be asked to do, notwithstanding whether it's temporary or permanent, would be to evaluate whether one or more, because you would only technically need one exemption for the exemption to apply or for it to be an exempt project. if one of those exemptions apply and there are no exceptions to that exemption, then council could make that finding. Does that make sense? That's complicated. But we can also look through the staff report and talk through that.

So my next question is, my understanding is that if CEQA applied, The purpose would be for the limited review of the historical significance of the back facade of the arcade. And one, whether it's being impacted by the project. And number two, if there are any mitigation measures that could reduce the impact.

So as part of a CEQA analysis or CEQA review, what a CEQA consultant would generally do is they would, there's a checklist in the CEQA guidelines, and they will typically first evaluate, is this a project subject to CEQA? And then they will go through the checklist to determine, they'll evaluate the type of project and the potential impacts, environmental impacts to the project, which include not only historic significance, but other environmental aspects of the project that are regulated under CEQA. And they evaluate all of those potential impacts. And as kind of a preliminary evaluation, they'll do what we call an environmental review and determine what level of CEQA review is needed. And out of that, you end up often with a recommendation as to whether more review is needed. They might confirm it's subject to an exemption, but often exemptions are recommended at the staff level. And then they'll do that deeper analysis and identify any mitigation measures that might be needed.

Thanks. Thank you. Any other questions?

That wasn't in the packet, so I was just curious. Yeah, so each project that we go through,

Mentally, we look at the checklist. Now, do we do we do that and put it in the file format? No, not for each project. Instead, what we do is we evaluate first whether or not the project itself is is a project. And then and then second, whether or not that project then either qualifies for an exemption or multiple exemptions. Or if not an exemption applies, then it goes into the sequel box, which then runs into the pieces that Bethany had just spoke to, the city attorney had spoke to. So in terms of the checklist, we go through that mental checklist immediately, but don't necessarily fill out the form for those pieces immediately. Now, if it is a project per CEQA in terms of going through the process of CEQA, then absolutely, because there's an initial study that we would then fill out and likely would be then working with a third-party consultant to evaluate that.

It just seems funny not to have this, God forbid, something should happen to either one of you, and then who steps up to say, oh, well, here's why. You know what I mean? It just seems like it should be something just a gimme to have in a file when you're applying for something.

I mean, it's a fair assessment there, yeah.

But I do believe it's also stated in the agenda port normally as to why something is exempt or not. Correct.

Any more questions? Mr. Seiber, did you want to say a few words? Or are we done with the staff report? Okay, wonderful. Okay, so we will move on to the applicant presentation, please. Thank you.

Good evening.

Mayor, members of the council, staff. My name's Don't Army.

I've been here a while. It's been pretty dry, too.

Oh, yes, of course.

Mr. Now, would it be easier for you to sit for your presentation? Because we're happy to accommodate that.

I think I can stand for a bit.

If you'd like, it's not an issue. Yeah, we can lower that. We can lower that.

All right. Sure. Give us a moment.

We'll prepare that.

That lowers. That whole stand lowers, by the way. Turning the dial.

Very much for the accommodation.

Thank you.

All right. I'll keep the drink by my feet. Thank you. Thanks. All right. I don't have enough accommodations. I need my glasses, too. Pardon me. All right. So my name is Tony Anno. I'm one of the co-founders of Ojai Mountain Farm. I've lived in Ojai for about 10 years. I live about one mile from here. Before I get into my patio proposal request or appeal request, I just want to tell you a little bit about us and what we do. Ojai Mountain Farm is a fully natural Uncertified organic, biodiverse, regenerative farm. Our farm is only fed with well water. We are only powered with solar power. We are as green as you can get. This is Ojai Mountain farmers delivering food to Ojai Mountain farm cooks. No middlemen, no distributors, like this is all the way. It's farm to table all the way. And it's all built on the kind of these ethics that I believe are held dearly here in Ojai, which are organic and green and natural and local. Every single thing that we harvest from our gardens and orchards ends up in our shop here in town. This is a closed loop system. So. If anybody has any questions about what we do, please let me know. But I'm very proud of it. What I'm requesting today is an additional 82 feet of patio space. As Maura articulated, the entire area use would also include the area that is currently screened in with the freezer. But what I'm asking for is a reorientation of our patios. The entirety of the dining space would go from 360 feet down to 342 feet, but I'm also asking for a 100 feet of a court like outdoor corridor for access. So this would be small compared to most patios in the plaza. The reason for the repositioning, and I'm using the term repositioning because it's important to know why I'm asking for the space. As I believe council knows, the freezer is permitted. The screen around the freezer is permitted. I have an outdoor dining permit. That's all in existence and it's in use now. What I'm asking for is repositioning. The repositioning, there's two, well, first of all, when we took over the restaurant, it had a conditional use permit. It was on the screen earlier. And that permit is now out of date and doesn't comply with federal, state, and local code. i could go through all of it for you it's pretty exhaustive i'm going to just stick to two things that are i think are most apropos here the first is ada the patio permit that has been issued by the city of ohio in 2007 was created before the ada changed the laws in, I think it was 2009, 2010, became mandatory 2012. And there is, I could go, if anybody wants me to go through that, I'll be happy to explain why it doesn't comply, but it doesn't comply for a number of different reasons. Most notably, there's no safe egress, there is no direct path of travel, and there are multiple trip hazards as documented in the documents. I don't think anyone's really talked about the ADA, but there has been quite a lot of talk about the guidelines. And the way the patio is laid out right now, or the way it was permitted, does not comply with the Ojai Arcade Plaza guidelines. Mouthful, I say it a lot. For a number of reasons. Most notably on page 10, and this is a quote of the guidelines, it says orient businesses toward the plaza. This can be done with patios. And further on the same page, it says loading trash and storage areas should be located away from the seating areas and screened from public view. The permanent patio that we have now opens directly to the public toilets. These can be quite unsavory at times. We have seen those toilets become clubhouses for people in the evening times. We've seen them be pumped in the middle of our service because there's been an emergency in there before. We're trying to move our orientation away from that. The other thing it opens up to is the busy service alleyway, which has, I think, eight trash enclosures. So there's trash coming in and out all the time. We use them, so I'm not pointing fingers at anybody for that. And it's a busy alleyway where trucks come, make deliveries all the time. They leave the trucks running. They do their thing. Again, it's not just Rainbow Bridge and Raines. They come to us and everybody in the plaza. I mean, everybody in the arcade. But if you look at the drawing of what the permitted space is, that's where it opens up to. The arcade vision, as stated in the guidelines, there's a whole bunch of stuff about what they want, what is wanted there. But it's meant to be a town square. That's a quote from there. And it's meant to have a healthy downtown business climate, which is what I'm trying to do. And if I could go on and on about all the things that it says that we're trying to actuate. But The real truth is that the way it sits right now is right on the toilet and an alleyway. We want to turn it so it's facing the grassy area as envisioned and suggested as appropriate by a guideline. The reorientation that I'm talking about solves all these problems and activates that beautiful space the way it was intended to be. This also improves the visual character of the plaza and does so with a responsible footprint. The repositioning requires a walking corridor that doubles as an emergency egress. And the new shape brings us into full ADA code compliance, which the current plan does not. So that's what I asked for. And I can get into the specifics of that in a minute, but I think I should address the elephant in the room, which is the freezer. So I read a lot of the public comments that I live here and I hear what's happening. And people are unhappy about the freezer and they're unhappy about the way the freezer was permitted. I sympathize and I understand what people are saying. I just want to make it really clear. I came to the city to ask for a building permit for the restaurant. On the first time I came, I had a plan to have an outdoor freezer that was in a different location than where it is. I was told, you can't have that there. If you want to have an outdoor freezer, it needs to be inside the existing screened-in area. So for all the people that say that I put up a fence that blocked the brick, that did not happen. That fence was that screen. That fence was there before I got there. Depending on who you ask, it might be 2020 or it might be 2007 or somewhere in there. But it was there for at least five years before we took it. So please don't pin that on me. we were told i was told that the freezer had to fit inside that screened area so we made a plan for that we reduced the size of the of the freezer brought it back and then we were told well if it's going to be there you have to get a tree permit for this because it may affect the oak tree that was there so we went we hired a tree consultant back and forth back and forth and we uh we're told well if we're gonna have this if we're gonna do this we have to make it even smaller and put it into a corner Anyway, we complied with everything. This was many back and forth. There was no backdoor politics. There was no me doing an end around, sneaking anything in. I followed every step that I was directed to follow, and I was awarded a permit. Over a year and a half ago, I got a piece of paper. The piece of paper said, permit for store and restaurant renovation with outdoor freezer. issued by the city of Ohio. I built a very expensive project to that code, up to code to the letter of that permit. And so I just want to make everyone, I want to make sure everyone understands that what we are asking for here is a small modification to the dining space. And it is, I don't think it's, I don't, I don't think that we got a, an unbiased decision from the planning commission. And the idea with the Planning Commission is that, look, I have a ton of respect for the Planning Commission and the Historic Commission, and I live here. I believe in what they believe in. I wanna preserve this town just like they do. But when I came to ask for the patio, they were, all that came up, the lion's share of everything that was discussed was the freezer. Staff reminded them repeatedly, the freezer is not up for discussion. Right now we're here talking about patio. And it was at least a distraction, but it was clearly an influencing factor in their denial. To kind of, not prove my point, but to underscore that the permit was not given a measure by its merits, let's say. was in the March planning commission meeting, there were three voting commissioners. Two of them stated, one at the, I think at 46 minute mark and one at the 101st minute mark, that they would approve the plan if it wasn't for the freezer. Again, that's conditioning a permit on a permit that the city of Ojai issued. So another thing that happened, which I think is even more telling, was that earlier this month, they denied approval. During that meeting, they said repeatedly that they had trouble with the way the freezer permit was issued. They'd never said it was me. They didn't say it was Hawaii Mountain Farm. They had problems outside of Hawaii Mountain Farm, yet they still decided to not issue the permit. We built a plan exactly, like intentionally exactly to the guidelines. And the denial was issued without finding. So my understanding is typically when the Planning Commission denies something, they do it because something doesn't match code or whatever, you know, they have finding. They didn't have finding. So it seems on its face to me that this withholding is in retaliation for something that I had nothing to do with. And... It has a huge impact on us and our business. As I said earlier, this is a business where we take food from the ground and we serve it to customers. Sometimes it's a season where food is plentiful and we have excess and we need to store it. We store it in the freezer. We built our entire plan based on having this freezer right outside. We use it all the time. We're in and out of there all the time. I can, I feel very strongly that the permit was not turned down by its merits because there are only two modifying things we're looking for. One is a very modest addition, which still keeps us as one of the smaller patios, smallest permitted patios in the plaza. And the other is the form, the shape. The current shape is a little nebulous, which makes it very hard to, tables and chairs that make things work properly. Ours is all right angles, which completely mirrors the back of the arcade, the actual building itself. The other things that could have been discussed, but were not, were the furniture, which are completely in compliance with the wood and metal only, no plastic or resin. As for pages 11 and 41 of the guidelines, the gates, the decorative metal black, this meets the guidelines for page 25. The plants, No one said this, but one person said, what kind of plants are we going to use? The plants call for rosemary, which is, according to the University of California Resource Management, is highly drought tolerant, extremely low water use, and insect deterrent. This meets every recommendation from page 39 of the guidelines. Pots. The guidelines say, and I'm quoting, that buildings should use half walls. that mimic the, that create semi-private atmosphere. Semi-private and half walls are quoted, the atmosphere I just added there, pardon me about that. And the plants can be used to, and this part is a quote, used to define, potted plants can be used to define the space. The pots that we've selected, were criticized by Planning Commission and I think by HPC. We have changed them. They now match the picture on page 43 in size and shape. However, they are the color that is recommended on page 41, which is a dark brown. So, they also, incidentally, meet ABC barrier requirements, which is the minimum of 30 inches, and they are movable when needed, so they're light enough that you can actually move them. And that brings us to the last element, which I know is something that has come up a few times, which is the umbrella. Um, the planning commission was not thrilled with the idea of having one umbrella. They prefer the idea of having lots of little umbrella. Um, they asked me to change to that. And after the first meeting, I reluctantly made the change i didn't i didn't want to for a lot of reasons but we did it and they still denied us so i'm asking for a single post umbrella the um guidelines are really clear about umbrellas they mentioned them several times and what they say is that they should be cloth single color no logo tall enough for us we've matched we hit everything like we built it to scale to suit The other thing it says is that everything should be either Mission Revival or complimentary to Mission Revival. Well, there weren't umbrellas in Mission Revival style. So we have to think, well, what would be complimentary to it? And so I talked to my architect, and what we determined was the three most noteworthy buildings that exemplify this style are the Post Office, the Arcade, and the OI Valley Inn. We contacted the architect that built the patios there, and we're using the umbrellas that they're using. We've gone to great lengths to try to comply and to try and do everything we can to meet the guidelines exactly bang on. Our plan doesn't thread the needle, as it was said in the last meeting. It threads several needles with one thread. We are in line, fully in line with... OHI Municipal Code, Americans with Disabilities Act, Ventura County Health and Human Services, California ABC, all while aligning with the Arcade Guidelines. It takes a lot to make all that happen. I hope that it comes through, that we've really gone to great lengths to do the best we can for OHI. There's also just two little, not little, but two economic things I want to mention. One is that restaurants are a lot more expensive to make, maintain, and run than a typical retail business. The former restaurant that was there, which was OMG, which a lot of us knew and loved, was not up to code on certain things, most notably the electrical, where they had at least one fire that we know of. We had to completely replace that, bring it up to code, which is a touchy subject at the moment because of the fire in the arcade this week. But we came out of pocket and made a significant expense to bring this all up to code. The second, and this is not an abstract argument here, not including me and my kids who work at the farm in the summer, we have 17 people on our team. 12 of them live in Ojai. Not Ventura, not Oakview. They live in 93023. This is not just good for us, Ojai Mountain Farm. It's good for Ojai. This is an investment in the working community, the working families, the community of Ojai. And allowing us to reposition our patio puts us in a position to succeed, and that's an investment in the community. I'll leave it with that.

Thank you. Appreciate that. Any questions? Yes, please, go.

Thank you so much for explaining everything. So let's say that if there was a freezer in another space in adjacent business, for example, that were available for your use, would you be open to it?

I'm open to all sorts of things. I don't want to say I'm open. Sure, let's talk. There are, you know, I need a lot more specifics than that. And I need to understand who's paying for it. Who's like, where is this all happening? Like, let's say that like we had talked about, not you and I, but internally we had talked about contacting Rainbow Bridge at one point about maybe we could use some of their free space. There are health and human services issues there. There are labor issues. There are access issues. So am I open to it? I'm open to a discussion, certainly. And I want to comply. I want what's best for the city. I'm not trying to get one over on anybody here. So I'm open to it. But what I'm really asking for is this modification so that I can create a beautiful patio and not use the space we have now, which is kind of a leftover ramshackle bits and pieces of what we left from the previous tenant.

Yes.

I just wanna, I have a couple clarifying questions. I believe it was the last planning meeting that I watched when you, I don't believe you were there, but they were speaking of the umbrellas. And the commission, so I'm a little confused because I know it was individual um umbrellas and then they went to the larger just the one umbrella and then at the last meeting because i remember the one commissioner saying oh they're taking steps backwards so at that last planning meeting was it talking of the smaller individual

I'll be happy to address that. Okay, please. So I've had three meetings with Planning Commission. The first meeting, we presented an 18 and a half foot single stem umbrella. They, I would say, liberally, 80 to 90% of the meeting was spent on the freezer, but they did give notes on the planters, on the tables, on the gates, and on the umbrella, and on the sides. When we came back for the second meeting, we addressed all of that. However, they again, and I was at that meeting, I was online, I was unable to attend in person. However, they again denied it. Again, using almost the entire time talking about the freezer. And so I went, I hunkered down and said, how are we going to, like, what do we have to do here? It doesn't make sense. Like, it feels retaliatory. So I went through the guidelines. I've been through those guidelines inside and outside. And nowhere in those guidelines does it say anything about size of the umbrella. In fact, there are pictures of umbrellas of different sizes in there. As a restaurant owner, I can tell you, and we've all had this experience right where you're when you're under a little umbrella and the sun moves, then you had to move the umbrella over and then the table has to move and everything gets all rickety. As a restaurant owner, that is a killer. As a diner, it makes for a subpar experience. The other thing is those little umbrellas are a real trip hazard. I'm extra sensitive to it since my illness, but as someone with mobility issues, I can tell you that those umbrellas are not optimal for anyone. And so the opinion that was suggested by the commissioner who said that they wanted the smaller umbrellas, while I respect his opinion, it doesn't exactly make sense to me because it has nothing to do with any of the guidelines, but they keep voting the guidelines. We did make one change from the original plan was we made the umbrella two and a half feet smaller square, two and a half by two and a half, so I don't know what the math is on that, but it's quite substantial.

And then I just have another question. And I don't know, like you were saying that there were times when you wanted to discuss other things, but you can't, it was limited to one thing. Do you think in kind of like a piecemeal is the word that I'm coming up with with different things, do you think that made a difference?

You know, I don't want to put myself in the minds of the commissioners. And I've gone back and painfully watched those tapes again and again because I wanted to be prepared for today. And I really wanted to understand what the issue was, you know, so I could address it. There is significant discontentment with the, my interpretation is there is considerable discontentment in the process that was used to obtain the permit in the city, not from the applicant, not from Hawaii Mountain Farm, but in the city. They have voiced that many times. I was going to try and quantify it, but let's just say many times. They have made some suggestions that are frankly just impossible or impractical. Like, for instance, one suggestion was we'll brick it over and make it look like, well, according to the Planning Commission themselves, that adds new issues. I don't remember what they are, but maybe one of you guys remembers what they said. Anyway. You know, like, so there was this open discussion back and forth about what can be done about the freezer, because they've all kind of said, well, we understand it's there, but they were willing to horse trade with it for a permit for an extra, you know, by my math, it's rafting for less than 100 feet of modification. There are two, when you talk about piecemeal, though, there are two different aspects that I just want to point out. When Mara was doing her presentation, is it possible to bring a slide back up? Because I think it's, if you'll grant it. Yes, sir. Okay, in the design package on page, on page A23, I believe. Mm-hmm.

Are you looking for the site plan for me to put on the screen?

I'm looking for A23, which is, I don't know, there's a CUP patio plan and then pre-existing and prior. No, that, I, yeah. No, I think it's the next slide past that.

Nope, I think so. The A23 wasn't on the, oh, is this what you're looking for?

Right, I think the, the slide that you're looking for is not it's not I'm sorry then we're looking at we could be looking at it though right it is sheet a 2 3 in the packet yeah it has some it's the second set of plans in the packet right before attachment e and it's three different site plans stacked on top

If it's all right, let me know when I can proceed.

It's page 162 in the large packet and our whole agenda packet.

I think it's 172.

Oh, 172? I'm looking at A23. It looks like for me it's 162.

The revised version is on page 172.

Oh, OK, thanks. Okay.

It looks like some people are still hunting.

Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yes, go ahead, please.

Okay, is that all right? Yeah. Okay, good, okay. So the top drawing here shows the, this is to address the piecemeal question. I'm sorry, it's such a long answer. What you can see in the top drawing is the current permitted area. And then in there are two gray boxes that are a planter area. Now, this design is a copy directly from this conditional use permit issued in 2007, so pretty much 20 years ago. The piecemeal part of it is that the gray areas were permitted as part of my building permit. And then what I came back for is to change the patio layout and patio design. And what I was told was that it would be a step in the right direction to the council if rather than just coming back and appealing just my patio design, if I came and said, why don't we standardize this and create a conditional use permit around this permitted freezer area? So... to include things that the council would like to add or that the city would like to add. For instance, the six month rule and removal and potentially a few other things. So when you say, so your question about piecemeal is, I think it would have been less clunky had we done this all from the beginning. I didn't know that was the process. I applied for a permit, I got a permit. I'm not an expert. I'm an expert now, but I wasn't then.

And then I just have one more question. If you're at the back of your building, the right hand side, there's a new wood fence. And I'm just curious how that came about. Is that permitted? Because I was under the understanding.

I can't wait to get rid of that thing. That thing was there when we took over. There were actually two panels of it when we took over. You're talking about the latticework fence that separates us and the art? It's like a wood fence. Yeah. That was there when we got there. There were two of them. One of them was... fell over uh when we had our construction fence up the construction fence was leaning against and it broke the support and the construction team got rid of it but the other one was there to be quite honest i'm not sure if that was the doing of the previous tenant or if that's the art place next door but i am eager to get rid of that and uh it will be replaced by if granted with a beautiful two beautiful brown pots that will be uh filled with rosemary thank you

The question I have is, and I'm looking at the plans, if something could be worked out where there is a refrigeration not on site but close by, let's say, and all the steps worked out that were along the way, and now you had access to basically that real estate, you might say, that you could then do something with. I guess I'm interested in the possibility of looking at that, understanding that there's a lot of ifs and things to be determined. But opening up that, and I heard you say you want to be in compliance and you want to work, and I hear that, and that's what we're trying to do, too, is figure out how can we make this work. That's the kind of idea that... I'm interested in giving you having you have the dining space you're looking for. I love the new orientation. It makes perfect sense to me and that we figure out how to make this be compliant in the community.

I understand. And to be honest, I'm skeptical that we could find something. And not because I want to be obstreperous or anything like that, but because I have staff that have to get in and out of there. Are they crossing multiple properties with... goods in their hands is there insurance issues are there are there um health and human services issues are there what happens if there's a if the other place goes out of business then do i go out of you know like there's a lot of so my skepticism isn't blind it's it's i i've been i've been thinking about the same thing yeah fair enough and um i'm eager to find a solution here and i'm here to do that and i think i hope that that shines through that is coming through

Yeah. Well, I have been talking to one of the other business owners who is very interested in working with you to see about a plan. And there is a separate door and a separate entrance to the freezer. They have the biggest walk-in freezer in the arcade. And so in the spirit of community and in support of what you're trying to do and and your organization, your company's mission, they would be very willing to work with you to come up with some kind of plan.

I would be all ears. Okay.

So if there are no more questions for the applicant, we should make sure we open it up for public comment.

Understood. Are there any more questions for the applicant?

Thank you very much. Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you very much. First, Brian Akins, please, and then Leonard Claife, and then Craig Walker.

Wow, my heart's dislike. So Brian Akins, I happen to be on the Historic Preservation Commission for 11 or so years. I am not here representing anything for them. I am only sharing with you my personal thoughts. Some of those address the question that came on recently. So I constantly walk the arcade, both the front side and not as much the backside, or I would have seen the fridge earlier. The reticence, the bit of an attitude, speaking myself, when something that's going to be placed in a historic district, and there was little debate on whether that area was a historic district, I would expect that it would come before the Historic Preservation Commission. And based on comments by the community, they expect it to. came before the Historic Preservation Commission with the note that we could not discuss it in any way possible, that it was a director's exemption, and we just had to move forward. So, in asking your question. You know, I've seen it, I allow it, or I, Well, like what you said. So I'll keep it short. The other thing I noticed when I was just there the other day, because when the orange bench in front of the ice cream store came to the Planning Commission, I tried to go to all of the planning commission meetings, anything that affects historic. Also, it was bad luck on my part that this came before the HBC. I was at a funeral at the very same time in Utah. But my last thing, again, that orange bench I sat next to the owners when the Planning Commission was discussing that, kind of explaining to them, if I walked through to the back and all of a sudden I saw orange chairs back there, I'd be kind of wondering why them and not me. if you understand what I'm saying. I also take exception, it says City Council Appeal Planning Commission Denial Outdoor Storage and Use of an Existing Walk-in Freezer. To me, reading that firsthand seems to imply that that refrigerator has been there for some time. So again, thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Akins. Lenny Claife, please. Lenny Claife, Craig Walker, and then Bill Weiber.

Good evening, Mayor, Council, staff, Leonard Clay, if I live in the city of Ojai. My remarks are going to be vastly different than the remarks I had intended to make based upon the applicant's statements, which the presentation that he made was extraordinary, and leaves, in my mind, the only question is on page two of eight of the administrative report towards the bottom. The zoning clearance for the freezer was ministerially approved by staff in January 2025. How could staff approve the placement of a freezer in the public right of way, when in order to set up a chair and a table out there, you need a conditional use permit. I find that extraordinary, extraordinarily inept, unless I'm missing something. Assuming that in fact staff approved that, And the applicant went out and bought this ridiculously huge, ugly freezer to put in his backyard in our public right of way. That's on us, not on him. And that should not be a reason to deny anything. And I regret having to say that, because I don't think the freezer belongs back there. But the city apparently said, sure, go ahead and do it. And the guy did it. And it can't easily be undone. I don't understand it, and I would hope that somebody comes up with an explanation for the public on how that happened, if it was proper that it was happened, or improper, and who was responsible, and if it was proper, change the procedures so you can't administratively grant something that should be under conditional use permit. I just, I'm not speaking very clearly, because the whole thing is incomprehensible. And other than that, I have nothing to add except I would note that Ms. Burgess often does not speak into the microphone.

Thank you. Thanks for the feedback. Craig Walker, please, William Wyrick, and then Nathan McCullough.

Good evening, Mayor and council members. I first want to assure you that there is nothing in CEQA that says that if an action is reversible in the future, that it's not a significant impact on the environment. That would be like having a project where you were polluting a river And you said, well, someday somebody could stop doing that and reverse it. And so it's not damaging. There's nothing. I've gone through CEQA so many times. I know it very well. There's nothing that says that if it's temporary or if it could be reversible, that you can do whatever you want. You can damage the environment as much as you want to. The issue I'm going to be addressing is whether the city correctly exempted this project from the required environmental review. The record shows it did not. You said this appeal would clarify whether the project impacts the historic building and plaza and whether staff properly exempted it from review. Yet you have before you no professional study or environmental analysis. How can the city claim no impacts while refusing to study the impacts in dispute? Both the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission found that the project does impact the building and its setting. That alone should have triggered a formal study. The project was also piecemealed. The arcade side proposal, the outdoor dining area, and the freezer service areas were segmented into three separate projects. The historical mural was ignored. CEQA requires one review of the whole action, including both indirect and cumulative impacts. The idea that some object didn't actually touch the brick on the building and therefore it doesn't apply is ridiculous. You have to look at the setting of the building and the environment of it as part of the review. The categorical exemptions that they mentioned, the Class 1 and Class 3, those cannot be given until the council formally determines whether or not the project will cause a substantial adverse impact to a historic resource. Historic resources are an exception to the exemptions. And I think you know that, that you can't exempt any project from CEQA if it involves a historic building. You first have to find that no significant impact was happening to that building, and you haven't done that. Staff is asking you to certify that there are no impacts, despite the conclusions of both your commissions. We can all see the impacts with our own eyes. The project obstructs the historic brick facade and windows, alters the roofline and plaza setting, and introduces new commercial appliances, fencing, ductwork, and utility infrastructure. Again, to qualify for any exemption, you have to first show that it won't impact the built

Thank you, Mr. Walker. Appreciate it. William Weirich, please. Nathan McCullough. And then Chelsea, it looks like Kopp or Kott.

I'm going to jump right in. Yes, please. Yeah, the project was piecemealed, clearly. I have before provided many citations. I'll give one of those. The California Environmental Quality Act defines a project broadly to encompass the whole of an action. Planning and Conservation League versus Kasei Latewater Agency in 19 and 209 case law says, impermissible piecemeal review occurs when a large project is chopped into many little ones each with a potentially minimal, with minimal potential impact, but engaging in a fallacy of division, and they specifically talk about a combination of discretionary and ministerial decisions, which was clearly done here, rather than a whole of an action. The staff report and the applicant testimony could make it so clear about the piecemeal aspect of this, which I notice is lacking in a discussion illegally, and I don't know what you were briefed in in closed session about the piecemealing issue. But when you talk about the walking cooler being existing or the door that suddenly opens up into the path of travel in the front of the in the arcade Those are piecemeal actions and I just think that it's not the applicants fault It's a problem with the process And I want to remind the council that you have broad discretion to fix this in the public interest and recognizing the fact that we shouldn't victimize the applicant. We should try to keep the public interest whole without necessarily victimizing anybody. And I noticed that I didn't see the citation of 1.4-005, appeal by council, that in an event an appeal is brought by city council acting as a whole, there should be no requirement. At the time that counsel hears such appeal that a counsel shall cause on the grounds specified in the notice of appeal, why the action accepted to should not be approved. The counsel, I'm reading from the ordinance still, the counsel shall instead have full power and authority to sustain, reject, or overrule wholly or partly the decision from which the appeal is taken. It's your decision. It's your situation to deal with. You own it because it's an appeal hearing to try to fix this in a way that's fair to the applicant, understands there was a problem in how this was handled, and again, try to protect the public interest. in a way that's fair all the way around so i just really want to emphasize that and please let's not venture any further into problems with setting precedents that we really i don't think are comfortable with as a community thank you thank you mr eric nathan mccullough please and then chelsea cott and then marissa johnson nathan oh yeah thanks

Thanks for having me here. I'll be real brief. I just wanted to come and show my support for the Back Patio. In my 27 years of restaurant work, Seeing places beautify specific areas, bringing in more foot traffic, and which in turn helps the businesses all around them has only been a positive thing from what I've seen. And one of my favorite things about Ojai is the outdoors. So having another place that we can properly enjoy it like this makes a lot of sense to me.

Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. Chelsea, please. How do you pronounce your last name? Thank you, Chelsea Cox. Not at all, no. I couldn't tell if it was a T or an X. And then Marissa Johnson. Yes, thank you. Thanks.

Good evening. My name is Chelsea Cox and I'm speaking tonight as a community member. I'm going to try not to repeat myself and be very quick. The original vision of this project was not a restaurant, as Mr. Yano explained. It was a small family home that was bought by Mr. Yano on a bridge in the Sulphur Mountains. The Thomas Fire neutralized that hope and all existing structures, and it was reimagined as a regenerative farm and farm-to-table concept that could bring locally grown food directly into the Ojai community. What people see today is the result of more than six years of effort, investment, setbacks, permitting, construction, and perseverance. When the arcade location became available, it felt like an opportunity to connect the farm to the community in a truly meaningful way. Bringing that vision to life required extensive improvements, bringing the building into compliance, which it was not previously, and took significant time and expense to do, and we're happy to be a part of that, and making substantial investments so that a restaurant could legally and safely operate there. what i think is getting lost tonight and and over time is that i believe all of us want the same things which is and that's the hpc and it's the it's omf and all people of ohio we all want a beautiful not under construction patio we want it to be in keeping with the historic arcade and all of its guidelines and we wanted to contribute to enlivening the courtyard um while the front of the arcade is Incomparably iconic and it is the back is connecting in a way that a sidewalk just can cannot be it's about creating a welcoming place where families gather and neighbors can run into each other and cyclists can stop and children can run up from the grass they're playing on and people can spend time together in a meaningful way and Over the past six years. I've spoken to countless families here in Ojai about the OMF project and they've all been enthusiastic and I That sense of connection, that sense of community and local agriculture is what inspired this project in the first place. I think it's important. I think it's still important. I think it's still relevant. And I hope that you'll join everyone I've spoken to over the last several years about finding this to be a really meaningful effort on behalf of the people of Ojai. And I hope that you'll join us in your authority in agreeing. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Marissa Johnson, please. And then I have a card that says no name. Literally. So I guess that could be anybody. Or nobody. Okay, go ahead.

Hi, everyone. My name is Marissa Johnson, and I live here in town. I'm very grateful for your time.

This has been a very fascinating hearing.

And I, too, feel like I want to say something a little different than what I had planned. I think it's clear that there is a tension with the issue of this approval with the freezer, which, as I understand it, is not of issue tonight. It sounds like the thing that Mr. Yano is asking for. is a reorientation of the patio so that we can use it it sounds like this how did the freezer get there question is one that you all do need to take on internally and i would ask do we all have to be without the patio while you do that do we let someone who's invested in this community in the way that he has we're talking about environmental impact Farm to table requires freezers. Does it need to be where it is? I don't know. Again, that's for you all to decide. But it's clear that you did all approve for it to be where it is. Or that there was some approval that was issued. There was approval that was issued. So... So again, that seems like it's just not at issue tonight. And I think it just speaks to what I heard Mr. Yano saying, where it's like there feels like there's this retaliatory measure happening. This keeps getting dragged in when the question is about something totally different of the reorientation of the patio so that we can enjoy it while you all figure out options for the freezer, if that's something that's tenable. So I just have to say, sitting here, reflecting as a member of your community in the audience, this is the kind of thing that frustrates the members of your community. You know, that says, like, how could a city let a project go this far and then realize they have some of their own internal thing that, again, is not the applicant's fault. It's not the fault of the people of Ojai. that now they're going to stop the whole thing this far the way through. It's just hard on us who want to enjoy the space. I loved OMG. I was sorry to see it go. I was excited to see this project come in. And I'd like to see what it is and what it has to offer us. And it's clear when you go in there that it's constrained below its potential. And that just feels like a hard place to hold someone who clearly did nothing wrong and clearly has positive intent. for the people of Ojai, for the environment, for everyone present. So again, I agree, this is in your court, and I would ask that maybe you kind of parse out and separate the different pieces and think about while you're sorting one issue, what is available to the people of Ojai who would like to sit down outside and enjoy this beautiful restaurant. So thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Got it. Thank you all. Who wrote no name? You're welcome to come up.

I will move on then. Sorry, Mayor. I wrote no name for your knowledge. We received a card without a name, if anyone's still here.

Oh, so sorry. I misspoke. Did somebody write a card?

You know what?

I'll put this at the end, and if I didn't call you, then you'll know it was you.

A card was submitted, so we wanted to do our best. Understood. Okay. Heidi Whitman, please. And then Jason.

Good evening. I'm going to come straight out. I'm opposed to granting this appeal. In my humble opinion, this is the biggest example of gaslighting of the community that I've witnessed in my 40 years that I've lived here. The project keeps changing. We don't know who allowed what. Our commissioners are being ignored. It seems the staff somehow made a giant mistake, but nobody's saying that. Tonight we're hearing yet another version of the project and now it's the public restroom in the public space on public property that's the problem. So although I clearly believe that the applicant has had some challenges with this project, I'm not sure that the applicant is completely not involved as well. I wanted to say that I think that perhaps the applicant seems to be in the position where he's rented a space that doesn't quite fit his intended use. Priority of use is really super important. It was never intended that the public came second after whatever a particular business owner wanted to do. This public use was a priority. The community invested money in this space. The public was the priority, not any particular business owner. So I really encourage the council and the staff to come clean. Please take an action to make sure this doesn't happen again. And I think it's really important to know what it is that happened, which nobody seems to be sharing. so that it doesn't happen again. And by the way, in CEQA, a temporary use typically applies to a short-term construction-related use. But kind of the rule of thumb in CEQA is that if it's temporary and it's less than two years, that's the standard that's used. So I've been working with CEQA for most of my adult career, and I just think this is a bunch of nonsense. So please deny this appeal. Thanks very much.

Thank you, Jason. And then Nancy reading after that.

Hello. evening mayor and council my name is jason um i've been a resident of this valley for 10 years i'm a big fan of the plaza i'm a really big fan of the arcade um i think the businesses are super cute and i love the strength that we have and i love the tourists that we attract to this uh area there's a vibrant spirit that that flows through downtown ohio and it's iconic After hearing the applicant's presentation, I was inspired by his intention. If you've been in the restaurant, it is beautiful. And I think it encompasses what I think fits perfectly in Ojai as an upgrade. I would say details matter. And I think that no detail was overlooked. extra attention was put into materials, where they're coming from, how they're procured, how they put in. And I would think that after seeing those drawings, that the same type of detail and attention will be put into all the things moving forward. That plaza is kind of, or where the restaurant's positioned, it's kind of in the corner, it's kind of tucked away. And He mentioned that the way you walk into it, you kind of are facing the loading dock behind Rainbow. I think that if it was repositioned, you could sit and you could look at the plaza and the trees and the grass and where it opens up. I think it sounds simple. It sounds like, of course, that's what we should do. And I do think that the intentions of the owner are, they speak for themselves. He had these intentions to create this space that is welcoming and compliant uh not just for like our ada folks but to all the codes and regulations and pay respect to our city um and also um would continue that way and it sounds like through his presentation that it is he's really sifted through the details um and i would like to just say let let them these these two subjects be different let the freezer thing be the freezer thing and let's not make the man pay for a mistake by somebody else and give him his fair justice or a fair shake uh to again continue making uh oh hi beautiful and engage the community a place where we can sit and enjoy a drink or some great food uh and watch our kids play in the grass and under an oak tree that's my time thanks so much guys appreciate you thank you very much nancy reading please and then thank you guys um nancy reading please and then courtney russell

He just stole all my thunder. He pretty much said pretty much what I wanted to say. But as a layperson, not as a politician, and having lived in the Valley for almost 40 years now and seeing so many changes everywhere, this one seems like a really petty offense to me with all the bigger fish to fry everywhere around town that seems nonsensical to my eye. I mean, walking by there, the freezer just doesn't seem like any big deal to me. And I'd like to just advocate for his proposed patio renovation. The arguments tonight have just seemed petty to me and political in nature, something internal that is not his problem. And it sounds like he's jumped through every hoop and tried to dot every I and cross every T as best as he can. As a patron and a restaurant foodie, would I want to sit on a patio facing restrooms and trash cans? No. It's a pretty no-brainer to me of just aesthetics and an enjoyable eating experience. So what he's asking for to me just seems completely fair and logical. And so if you, like the previous person said, what they have done inside that space is completely beautiful. It's classy. It's contemporary. And I have every hope and belief that he would do the same in the back, that what he's done would only beautify our already beautiful city. Thank you.

Thank you very much. No need to clap, guys. We get it. So that will, and Nancy Redding, please. And then I have Andrew. It just says Andrew, Andrew. Oh, are you Courtney? I'm sorry, that was Nancy. You're Courtney. Sorry, I mixed them up. My fault.

Hi, I'm Courtney Russell. I am a resident of Ojai. I live here with my partner and my three dogs. And we spend a lot of time walking around the plaza every day. We walk through, we walk all around town, and we love dining outdoors. I thought that tonight I was going to be here to advocate for the patio. It sounds like the freezer keeps coming up, which I understand there's a lot of contention about it, and I understand the arguments. As a few other people have said, it's very obvious that the applicant is being punished. And I live in town. I have heard nasty rumors, cruel, cruel comments on Reddit, on Facebook, people walking by, people filming. It's appalling. And I don't feel like anybody is taking responsibility for how this is coming down on the business. I have seen the people, the staff working in the restaurant being talked to so cruelly. As somebody who once strove to own a business in town, I have completely turned that idea off. I will not start a business in this town because I see how people are being treated who are trying to do something good. And I hope that at some point people can move forward, take responsibility for the mistake that was made that was not the applicant's fault, and remove some of the damage that is being done to this business, to this business owner, to this staff. and put an end to it and celebrate what an incredible business this is. I've never seen a business like this before. This is the most wonderful offering to Ojai that the community is so proud of. Has anybody hung out there and seen how happy everyone is? Everyone loves it. It's amazing. The food is vibrant. It's delicious. People are having fun. Everybody who comes in comes back again. I have seen that myself. And I just think that it's time that we celebrate this new business and we support it and we get behind it and we stop the damage that's being done to the actual business because that's discouraging future business for Ojai. Thank you.

Thank you. Remember what I said. Andrew? Is there an Andrew there? Thank you. Thanks.

Everyone said it already. Okay. And I worked at the City of Santa Cruz City Planning Department as an intern probably 40 years ago now. It doesn't look like much has changed. The bottom line, I'd like to support the renovation. Ojai is quite fortunate to have a restaurateur like the applicant who has heavily invested in the community, into the arcade, who has proven to be patient, thoughtful, and compliant. Making the improvement process Onerous for small business for a simple existing patio does seem punitive and deliberate it's been Astounding and bewildering to witness this whole process over something so simple You think you know? He's building a freeway it just for something so simple and I agree with the last speaker that If you continue to make the business climate here unfriendly, it's just for small business. It's one thing if the OI Valley Inn wants to do something or a big company, but for a small business to have them jump through countless hoops that seem very petty, it's just bewildering. It's just, it's sad to see. Anyway, thank you.

Thank you. I know it's hard to resist. Did anybody fill out a card that have not called? Please come up.

Hi, my name's Krista Harris. This is my first meeting. So I didn't know you put your name on there. No worries. You're good. I just wanted to say that it's really hard to drive when you're looking through the rearview mirror. It seems like you guys are looking through the rearview mirror and the applicant's looking forward. I didn't even think the freezer was... tonight's agenda however that's all we've heard about so the applicant deserves his project to be approved he has jumped through every hoop and he has set the bar so high we need to meet him so that's all thank you appreciate that anybody online yes mayor we have bill followed by Larry and then Renee okay mr. Miley you have the floor

Okay, I'm here.

Yeah, great.

In my thinking, the key question is what is best for our city now and its future? The success of a business like this one will serve locals and tourists. And certainly an important element is they, the farmers and restaurateurs, are local folks. growing their food, storing it, and serving it. The freezer, without it, no good restaurant seems to exist, I understand. The patio size, without some sort of expansion for customer tables and chairs, relative to the economics of cooking and serving patrons is questioned. That's the position of the owners. And the toilet exposure is ugly. I want this business to succeed and be part of our city's economic future. Our general plan has a new economic section. Please embrace it. Please consider what makes our city attractive to locals and tourists. places they walk, hike, view, experience, eat, and stay. And remember the term, eat. This business is an integrated business from farm to mouth. Here's what I suggest. Freezer. Allow it to be placed as is outside next to the rear entrance. Sound, noise. The city's ordinance says businesses can have 65 decibels with shorter times for noise spurts. That's not the problem. The problem is the sound is generated 24 hours every day, seven days a week when it cools to keep it cold. even when they're closed. It's an easy solution that neither the commission or the planning committee or the HBC discussed, which was sound insulation for the walls and ceiling, a one-time act which pays off forever. Please give it a permit, not a CUP, for the life of the restaurant. also require covering for, so it zeroes out its function for others. For cities, for Ohio City's future, please seriously consider saying yes to Mountain Farm and its outdoor freezer and patio expansion, but mainly for the future of economics in the city of Ohio 50, 100 years from now, hopefully. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we'll have Larry, followed by Renee, and then Ann. Thank you. Larry, you have the floor.

Thank you. Good evening. I really feel sorry for the applicant. I feel more sorry for the city and for our city council because, in my view, it looks like we've been sandbagged. The applicant goes to planning and says, I would like to do this, and they go, okay, we'll find a way. Well, they did because if they had gone through the normal process, the freezer would have been refused because it's part of the arcade. It's not the back of a strip shopping center. It's inside the arcade. All right. This business model called for the freezer outside. He could have put two smaller freezers inside, but that would have called for more floor space. But that's beside the point. Here we are. and yes the freezer can be bricked up the polar freezer has panels that can make it look just like the arcade the bathrooms are there but the bigger problem is how we get here okay you have to deal with that we can't that's internal or maybe it becomes external but i was at planning two two weeks ago or three weeks ago And they asked if there were going to be any compromises or changes. And there were none. No one offered to brick up the freezer or do anything. No, but the eight foot fence in the drip line or any of that stuff. So at this point, you either have to come to a compromise and make it work so that there's no litigation and no anything or deny it. You can't privatize public land. You may be able to give them along a lease. for the length of his lease, if he is leasing, in which case the next applicant would have to go through the whole process again because the buyer of the restaurant is going to want the freezer. And without that, they're going to have to build it inside or change the business model. But here's the problem. You have a problem. I mean, the man was granted the freezer. However, the process was they jury rigged it, and now we've been sandbagged, and now you have to vote on it, and this is something that should never have come here. The freezer never would have been approved. Okay, that's the problem. And the space for the seating, that can be worked out. The patio, people are sitting everywhere and eating. And it is next to the bathrooms. So that's not going to change. Can you put a fence around it? I don't know. How are you going to keep the bathrooms? Bathrooms are public. So I wish you all good luck in how you decide. But this is a real problem, and you've got to make the right decision. So please do. And I hope you have to deny it unless they compromise, unless everybody compromises on it.

Thank you. Next, we have Renee, followed by Ann, and then Leslie. Renee, you have the floor.

thank you uh good evening city and and staff can you hear me yep thanks okay good um i'm going to speak very briefly because i was one of those people who did speak up at a planning commission And I was opposed to the project, basically under aesthetic grievances, but there's one that I think nobody really has talked about tonight and I did want to bring it back up again. But I'll start off. I appreciate hearing from new people in the community. I think this is really important to hear from new voices in the community, and I appreciate people stepping up and supporting regenerative and healthy food-based services. Uh, options in our town. I think this is really a significant offering and I think it should be recognized as that. The other thing is, is, I do believe our general plan does say that the city has a responsibility to work with businesses in the community to make accommodations. So I do think the city has some responsibilities here. I think Lucas was doing his job. He made the accommodations. He followed the law. I think there is something in CEQA that says you have so many days to appeal or you have to be silent. I don't know if the notice was filed. I don't know if the appeal, but I do think it's not right to keep hammering CEQA violations in this situation. I just don't think it's appropriate. I also think if Rachel and other neighbors that this property is next to say, look, we want to work this out with you. We agree you can have some room from where our business is backing into this area as well. The other thing I think the city could do is say, look, we'll put up a barrier in front of the bathrooms. I agree, you don't want to see people traipsing in and out of the bathrooms. You also don't want to see cars coming in and out of that driveway. But I do appreciate the efforts made by the applicant. I do appreciate that the council is hearing this. I think it's a good effort and I think you need to come together. I do think we all want the same thing. We want a healthy place for our families and kids to play and eat. so i think the city can step up and put on put in some barriers and put in some things that will make this project work and i'll hope you consider doing that and maybe i also want the oak tree to live i did not like seeing the fence around the oak tree that was one of the most beautiful assets in that patio area and now all you see is this brown ugly fence i think the tree needs to be showcased i hope you would consider doing that and removing the fence around the tree thank you thank you next we have leslie followed by kathy thank you leslie you may unmute and you have the floor uh very eloquent speakers tonight i really appreciated lenny clife and craig

Walker and I will just make it short and say please deny this appeal thank you thank you our last raised hand for this item we have Kathy okay pardon me Kathy you appear unmuted and you have the floor followed by Kathy thank you Leslie you can unmute when you have the floor

uh very eloquent speakers too really appreciated lenny clave and craig kathy we're speaking to you via zoom it appears we have a relay she's she's playing it possibly yeah kathy you have the ability to unmute and speak now please turn off your volume thanks i'm not sure which okay there we go we can hear you now

You can, okay. My name is Kathy Laudis and I'm a resident of Ojai. I just, you know, for some reason a lot of this project was not very clearly explained and seems to be a lot of confusion about whether the freezer is part of the project or not. It just most certainly is part of the project. It's actually a big piece. There was a mistake made. This is your opportunity tonight to rectify the issue. You know, the main problem is that we are talking about giving public space of the Plaza Arcade to a private entity for their benefit, with very little benefit accruing to the public. It's taking away from the enjoyment of the arcade It's causing the applicant to want to encroach further into the arcade. So there are some real issues to think about. So if we allow the freezer here, what do we need to allow for the next person and the next person and the next person that wants to put their utilities in this area and you know for since the 70s i believe the 1970s there has been great effort on the part of the community to not to take that area away from being a back door alley kind of a place where all the utilities and the crappy stuff is located into making it nice and i think we're still on the path to making further improvements in the area but having a big honking freezer out there a walk-in freezer that is by the way for the purpose of storing produce from the farm it's a farm storage unit that he's putting downtown so uh You know, let's really think about the trade-offs here. Who's benefiting? How to rectify the situation? Maybe we need to refund the applicant his fees in entirety. But I do not, I certainly hope that everybody understands the freezer is the big part of this project. We had unanimous decisions by the Planning Commission and Historic Preservation denying the project. It was unanimous of two commissions and that was not even mentioned in the staff report. Those commissions are the voices of our community speaking up and I hope that that I know it's a tough issue, but I'm sure that the council can wisely work their way through this. But do not forget what's at stake here. Thank you.

Thank you. One more, Mayor. Okay. We have Ann will be our last raised hand now. Okay. Ann, you have the floor.

Thank you, Weston. It's actually Teal Rowe. That's why I lowered the hand, because I was wondering who Ann was. I'm on a different computer. So thank you all for being there tonight. And it is a complicated, it's become complicated. And it seems very simple to me when I hear what Craig Walker says about CEQA, which is, to me, super important to holding to the standards of what Ojai is built on. I'm very concerned about the tree. When I went by there, I couldn't believe what I was seeing in the drip line of the tree. And also... The idea of the noise from a walk-in, and it is a beautiful thing to be growing food, and the applicant, what they're doing is a beautiful thing. I hear that. At the same time, when you start a business, especially a restaurant business, the center of a restaurant is the walk-in, period. That's what it is. So make it the center of the business, not the center of our commons, please. Thank you.

Thank you. No more raised hands, ma'am.

OK. We'll close the public comment. We have a small sec, five minutes for staff to say anything else if they wish to.

Mm-hmm.

If I could just respond to a couple pieces here and just to get some information here. There's in no way is there any sort of Let me start with the process. From a processing standpoint, looking at this as a zone clearance versus a CEP versus a design review versus a minor CEP in terms of what's been processed dating back to 2007 to what we see today. Zone clearances are typically and are a ministerial action in looking at that. I've been in the planning field for more than 20 years. I've worked in a number of different cities, this one included, obviously. And when you're looking at a zone clearance, there are a number of different ways in terms of evaluating it. And when I first started here, it was identified to me that there are three ways in which projects are processed. They're either ministerially, through a zone clearance, through staff level, in terms of a director's exemption. or through a discretionary review process, which is either handled through Planning Commission, Historic Preservation Commission, and even this body. When evaluating this project, and mind you, it was the applicant coming to the city and for staff, and myself specifically, reviewing and having that conversation with Tony from the very beginning. all the things that he's disidentified in his speech and his presentation as a part of this project is true. We've absolutely had that conversation. There's nothing in there that should be damning to him in terms of how this is evaluated. And instead, the evaluation in terms of how I reviewed this and evaluated it really dates back to when I first started here in terms of reviewing and analyzing these pieces and those three different buckets by which, um, this has been evaluated. Now, obviously when looking at this, I saw this specifically as a minor, um, ministerial action and treated it that way moving forward and having those conversations, um, through that lens obviously that is not the way in which the community sees it that's clearly not the way in which legal sees it so i've pivoted i understand what we're looking at here what the implications are now some of those pieces i don't necessarily agree with from a review standpoint sequa is one of those obviously you as the council have that authority obviously we're giving you a recommendation by which we've evaluated this um some of the pieces that that specific council members have spoken to regarding sequel i get that when we're evaluating these projects and i would say consistently reviewing these these projects uh as to whether or not the project is considered a project Or meaning, is it in the SQL box or out of the SQL box? That's really what we look at when we evaluate each and every project that comes before the community development department. So I wanted to just address the process piece because we've talked about it a number of different times. It's obviously identified within the staff report. So I wanted to just be clear on that. The piecemealing portion that has been mentioned several times, I get looking at this, it feels like it was piecemealed. We didn't evaluate it that way. We saw it as this piece says piecemeal. This action that we're looking at... is something that just did not fit within the confines of the way in which you're evaluating it as a project or not. And I'm speaking specifically to the freezer. We didn't see it that way. When I was reviewing this and evaluating this, I didn't see it that way, right? It was behind an existing fence. located within an area that, which by the way, in each, sitting with you, you should have the tree report that was evaluated. And the conditions that have been identified within that as well. That was the most critical piece when we were evaluating this that I saw as something that needed to be addressed. And obviously having a professional review that, analyze it, provide recommendations to ensure that the oak tree that's there has the best chance for survival. So I just wanted to speak to the piecemealing aspect. And then regarding the noise, I know that was discussed early on. Staff has gone out, done some preliminary analysis that's been identified here within the staff report itself. There is no noise. Can I continue? Just wrap it up.

The noise is the last piece. Okay.

When we went out and evaluated the noise, there is no noise tied specifically to where the freezer is located. Instead, that noise carries itself to the roof. And you're hearing that noise from the roof and down. It's the reason why you have in the conditions for consideration the requirement for the screening on the roof. Mm-hmm. There is no noise that the freezer physically generates. Instead, that noise has been carried up to the roof. So that's it. Thank you.

Just a quick question. I was just going to say, are you saying that the noise from the refrigerator carries to the roof, or are you saying the refrigerator is not making the noise?

Yeah, the equipment that is making the noises on the roof and not the freezer itself.

Okay, thank you. Thanks.

Please. I'm going to be really quick.

Thank you for... And this is just to say whatever else you would like to say.

Yeah, I thought this was time to address some of the public comments. Absolutely, whatever you want. Okay, so just... thank you um uh talking about the sound the sound that has been identified there is not the freezer at all the freezer the mechanics for the freezer are way up in the middle of the roof as shown on the roof plan i'm not going to bring it back on the screen but if you want to look at it again um and is inaudible even from 10 feet away on the roof So someone made a comment that it's on all night and all that. That's not the case. There is an audible noise that comes on periodically. That is a fan that blows air underneath the building. Again, it is a fire issue. It is a mold issue. It is a, I believe it's city code. And that's what that is. That fan was inoperable with the last applicant and when we were going through our inspections I didn't even know this existed and we had to um put a new motor in or something like that and it was pretty loud and I asked the um contractor you know does it have to be on all the time he said no just has to be on two hours a day I was like all right well let's just do two hours a day so it's on a timer and it's still under the decibel level but I just wanted to make that point okay the next thing is again this might be a little repetitive and I don't want to bore everybody but several people talked about the tree and the fence and the fence was there the tree was there the report was done so I'm sensitive I'm very sensitive to that too and we've done everything we can for that but the complaints that all of a sudden you can't see the beautiful brick facade We have documentation that shows it's at least five years old, and I have a picture that says it's from 2009. So, you know, again, I'm asking you to please not try to, please don't pin that on me or make a decision about my patio based on it. Oh, the giving away of private space falls into that was something that was brought up by two different people, I believe. And that's part of that same thing. We haven't taken any more footprint from what was there uh originally and then just um you know uh one lady in the audience or said that we had changed our plan and that we've been gaslit or that why I or staff or someone have been gaslighting I have to say I take exception to that because I feel it's very personal and the truth is if you look at our plan our plan has changed over time it's gotten smaller and smaller the orientation has always been away from the bathroom If we didn't care about the orientation being by the bathroom, by the trash, why would we even come here? We already have all our permits. I'm literally making my dining space smaller. I'm not making, I'm requesting a permit to make a smaller space. So I just want to make that point clear because I don't want to leave that kind of resonated with me. All right, I think I'm done. Thank you very much. Thank you so much.

I appreciate that. I just want to, we've been sitting here for a while and we have some deliberation to do. Do we need to take a five minute break and come back? Okay, five minute break.

One, two, one, two, thank you.

Is Ms. Burgess on her way? Okay, no problem.

No worries, no worries. on the door and say we have a legal emergency well we will officially close the public hearing and move into discussion when the attorney returns noise thank you So we'll move into discussion. Ms. Lang, were you gonna start?

Okay, so I apologize. I picked up a little virus on my way home from New York from a work trip, so I am gonna keep my mask on. So I think that there, are definitely process issues here and you know i'm i'm optimistic that our city manager and our city attorney are working those out you know this is not the first business that i've heard these kinds of stories from in our community and it's really unfortunate that we have this formula business ordinance and we want people like mr yano to to have mom-and-pop businesses locally owned locally run businesses and i think we um you know we need to be looking at processes to make it so that we don't have these kinds of issues for our people who are trying to do good things in our community i do believe that you went through all the proper protocols i do believe that you went through the permitting process and that you did everything in good faith um i uh you know i've i've listened to all the the planning commission and the hpc uh meetings and it and i agree with what you said that it does look like the uh that the freezer was the big issue And so I was thinking about how could we make it so that you could have the use of the patio, maintaining the same footprint that OMG maintained, and addressing the freezer in a separate way. And so I've had a lot of discussions with people in the community, namely one of the business owners who's right across from you, who has come up with a proposal or an option of utilizing their freezer. They have a walk-in freezer, it has a separate entrance, and we could potentially work something out for that to happen. And if that is possible, would expect the city or I would want the city to work with you and work with this business owner to see what we can do and and and and so my and so what I would like to propose and bring up for discussion is the potential of having a six-month six-month temporary Permit is that is that correct? Is that a conditional conditional use permit six? for the use of the back patio and in that six months the removal of the freezer working with the city and working with this other business owner to to try to to find a workable solution and

and if you're done yeah go ahead okay well i i want to support that i i see that the applicant has done everything they were supposed to do in good faith that's how it appears to me and that i would like to have that patio work as quickly as possible in the way that you've proposed um i think it's good for the entire community and i do see advantages to not having the refrigerator in that location if possible And so what I would like to support this proposal to say there's a six month conditional approval to operate immediately while something is being worked out with the city as support and that we have to work out what that support is with this business that's close by and try to figure out a solution of what to do with it. Yes. Oh, sorry, I was gesturing. I thought you were.

No, I'm certainly ready to talk always. So I also support the six-month conditional use permit. I understand and felt immediately that there are hurdles, for sure. And we don't really even know what those hurdles are until we get into the details of it. I would like us to really try and bring the community together because I also understand being the recipient of really nasty remarks and what that does to you and how that works and how unfortunate it is and to have people assume the worst about you And I think that this is a way to try to kind of bring that together. When I first met with you, you talked about the positioning of the patio and how it wasn't optimal and how it didn't match if you looked at the arcade guidelines, that there were ways that you could say that this patio was positioned in opposition to the patio guidelines. And so I saw that at the time. And I don't see that as something that you changed all of a sudden to try to whatever it is you were or not trying to do. I've been taking notes here. I understand the idea about a large project needing to be seen as a whole. We've brought that up with the Inn, and no one bit even with that. I think we've done these small piecemeal projects with the Inn, and no one said, oh, we should be looking at this holistically. I'm not even sure that this is a large project. This is a restaurant. So a refrigerator permit and a patio permit, does this qualify as a large project? I don't know. Maybe. I mean, I don't know what the guidelines are for that. Is it 3,000 square feet? Is it 10,000 square feet? So I'm not even sure that that's fitting. But finally, to also speak here, yes, this process was completely messed up in so many ways. And we are looking and are seriously trying to evaluate what happened and how we can keep that from happening again. So to the idea that this is a big cover-up, no, it's not a big cover-up. It's been a huge discussion on how we got to this point. It's been, for us here, really the main discussion. It's not something that we have avoided or not looked at or don't want to look at. We do want to look at it. We want to fix it. But we don't want to hold businesses responsible. And finally, for me, you know, when you talk about protecting the public interest or even evolving the public interest, I did a whole project, you know, we're talking about an economic sort of revisioning and rethinking. Well, I did a whole project on a regenerative economy. That is, to me, the way forward. And sometimes you have all of these kinds of rules and regulations that don't allow you to move forward. And I'm not saying that that's the case here, but we need to rethink what actually we believe to be the public interest and to be more evolutionary. I think someone said looking forward, not backwards. And so how do you discuss a new model of sustainability and regeneration and a new economy if you don't take all of these things into consideration? So for that reason, I supported this appeal. But I think if we could really figure out, and if there is a way to get a freezer that's right across or somewhere that you can make work or that OMG, can make work, then we should really try to do that in order to bring the community together. And my only concern is that in six months, we're back here again. So I'm really hoping that all parties can come together, including the things we don't have control over, but working towards a solution for those things we don't have control over. There's always a creative way to figure something out if you have a will to do it. And so I hope that we will have a will to do this. And I am supportive of what you're doing. And yay you.

Thank you. Yes.

Well, I'm thinking if we're going to give the six months for him to check out what the available options are, I think that would be great. And I'm just wondering if we can add to that, like during that six months, I don't know how long it would take, but if we did an environmental impact report, have that done so when he comes back in six months, we have more information to make a better choice.

I would not support that. The reason I would not support that is that it opens up more cans of worms. And I think that it needs to be holistic for the whole area. And I don't think that can be done in six months.

If I could just jump in. The other concern that we would have at the staff level is it sounds like you have to provide direction, but if you're going in that motion of a conditional approval with a six-month revisit, which I think is what you're talking about, you're asking staff to address the situation of the outdoor freezer. You're asking staff to try to find a way to remove that from the equation. And so if you're asking us to do that, that would probably be the focus of any type of requested environmental study. And that would be, the goal would be to have that go away. So it wouldn't make any sense to do a study if you were trying to remove that aspect.

And I would support an EIR for the whole area, right, to really get a sense, for instance, of garbage, for instance, of lavatories.

Or of neighboring businesses that have encroachment in public spaces as well, because I think this shines a spotlight on all of the ways in which businesses have been able to get away with certain things that are against the guidelines.

We've seen that in so many areas that we, and we're working on it, luckily, is the code enforcement, how much it's ramped up, that everything needs procedural justice and tightening to get it.

If I could just jump in again. So I think if you want to give us areas to focus on for that area, we would be happy to do that. It would be largely through a code enforcement lens. But normally when you're doing environmental impact reports, there's a project. is triggering it and unless you have something like that that you're envisioning I would say it's probably more you're thinking of areas you want us to to address but that's what I would suggest and I'm not even I would need more clarification on for instance what is the scope of an environmental so we plan on bringing back to the council there's a direction to come back and talk about the menu if you will of proactive code enforcement and issues and this would be your chance we're going to come up with some suggestions i'm looking at maura because she heads this up but you know we would we would want you to tell us what the priorities are that matches what you we we have three that we're working on now that we brought forward and we know we wanted to come back but i mr whitman do you have anything you want to add yeah i have a few things okay um you know first i think

that while the applicant is extremely convinced that this piece of paper that he got gives him the right to put the freezer there, I think that it's not as certain as he thinks it is. And I would encourage him to try to work through the resolution that we're talking about The contrast to the six years that he spent working on this project is Ojai's history going back to 1980 when we recognized, and I'm going to read from, first of all, I'm going to make a Rhetorical comment but I don't know how you can read the arcade plaza guidelines and come to the conclusion that the placement of what somebody referred to as a honking freezer in the middle of the plaza is consistent with the guidelines but. What the Arcade Plaza design guidelines say at page two is that originally the plaza was created from an alley in the early 1980s as a redevelopment project aimed at invigorating what was then a seriously blighted area. So through today's plaza, though today's plaza is a great improvement, this was written in 2001 from the previous alley. However, it's never fully developed as planned in the initial redevelopment project. the and the improvements that have been made as of 2009, did not meet the city's expectations for a revitalized arcade plaza. So the idea was to get equipment, trash enclosures and all of this out of the back entrances to these buildings, and turn the back entries into essentially entries into the buildings where you could enter from either side. The design guidelines go on to say, although the Arcade Plaza is a relaxing pedestrian space, there's a significant opportunity for improvement to maintain its quiet elegance while providing added economic vitality to the downtown pedestrian core. the design guidelines for buildings surrounding the Arcade Plaza are important elements in the total revitalization process. There's a statement of the vision which says that the plaza will act as the town square or heart of the downtown and enhance the small town experience of Ojai. As a tranquil yet lively space, the plaza will be oriented to all age groups and provide a comfortable place for community to interact. And I would, you know, I'd take exception to the idea that the Planning Commission didn't look at the design guidelines and decide that they were not being met by the placement of this freezer. And we have a transcript, I'm not gonna read through it, but they read through, the planning commission concluded, hey, the first three questions on the checklist, for meeting the design plaza guidelines have not been met. So there I'm going to kind of reverse if this was just about the patio and how that was going to be furnished and the space it was going to be utilized, then this never would have come to us. There may be some incredulity that we're talking about the freezer, but that's what this is all about. And the freezer has not been given a legal right to be where it is at this point in time. And so I've been encouraging, since the first time we've heard this, that we reach a solution that allows the applicant to conduct his business but also allows the community to have the integrity of that space that they, we've invested 45 years, countless millions of dollars in the Arcade Plaza District. And this, allowing this freezer potentially destroys all of that effort that the community has made. Thank you.

I guess it seems to me the proposal is to try to have it not be there. That's the proposal.

That's on the table right now. I support the idea that to give the applicant six months to work with the community, whether this option that's been identified works, or if it's another option that, you know, if that one doesn't work, but then, you know, the project would come back to us in six months if a resolution hasn't been figured out. And then, you know, everybody's at risk at that point in time if we don't get something done.

I hear what you're saying, and I would suggest that we, my view, we owe it to the process and the applicant to offer this period of time to try to get a solution.

I agree. Did we get a motion already?

I'll make a motion to move forward with a six-month conditional approval and direct staff to work with the applicant and the other business to work out a solution for... Go ahead.

Just, Tim, you wanna add, but approving the patio as submitted.

Approving the patio as submitted. Approving the patio as submitted. Go ahead, do you have a question? Yeah.

Do we have a budget?

A budget?

Yes. Well, if we're intervening and part of the solution.

Yeah. All right, you know, a reasonable budget.

I think that what I would recommend is that we would come back to council. Yes, come back.

I think come back with the.

Maybe I should rephrase that. Is there any direction that we would potentially have any type of stake in this? Yes. Because I don't have any idea what the costs are because I don't know what's involved.

I would offer that as well.

Yes. I mean, yes, but that it comes back to us for approval.

Yeah, I can guarantee you the city manager's spending authority would not be anywhere near what would probably be required. And I wouldn't do that anyway.

And I would say, you know, move this forward with all due speed if we can.

And we might want to, you know, I know that you're trying to make a motion, but I don't know if the applicant might want to.

It's okay, yeah, come on. Come to the microphone so then everybody out in the internet can hear you as well.

Would you like to stand?

Thanks. We're breaking our rules. That's okay.

Yeah. All right.

Pardon me?

Don't worry about it.

Go ahead. So first, I just wanted to address two things that Mr. Williams brought up. First is, I totally agree with you that the freezer does not IT'S NOT AN OBVIOUS FIT INTO THE GUIDELINE. I NEVER HEARD OF, NO ONE TOLD ME, THE FIRST TIME I EVER HEARD OF THE PLAZA GUIDELINES WERE AFTER THE FREEZER WAS DELIVERED AND SOMEBODY, AND I WAS INFORMED BY STAFF. SO FIRST I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW I AGREE WITH YOU AND AGAIN I'M NOT TRYING TO, THE SECOND THING JUST TO ADDRESS WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAYING THAT I DIDN'T ADHERE TO THE THREE FIRST THINGS THAT CHECK THIS. I would go to the wall to refute that because every aspect of that has been done, and I'll be happy to do that with you if you like. I really appreciate everyone to work with me, and I really appreciate everyone's thoughtfulness and the community's input on both sides of this. I have great concerns about this six-month period, and here they are. There are a lot of hurdles that we, as a group here, probably cannot answer tonight. Can you make between financial arrangements with the freezer owner to health and human services issues about crossing multiple properties and public land with food to insurance issues? Who's paying bills? Who's removing the freezer? There's a lot of stuff. my worry is if i'm going to execute the the plan that i really appreciate the support on that comes at a great expense to me if in six months we are not able to come up with something i got to come back here and go through this whole rigmarole again when the freezer first became an issue in town my entire project was put on hold for many months I had staff, I couldn't just let them all go. I paid full-time staff for months while we were trying to figure out what to do with the freezer. I can't put myself in that position again. I respect the fact that Ojai's a lot older than six years, I get it. 10,000 years of people being here from what I understand. I'm saying from a business owner's perspective, I cannot put myself in a position where I roll the dice and hope that in six months it goes my way. I will work hard. I will sign anything you want to show. I will do what I can to make this happen. But if it costs me $100,000 a month, I cannot. That's a made-up number.

I understand.

But anyway, so...

I totally hear what you're saying, and speaking for myself, I could say you have... least from me but I believe for more than me the sincere goodwill to make this work so I think that's what we're offering right now is something that you can start you can open in the back move it forward and that we are gonna work really hard to try to make this work thank you okay I'm already open in the back no I know I understand but I mean in the way that you would like to be right and so what I'm trying to explain is that in order to create the patio that we're talking about it involves a

$50,000, $70,000 worth of furniture and umbrella and planters and watering system, you know, all of it. If in six months I'm told I got to bring it all back, what do I do with all that stuff? And I'll never be able to make that money back in those six months. And I'll have to buy different stuff, you know what I mean? So I want to, you know, I appreciate the goodwill and I extend it back. If Health and Human Services comes back and says, no, you will not be able to take food between places, then this thing's cooked, and then I'm right back here. And I just can't keep doing it. I understand. It's a lot.

what go ahead no no go ahead what um what if we what if we separated the freezer from the patio uh and so you know

Well, but it seems to me what you're saying is you're investing in the patio. Yes. We get that. And I don't think that's going to be a wasted investment in any way.

Okay. Let's say in six months from now, for whatever reason, we can't make the alternative freezer work. What happened? Do we revert to, do we stick with the current, the plan that is being approved until we figure something else? I'm back in limbo is what I'm saying. And like I keep saying, I appreciate everyone wanting to work with me, I just, I can't be in limbo.

I hear what you're saying. But this kind of negotiating that we're doing right now is not something we do at this stage, so I'm gonna have to stop. But I think we're offering you what we can right now.

It has a lot to do with why we offered six months for that, believing that that would be time to sort things out.

If the negotiations on figuring this out are going to take more time, come back to us and say we need three more months or... Can I just, I would say that it's fairer for us to take the risk than to ask the applicant to take the risk. Because what we are essentially saying is you know, you take the risk, do everything you can, we'll help you all we can, but if it falls through, it's kind of on you. I think that the fairer thing is that it falls on us, honestly. I mean, we all will work as hard as we possibly can. To me, to me, it just seems fairer in that way.

And falling on us would mean something like allowing it.

Exactly. That's exactly right. We'd be allowing it. And I know that that doesn't put the, by saying the risk is all for you, we assume that you will then try as hard as you possibly can But I also believe that you will try as hard as you possibly can, because it is to your benefit and the community's benefit that this gets solved in the best way possible. And that would be to remove the freezer. So for me, that's how I am looking at this. Because I understand your point. If Health and Human Services say no, what are we going to do?

I understand.

So we have a suggestion.

And this is just we're trying to scribble something together here quickly. so potentially council could consider a conditional approval tonight that thereby allowing the dining well the dining is already allowed currently but dining is in the re-envisioned format to you know in the purchase of the items and so forth with with the freezer in its current position continuing we would return we would work with the applicant we're going to work with a number of different regulatory agencies We will return at the first meeting in August with a timeline and a scope and an estimated cost. I think I'm going to need some time because I don't think I've really fully envisioned every single thing that is going to be required. I don't think I'll be able to do this. We only have one meeting in July. It's July 15th. It's already stacked. I'm not going to be able to probably put that together between now and then, but I think I can do that by the first meeting in August. And I know that the applicant is willing to work with me and the city attorney and Mr. Seibert on this. Okay. Does that sound reasonable?

That sounds reasonable to me. I would second. If that's the revised motion, I second that. Thank you very much. Okay.

I appreciate the faith. Hold on.

I'm freestyling a little bit so the city attorney can jump in.

I just want to make sure I understand that it's clear in terms of, so when you say conditional approval, would the six-month limitation...

I don't have, so we can, I think we come, all right. We have a six month timeline where we come back. Just the one part where I'm hedging until I have a plan in place. Maybe I, I'm wildly optimistic about my capabilities to get stuff done. Maybe I can get it done within that time period. But I want to reserve the right, if I come back to you in August after I've scoped everything out and I tell you, the permitting for what we're proposing is gonna take four months. That's going to be outside the six month timeline. So regardless, we can definitely come back at the six month and tell you where we're at. But I'm going to put most of my timeline emphasis on what I bring back to you in August.

So if you were to say, if we were to put the six-month timeline on there as a outside, only for now, in August you come back, and we understand that there may be a revised timeline.

Yes. Okay. But we understand the direction is to remove, you know, the objective is to eliminate the freezer from its current, to get it out of the plaza if you go from behind the building. That's the objective. Yes. But doing this in a way that he's able to operate. Yeah. that we're not harming the character back there, and it's something that's allowed with all the health requirements.

So you're gonna be checking into the stuff that we don't have control over, basically?

Yeah, no, that's exactly, yes, yes, yes, and so Mr. Seibert and I will be diving into all those aspects, and we have, of course, contacts at those county departments, and we will be, this will be order of business that we'll be working on.

Is that sufficient, Ms. Bridges?

that is i was just thinking about how we formulate the motion for purposes of the resolution we have a resolution in your packet that includes conditions of approval and so it would be a i'm just thinking out loud a motion to approve the res the resolution authorizing the expansion of the outdoor dining area and the conditions of approval that pertain to that and that separately there would be a conditional approval of the freezer to allow the freezer to remain in its location for a period of up to six months.

We probably don't need you up here anymore.

But that we will bring back, we will bring a report and update back to City Council in August for further direction.

Did you get that? Correct, I got that. So are you okay with that?

I'm okay with that.

And I second that.

Ready for roll call.

It's all conditional. It's all temporary.

Except for the outdoor dining under what I just said. The expansion to the outdoor dining under the revised plan.

Which is the same footprint as OMG.

Yeah, and then my understanding was that if the solution for the freezer is worked out that the the OMG footprint would be, he'd revert back to the OMG footprint, is that correct?

That's part of the motion. Yeah, because he reduced the original one that they presented before planning to go back to that original footprint.

It's already the original footprint.

He said it's actually reduced because it's jetted out slightly. So if the freezer were to go away, the footprint either would enlarge slightly or could revert south. But to me, it's minuscule, actually. We're talking about like 100 square feet.

But it's not larger than OMG.

Right. The dining area is the same as OMG.

OK. I have the motion as stated by the city attorney. Okay. We have a motion by Council Member Lange, second Mayor Gilman, roll call. Mayor Pro Tem Meng?

No.

Council Member Rule?

Yes.

Council Member Whitman?

Yes.

Council Member Lange? Yes. Mayor Gilman? Yes. Motion passed.

And I want to thank the business owner also who has so generously come forward to help us come up with the solution. And thank you for working with them.

And continued work.

Yeah.

Thank you. So I had eye surgery yesterday. I'm not comfortable at all at this point. Okay. So I am going to take my leave. Yes. Yeah, thank you.

I think we need, do we need to approve the budget? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay, okay. And we have Pepe Smith here too.

Oh, yes. Okay. We'll be brief. Okay. No, thanks. Okay, moving on. We will move on to item number 12, the fiscal year 2026-27 budget.

Very good.

Thank you, Mayor. We're bringing forward our finance team. Thank you. Ms. Michaud and Ms. Palmer to deliver this. Thank you both very much.

Brenda, I put you right here.

I see the presentations already queued. Thanks.

Thank you for toughing it out, you guys.

Honorable Mayor, city council members, tonight we'll hold a public hearing to receive comments on the recommended fiscal year 26-27 budget and complete the review, review and approve the GAN appropriations limit for fiscal year 26-27 and adopt resolutions to adopt the fiscal year 26-27 budget, establish the GAN appropriations limit for fiscal year 26-27 and amend the salary schedule to be effective July 6th. At the June 9th City Council meeting, Council provided feedback to include the addition of $7,000 for Ojai de Mandala in the Recreation Department and $1 million for fire safety and mitigation, which would be funded through the general fund unallocated balance. The budget is a living document that may be amended throughout the year, for example, to allow for the pursuit and achievement of city council goals to respond to economic fluctuations and forecast changes or unanticipated events. And then this slide is just a review of the balance budget policy and minimum fund balance policy in which operating revenues must fully cover operating expenditures, though it is allowable for expenditures to exceed revenues when the fund balance is used for capital improvement or one-time non-recurring costs. Additionally, the city shall maintain a minimum fund balance of 100% of their prior year's general fund operating expenditures as the minimum general fund reserve amount. This table summarizes the general fund balance where the middle column is the balance that was presented at the June 9th meeting and the far left column reflects the balances after adding the two changes showing an overall difference of the $1,007,000. Similarly, this table shows the balances before and after the changes to the budget, again showing the overall change of the addition of the mandala and fire safety and mitigation for the $1,007,000. The next slide is began appropriations limit. The state requires that local governments adopt annual appropriation limit. This limits the amount of revenue that the local governments can appropriate from proceeds of taxes each fiscal year. This is calculated using the prior year's appropriation limit and is adjusted for the change in population and per capita income growth. So the limit for fiscal year 25 is $17,252,819. And in the calculation for the fiscal year 26-27 limit, the adjustment factor is 1.0424, resulting in an appropriation limit of 17,984,338. The city's estimated net proposed tax proceeds budget is approximately 17 million, which remains below the established limit by 895,880. And lastly, as part of the budget plan, an amendment to the compensation plan is recommended to update the salary ranges to apply the 3.5% cost of living adjustment to all classifications with the exception of the city manager and elected officials. The administrative report provides additional details on the amendments to the salary schedule, but I would be happy to answer any questions, and our HR manager is also available. That concludes my brief presentation. And again, I'm available for questions.

I appreciate that. Questions? I guess one question I'm having is that if we, it depends on, I'm looking at page 233 of the packet. So with the It's where we see like the general fund budget and where that got added, where we see the fire safety mitigation for that million dollars. And so I guess when I see the percentage of the projected fiscal year 26-27 at 116%, are we, I expected that to be lower with the million dollars.

Okay. Yeah, thank you for pointing that out. Okay. That should be 20 million.

Okay. 571-168.

Okay. And the correct number is on 237 of the agenda packet. So it's highlighted in green in the last row.

Yep, okay. Other questions? I have a couple of public comment cards here. Clay Creasy, please, and then O'Brien-Akins, but Brian left, and then Heidi Witten, but maybe Heidi left as well. Okay.

City Council, in interest of the time and everybody's endurance, I won't get too lengthy here. I did send an email to each of you, which I presume you saw. I want to just take a moment to discuss the overarching notion of staying true to our rules as opposed to shading things one way or another based on what we want to have happen. THE RESERVE RATIO CALCULATION, WHICH IS PART OF THE GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY, GOT CHANGED THIS YEAR UNILATERALLY BY CITY ADMINISTRATION TO ELIMINATE FROM THE RATIO CALCULATION ONE TIME ITEMS IN THE PRIOR YEARS EXPENDITURES. THAT IS NOT HOW IT WAS DONE IN PRIOR YEARS. It is not how it is called for in the general fund reserve policy that you all approved, but just spontaneously they decided let's do that. This skirting the edge of obeying the rules is an extremely problematic behavior. It doesn't just exist in this specific example. There are other situations where things we just decide to fudge it a little bit. Your prior discussion had many twists and turns, obviously. And to Councilwoman Rule's comment, there wasn't a cover-up. But there's a difference between pure transparency and a cover-up. And that middle zone is where you sort of just kind of fuzzy things up a little bit. So when I change a reserve calculation, in a way that makes it not true to the actual definition. And I just say, you know, pay no attention. There's no story here. That's, in fact, starting down a road of what we call in the real world of accounting cooking the books. Manufacturing a number that's different than the way it should be presented is a really good way for controllers and finance people to get fired in a hurry. You should not tolerate it for one minute. The benefit of doing that is zero. The harm of doing that is you really tarnish your reputation as being on it. And we all love Ojai. Nobody wants to point fingers at anybody. We don't have to do stuff like that. doing it merely undercuts everything we want to stand for. And I recognize many issues are complicated, but this one is really simple.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have no other cards. Is there anybody online?

Thank you.

Yes, Mayor, we have a raised hand from Renee. Okay. Renee, you may unmute and speak.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and members of the Council.

Hello.

Can you hear me?

Yes. Thank you.

Okay. All right. I will be brief. My first comment is the document that was available online had no page numbers on it. I know when you get your books as members of the Council, so I would like to have given you page numbers from my comments, but there were no page numbers on the document. And so that represents just a lack of transparency on how we can have a public conversation about the budget. You can't do it without page numbers.

Renee, I apologize. The large packet has page numbers throughout. I downloaded from the website also.

Okay. Well, maybe I'm looking right here at it. Granicus number such and such with no page numbers.

Sorry about that.

Maybe I didn't get the right version. Staff report is silent, by the way, on the 2425 audit. The status of the audit is really important when you're looking at your budget because you want to go back and say my actual numbers of my fund balance calculations are based on audited numbers. I called finance director Cho today and asked her and talked about it. And she explained it to me that the audit hadn't even been started by the time she was hired, which was October 27th, 2025. And it was supposed to be done by December of 2025. So, to me, that's just a, um, a major oversight. The staff should know that you should be working with audited numbers and you're not. So, um, regarding the general fund totals, 18.7Million in revenues, 18.8Million and expenditures. leaving a reserve of $20.1 million. That's a very healthy reserve, but with no audited numbers, it can get a little tricky. So if you look at your measure C fund, I would give you a page number, but I don't have it. Uh, which are for capital projects, by the way, for fire and climate mitigation as well. So. 10Million in expenditures and 4.2Million in new revenues, which means you're drawing down your fund balance from prior years. But those are unaudited numbers. So once those unaudited numbers, you really once those audited numbers come in, you really need to be getting updates on what your final adopted budget is. It's difficult to do so regarding the fuzzy thinking that and cooking the books that Clay was mentioning. This is pretty easy to do on this GAN limit because the stated headroom is now down to around $900,000. Renee, the time is up. Can you conclude? yes i will so i do think that the idea of taking the million dollars from the general fund and transferring it to the capital improvement fund and calling it fire mitigation is not transparent you have to have a project i mean conclude i mean conclude we're going to conclude quickly in order to transfer the money to the capital and prop capital improvement project you

Thank you, I appreciate it. Okay, anybody else online? No, Mayor, that's all. Okay. I mean, it seems to me what you've done is you offered the changes we asked for from our last meeting, and here they are, and I'm satisfied.

I was feeling the same way, but I wanted to find out from Mayor Pro Tem.

Well, I'm just curious when the 24-25 one will have that completed, the delay in that, and I realize that you came on board late, so I'm not pointing the finger, trust me, so. That's a question. Um, I also am concerned with the 1,000,000 dollars for the, um, fire. Like, shouldn't it be broke down? Like, I know it's a 1,000,000 dollars, but typically you put what the 1,000,000 dollars is going to be used for.

We don't know what that is yet. We don't have direction on what to do. Remember that?

Yeah, this was ever in response to saying there was no money set aside for fire mitigation. So. The idea was, so that we don't think we have the money to spend on anything. We know we want to work on that. We don't have proposals yet. Maybe we won't spend them.

It could be a capital project. You know, you could decide something else, but it's just set aside so that you can provide direction on that.

And then the other thing, again, is that the cabin village, the money, the things that you said, you know, are reimbursable and all that, I still haven't received.

So everything for the cabin village, including, so there's probably three or four major components of it, and I can give you the entire packet. There's the actual ERF grant application where we apportion out how we intend to spend the money, and that's approved and reviewed and approved by HCD. We can send that out again. There's that. There are the drawdowns from dignity moves, and this is all on the website.

This is all posted. What I'm saying is all along, like when I've questioned the finances for Cabin Village, and you would tell me, oh, this amount, that's reimbursable. So that's what that's what I'm telling you. So I mean, I would like that list of everything that you've said over the time that is reimbursable.

So okay. Maybe I don't understand. I think because I think I provided what you've asked for. Maybe I just haven't understood what you've asked for.

We can talk about it. Yeah, because I mean, I have that.

Okay, I think I have delivered it. But I'll make sure because we it's it's Yeah, it's taken it from that $12.7 million. It's all apportioned out. So for instance, tonight, you're being asked to consider a Ventura County behavioral health case manager. 50% of that is being borne by the ERF grant. So that's an example of it. The help of Ojai case managers, that's an example of it. Really, right now, the only things that we're paying for from the ERF grant are the case managers, dignity moves, and then there's money set aside for future operating. Other things like security, you know, the running of OTT, that's being borne from the general fund.

Mm-hmm.

I wanted to get more clarification on the general fund reserve percentage calculations and how we or why we are now excluding one-time items from general fund expenditures and how that really does affect how we're looking at reserve policy, et cetera. So why did that come into being and how does it really affect what we're looking at and what's the difference between what we looked at last year and what we're looking at last year's budget and this year's budget, so yeah.

So I don't, I mean, I can have Brenda help me with this one. I don't necessarily understand what Clay is getting at with that because we haven't made any type of deliberate shift that I'm aware of. It's always been based upon unless there's something I'm forgetting. But if this is all about the $1 million that we have earmarked, maybe that's what he's getting at. You know, what's your interpretation of that?

Well, we could ask. I mean, I know that it's, but it is something, okay.

We have not made any change, I mean, Ms. Cho, is there something I'm not aware of or I'm forgetting?

The fund balance policy states that the minimum fund balance would be 100% of the prior year's general operating expenditures. Operating would be the day-to-day normal cost of city services and operations?

I think he takes exception. He wants to include some things in operating that we consider one-time expenditures. I think this is what he's hammered a few times. It's his opinion. We have a different opinion. We consider some things one-time, and he considers them to be ongoing. I'll give you an example. You may remember the last time we talked about the cost set aside for the resource inventory for the HPC. We consider that to be a one-time cost. That's not an ongoing cost. We did agree with them. We did include the fee study in that. There was another item I'm forgetting about that we did not agree was an ongoing cost. Can you remember off the top of your head?

It was the fee study that we removed as a one-time cost.

Right, because it was only those two things? Okay.

I think he's not speaking, what I understand, he's not speaking about particular instances. He's talking about the way that you actually do the calculations.

And that hasn't changed, so I don't really understand what that question is.

So you're saying that the one-time expenditures have never been included?

I've been here since 2024. And from the time that I've been here, we're basing this upon the expenditures from the prior year. And that's how we base the reserve policy.

And not one-time expenditures have never been included.

I'm looking at the 24 budget right now.

I mean, I just want clarification.

But also, I would tell you, we've made a major shift in our finance team from 24 to now. It's night and day different. So there could have been some things in that budget right when I was coming on board that I was not completely aware of. But it's always been the understanding that you're basing it on expenditures from prior year, because the thought is,

No, I understand what you're saying, but what we're talking about here is a change in the way we do calculations. And you're saying that as you understand it, although you may not know.

There's been no direction provided by me to change the calculation, nor have I been made aware of any type of change that the finance team is doing.

But it's possible that there has been because we have a new finance team. Highly unlikely. Well, we don't even have an audited budget. So, I mean, when we say... Well, hold on, hold on.

So we're just, okay, so we're waiting for last year's numbers to be, the audit to conclude, right? And we've been in this catch-up mode because of staff shortings, but we're getting there. But what you'll remember last year when we were in a similar situation, when we finally did get the numbers in, they weren't much different than what we projected.

Yeah, I'm just saying that there have been things to say that, you know, as far as you know, and this is what I'm hearing. So you tell me if I'm hearing this incorrectly. As far as you know, it hasn't come from you. And as far as you know, there hasn't been a change in how we calculate that. We have never put in one-time costs is what you're saying.

Yeah, because it wouldn't make sense.

OK, and Clay's saying that's not the case. So I need to get into some clarification with, if it is the case or it isn't the case, or if it does change the calculations, then it's worth knowing if it occurred or not. And so that's where I have to delve a little bit more. I have to delve more deeply into, did this change from one year to another? And did it, in fact, affect calculations? We can look at that.

I mean, you know, but I can tell you, yeah.

Well, if I might say, it seems to me it's up to the council, actually, to say if we don't want to do that, we don't have to do it.

Well, I think it's up to us to say I want to know if it did happen. Right. We have a member of the budget committee saying there has been a change in how you are doing calculations. And so for me to say, I mean, I don't think it's unreasonable for me to say I would like to understand that. I asked the city manager. He doesn't understand. Yeah, I don't understand where he's coming from. Yeah. So I think it's something for us to delve into. That's it. Because I do believe that if it is changing the reserve percentages or something, then it's worth knowing. And I think, to your point, there has been a lot of change in the finance department. It's quite possible that procedures or how calculations are done, what's included, Once again, usually these things are black and white, but there's always interpretation.

But just speaking of black and white, so the important thing is knowing that you've got around $21 million on hand. Your expenditures each year are around less than $18 million. So you've got... more than, and you have no debt.

And I appreciate that perspective, but that's not an accountant's perspective. It's not, it's not. And I appreciate it, because that's my perspective, but I also, I have to, as a fiduciary responsibility to understand.

But the suggestion that we're somehow cooking the books is absurd.

No, I'm not saying we're cooking the books, but if we're changing policy, we have to have done that deliberately, or we have to know that it happened deliberately. Not deliberately, that's all I'm saying.

We'll meet with him, and we'll hear him out, and we'll come back to you.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Thanks. Cool.

Well, I move that we accept the revised 2026-27 proposed budget.

I'll second.

All right.

And Mayor? Yes? Would that include adopting all the resolutions recommended? Oh, geez.

Well, we do need... Okay. That should only be the first resolution. Oh, yes, okay. Or sorry, the resolution adopting the budget.

Okay, and then I would add the GAN appropriation limit.

We also need for part five of the recommendation on the resolution amending the salary schedule. Did your presentation address that? Okay, just making sure. It's been a long night.

No, no, yeah, no, it's not that. I did not say that in my motion, but I'm prepared to.

If you agree, I will have it as reported.

What's that?

If you agree to the city attorney, I will have it as reported.

I do agree. But I need a second on the agreement.

I'll second.

Okay.

Ready, Mayor? Yes. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem Meng?

No.

Council Member Rule?

Abstain.

Council Member Lange? We will have a budget.

I'm sorry?

Yeah, we'll need three.

The majority. You have a quorum.

You have to have three.

For the budget, you need three? For finance or just generally? I thought it was a majority.

There's four of us here, so two won't cut it.

Sorry. Because we have four council members present, unless the abstention is due to a recusal, then we need a majority vote to pass the budget because there are four council members, which is three.

Okay, then I will change my vote to yes, but I'm not happy about it.

Mayor Gilman. Yes.

Motion passed. Okay. I appreciate the movement there.

I thought it was... Understood.

Okay. Okay. Well, there shouldn't have been many surprises here. We've seen this a few times now. Okay, 954, zone change. Item number 13.

I have one question. So we do have someone from Tripepe Smith here for our social media policy. I think we have the applicant as well for the zone change.

Okay, okay, all right. Let's do the tiniest check-in. What can we not do tonight and what must we do tonight?

I definitely would recommend that you do the zone change. You've got two people sitting in the audience that are eagerly awaiting that. Right. We.

Speed.

Oh, geez. Well, I'm going to say I don't like not doing the behavioral health contract, but we can, we can, I can.

Could we do another meeting next Tuesday? Maybe. Hold on one moment, guys.

Give me one moment.

Give me one moment. All I might suggest is my thought is on the zone change, we have somebody ready to alter their business, and they've been here. So let's squeeze that one.

I can hang. I can definitely hang. It's good.

I want to talk to Councilmember Whitman. The short answer is yes, we can finish things up on Tuesday. I would love to do it earlier in the day if we could. I don't know if Councilmember Whitman can do that, but I'll check with him. If there's any appetite for a daytime meeting, that would really help, but I'll check with them.

Okay. We have that groundbreaking on that same day.

Yeah, we have the groundbreaking.

Just pointing that out.

We do.

Yeah. Okay, well.

I think we can, we'll figure something out. I understand, like, it's, we'll, let's just do the zone change, and maybe the social media policy, because Buffy Smith has sat here the whole time. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay. Okay.

All right. No speed hump. Here we go. Thank you, Lindy. All right. Item 13.

Okay. Thank you, Mayor and Councilmembers. So this project is located at 1124 Maricopa Highway and it is a request for a zone change from business professional to commercial. So on June 3rd, 2026, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the zone change requested by the property and business owner. This is to allow the request for the zone change is to allow for sale of alcohol and to bring an existing gas station associated convenience store use into conformance regarding the zone land use designation. Oh. Sorry.

I'm telling them now.

I'LL KEEP TALKING. SO THERE ARE NO EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS PROPOSED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. AND THE GAS STATION IS KNOWN AS OR IS CALLED OHI GAS. SO PURSUANT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE COMMERCIAL AND MANUFACTURING DISTRICT LAND USES AND PERMIT Service stations, including gas stations, are not permitted in the business professional zone. However, they are permitted in the commercial zone, C1. And, excuse me, they're permitted in the C1 zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit. So due to a previous non-conformance of this gas station, in 1996 the property owner requested and received Planning Commission approval of a conditional use permit to operate the existing gas station. So there's not a question about that. So also pursuant to the municipal code section that's called conditional use permits run with the land, this conditional use permit runs with the land. So again, as I just said, it's not up to question. So the reason for the request, again, is for the alcohol use and to make right the existing convenience store use. So the sale of alcohol is not permitted in the BP zone. However, it is allowed in the C-1 zone. The convenience store is also allowed in the C-1 zone. So correcting the zone or changing the zone from business professional to commercial would correct the noncompliance of the existing convenience store and would allow for the sale of alcohol. There are two additional gas stations within the city limits. Both of these gas stations are located in the C-1 zone. They both include convenience stores and they both sell beer and wine by right. This information is pertinent because the owner is trying to stay competitive within the city of Ojai. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED ON A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE BETWEEN MEDICAL OFFICES AND A STATE TRANSPORTATION STORAGE AREA OR STORAGE YARD. IT'S DIRECTLY ACROSS HIGHWAY 33 FROM A SHOPPING CENTER. THAT INCLUDES AVON'S SHOPPING CENTER AS THE ANCHOR AND THEN ALSO ATTACHED RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS, RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND RESTAURANT TENANTS. um the surrounding land uses are relevant because they indicate a diverse and heavily commercial prime area area prime for commercial zone designation the planning commission was able to support the zone change and recommend approval due to being able to make the findings included in your draft resolution this evening A zone change will make the currently non-conforming convenience store and the proposed sale of alcohol, as I already said, conforming uses. If this is not approved tonight, the existing convenience store will remain non-conforming and no expansion would be permitted, including the sale of beer and wine. Please note, as previously indicated, the business owner is also the property owner and he's seeking the change of zone to be in compliance with the municipal code and include the sale of beer and wine to be in a competitive market with the existing gas stations in the city. INCLUDED IN THE FINDINGS REQUIRED TO BE MADE THAT ARE IN YOUR DRAFT RESOLUTION ARE THAT THE ZONE CHANGE WOULD BRING THE EXISTING GAS STATION AND RELATED STORE INTO CONFORMANCE AND THE PROPOSED ZONE COMPLIES WITH THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN CLASSIFICATION WHICH IS GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION COMPLIES WITH THE BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL AS WELL AS GENERAL COMMERCIAL. And with that, we do have the applicant here. I'm sorry I talked so fast. It's probably because it's late. It's not just that I'm from New Jersey, but also if you have questions of me.

Any questions? I have no public comments on this. Anybody online? And no raised hands, Mayor.

I'm going to make a motion.

Yeah, I fully support it as well. Let's jump right in here. Yeah, I'm going to make a motion that we approve the zone change from business professional to commercial, and that we bring everything into conformance. Anything else I need to do here? Conformance regarding the zone designation, and that's it.

I'll second. I agree. Mm-hmm. I think we're ready.

OK. City Attorney Burgess, if I was to say, as recommended here?

That is correct.

That is correct. Thank you. All right. Council Member Lange?

Yes.

Council Member Rule? Yes. Mayor Gilman? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem May? Yes. Motion passed. Thanks, fellas.

Thank you. Congratulations. Yes. Go forth and prosper. Media policy.

Yes, we are two members of our ad hoc committee here, as well as Trepeffy Smith. Do we have Kendall still here, too? Is she gone? There's Kendall. Okay, great. Norma has a brief presentation.

Understood.

So we're going to skip everything else, and we're going right to 17.

I'm going to try to schedule a follow-up. We'll talk about this afterwards.

Okay. All right. Thanks for hanging out.

Oh my gosh, my pleasure. Thank you guys for accommodating me tonight. Really appreciate you. All right. Good evening, Mayor and members of City Council. I'm Kendall Lowry. It's great to meet you all. And tonight I'm presenting the city's updated social media policy for your formal review and hopeful adoption. As our digital engagement has grown over the past year or so, it's become clear that we need a modernized, legally sound framework. This policy ensures our public channels remain safe, respectful, and transparent, while strictly upholding the First Amendment rights of our residents and complying with state record laws. Oh, and is there a clicker up here?

There sure is, Kendall, and I could tell.

But we're having some difficulty with our presentation. Just give us a second here. What James and Christian loaded, I think we have some type of system issue.

I can be patient.

Yeah, why don't you wait a second and see if we can get this thing to load.

There we go. Cool. We got it. All right, beautiful. Thanks.

Okay, so our current challenge is audience expansion without guidelines. As you can see from some of these numbers up here, the City of Ojai social media profiles have evolved into our primary high traffic digital platforms. We actively monitor these channels, but a recent post for our pride flag raising ceremony served as an operational stress test. It drew hundreds of rapid interactions and exposed critical vulnerability. Our hands are tied. Without council-approved operating rules, staff lacks the formal legal authority to take action and moderate clear safety violations, meaning civil community dialogue is easily sidelined by extreme speech. And so we're proposing the following solution. The Social Media Policy and Community Code of Conduct, co-drafted by the city manager's office, the city attorneys, and Tripeppe Smith. By designating our accounts as a limited public forum, we create a legal shield. It allows us to strictly regulate the manner of speech, like stopping threats or discrimination, without ever restricting someone's First Amendment right to express their opinion. When it comes to hiding comments, staff won't act on a whim. We have a strict objective checklist. Content is only hidden if it contains direct threats to public safety, explicit material, targeted discrimination against protected classes, commercial spam, or interferes with police work. Blocking a user is an absolute last resort. We only use this action when an individual repeatedly violates our community code of conduct, and it is always handled in strict accordance with the law. Finally, to ensure total transparency, we never just hit delete and walk away. Section six of the policy mandates that before any comment is hidden or deleted or user blocked, it is fully preserved and logged in our official moderation log to ensure 100% compliance with the California Public Records Act. Let's look directly at that pride flag post case study. The thread received over 202 comments and perfectly illustrated our current limitations. We received standard politically adversarial criticism of the flag raising and under this policy that criticism is protected expression and must stay up. However, the thread also accumulated explicit safety violations, including some comments that you can see on the screen like torch it and flag burning, I'm in. Because we currently lack an active policy, staff had no choice but to leave those property destruction threats live on a city page. This case study proves why staff needs objective council approved legal boundaries to protect free speech while filtering out actual safety risks. We want to reinforce that legal safeguards are embedded in this document. First, viewpoint neutrality is absolute. We cannot hide comments simply because they're harsh, angry, or highly critical of our city decisions. Second, to comply with state law, the policy subjects all interactions to the California Public Records Act. Third, it requires all official accounts to have a pre-approved archiving plan. To guarantee complete transparency, any comment hidden or removed or any user blocked by staff must be logged in an official, auditable moderation log. And you can see an example of that moderation log in one of the appendices. And so we're proposing this path forward over the next 60 to 90 days. We recommend a simple four-step path to secure our channels. First, we ask that the council adopt the policy tonight. Second, we'll publish and pin a post notifying the public of the Community Code of Conduct directly to our social media pages so our guidelines are clear to the public upfront. Third, we'll implement the authorized user acknowledgement to train staff to uniformly separate protected criticism from safety threats. And fourth, we'll lock down security across all of our accounts by centralizing account credentials and requiring multi-factor authentication across all of our official channels. And I think that brings us to the end of my presentation. So I'm open to any questions y'all may have.

I know there's two things that we're talking about tonight. This is the first one, and it seemed perfectly clear and absolutely needed, and that your example was exactly the right one to bring up. So most of us were very surprised by the comments.

So I had just one question. So when we're talking about prohibited content, we're primarily talking about the comments, correctly, about things from the public coming to us. OK. That's correct. And the reason why I ask that is because under the prohibited content, there's solicitation of commerce, including advertising of businesses. And one of the things that we haven't discussed or it hasn't been a part of, but if there was ever collaboration with the chamber for example I would want to make sure that we could profile businesses and that that would still fall fall within our our policy if the shame if we did collaborate with the chamber or I mean it's something like that so yes of course yeah that's a that's a very reasonable concern and that limitation is mostly regarding commercial spam damn exactly I just wanted to clarify that definitely appreciate that clarification

So under five, also under prohibited content, defamation or malicious falsehoods. How do we deal with that? Because we know there's the tension between the First Amendment right, and then we know that it's malicious, and we know it's not true. But yet we also know that, and I'm assuming this is in comments, correct? I mean, we also know that that, yes, so there's that tension. And how do we negotiate that? And is there a process by which we can, for instance, put in a help ticket that says, this is malicious and false, and we think it should come down? Or how do we work that?

That's an interesting point, if I could jump in. I think that's a great idea, using my OHI for things like that. And James can hear me. When I look at the menu, I don't think it has anything like that right now. But of course, it doesn't, because we didn't have this policy until potentially tonight. But I think that's logical that people flag us through my OHI. It can go into Norma. And then we also would want to talk with the ad hoc committee, hey, this is what If it's touchy, I think we're gonna always involve our city attorney, obviously. We'll probably involve her regardless on those types of things, just to err on the side of appropriateness.

And we should, we should err on the side of First Amendment.

But I think it's a great idea that you bring up, you know, and it could, sorry to step on you, we could let people know we've adopted this policy. I'm freestyling a little bit here, but make sure that the public would be aware of, hey, if you see something that seems like it's inconsistent with the policy, go to my OHI, enter that, and it'll be reviewed. Does that sound reasonable?

It does. And the one thing I would note on a slightly, like one thing I'm noticing as we're having this discussion, the content guidelines section of the policy, and so I'm wondering if this may need a little bit of a tweak. For purposes of the prohibited content section, it does say that, like this applies to postings and comments made by authorized users. So I'm wondering, we need to tweak that to make sure that that's expanded to apply not only to authorized users, which are city employees and city contractors, but also comments from the general public.

So I'm just thinking of that. Good catch.

One other question. Is there like a list of words? Have you ever done a policy where there's a list of words that are flagged or anything like that?

Yes. I haven't worked directly on a policy that has flagged specific words, but I have worked with cities who have prohibited certain words from appearing in comment sections at all. That's an ability that's available across different social platforms. That would be something that we could incorporate into our moderation process.

I would like that. That way...

We could bring that to the committee. You guys could look at that. And then we would bring this back on a consent calendar type thing. Like, hey, I would see this coming back often. It's going to have to evolve. With things that people notice that we need to add. If the committee is willing to do that, we would love that.

Yeah. Great. I think this is very needed and exciting.

I know it is.

So Trepeffy Smith, we are talking about, this is going to sound nerdy, but we do want a post that talks about how we've adopted this and we want, I'm serious. And then it gets into like a loop. It's just looping back and forth. We want people to know about it because we want it to self-release and we want to make sure that the MyOHI app is tweaked and so this will all work together. So it sounds nerdy, but we put that on the list, please.

Yes.

So I would move that we adopt the updated City of Ojai social media policy.

I'll second it. With the change to section four. Oh, yeah, thank you. To read postings and comments made on city social media sites.

Did we ask for public comment? Oh, was there anybody online?

Sorry. Nobody has a raised hand online. I think I thank you.

And also the Be With Policy, the calendar, Be With Policy calendar is also on that item.

Yes, we didn't talk about that yet. But let's do it.

Yeah, so before you is also the Be With calendar policy and we want to instate a policy so that everything is transparent and equitable for everybody that posts something and gets approved. So we want to ensure also that that's posted and that anything that is submitted is able to be approved with these guidelines.

Yeah, that sounds good. Great. Then I would include also the Be With community calendar policy.

I'll second it.

Okay.

Roll call. Yes, thanks. Mayor Pro Tem Meng. Yes. Council Member Rule. Yes. Mayor Gilman. Yes. Council Member Lange.

Yes.

Motion passes. Thank you so much.

Thanks for being here.

Yeah, my pleasure.

Looking forward to the work.

Yeah, great to meet you guys.

Cool, guys. There were tons of meetings and there's tons going on, but

Let's split.

Wes and I will communicate about a meeting next Tuesday, potentially. I'm going to bug Kim and Leslie really quickly before you walk out the door. Thanks, guys. Meeting adjourned.