city manager are we ready to roll mayor? I think we are great good evening and
welcome to tonight's April 21st regular meeting of the Orinda City Council the
The first thing we'll do is do our call to order, okay?
And then note for the record that all council members
are present except council member Riley
who has an excused absence this evening.
Thank you, and we will have the Pledge of Allegiance
if you can please stand.
I pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands,
one nation, under God, indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all.
will now move to adopt the
agenda. And before we do, I
would like to move that we
move the council member and
city manager reports after
public forum and before
consent calendar. Unless
anybody would like to keep
it the way it is. Do I have
a second? I'll second it.
All in favor. Hi. Hi. Great.
And with that, we have an
The first is to recognize Arinda Action Day of Community Service on April 25th and City Clerk, I apologize, I didn't grab my copy of the proclamation off the printer. Do you have one?
I don't normally read proclamations in full and this was a long one, but in honor of Earth Month, Arinda has done Arinda Action Day for quite a number of years now.
It's spearheaded by the Arinda Community Foundation, but they bring in quite a few groups from the community.
And I will read the where as listing the groups
Whereas numerous community groups will play an important role in the success of the event this year including but not limited to
The Arinda Community Foundation Arinda Garden Club Arinda women's Club girl scouts boy scouts who I think are just called the scouts
Friends of Arinda creeks Arinda Rotary Arinda Teen Advisory Council and Moraga Church of Latter-day Saints
And many other dedicated volunteers and organizations, and then it goes on to specifically call out the mindful littles
Who in connection with the Teen Advisory Council is going to do an Earth care carnival in conjunction with Arinda action day?
so
This goes on to proclaim
Saturday the 25th as Arinda action day, and I look forward to seeing several of you out in the community
Doing our part to make it
Cleaner and more beautiful even more beautiful
Item D2 recognizes the month of April as Arab American Heritage Month.
And here in Arinda, we always try to take a moment to recognize some of these groups,
whether it's a national recognition, but the people in our community who specifically,
you know, make it up, contribute, and are part of celebrating some of the traditions
of our Arab Americans.
Were there any comments on either of those items?
We didn't have anyone to speak on them, did you?
Okay, then we have a library update
as our third item for the good of the city
from Michael Beller, the Arinda Library Manager.
Welcome, Michael.
Well, to begin with, in honor of National Poetry Month,
which April also is, a poem by Jack Kretlutsky,
I met a dragon face-to-face the year when I was 10.
I took a trip to outer space.
I braved a pirate's den.
I wrestled with a wicked troll and fought a great white shark.
I trailed a rabbit down a hole.
I hunted for a snark.
I stowed aboard a submarine.
I opened magic doors.
I traveled in a time machine and searched for dinosaurs.
I climbed upon a giant's head.
I found a pot of gold.
I did all this in books I read when I was 10 years old.
Thank you for that.
Well, I'll introduce myself.
Good evening, Mayor Iverson, members of the council,
and community members.
Thank you for your patience with me
and my love of rhyme and poetry.
My name is Michael Beller.
I am the manager of the Arendelle Library,
and I am one of your librarians.
Please, all of you, consider me your personal librarian.
Truth is all the library staff would like to be considered your personal librarian, but I'm the one that's here tonight.
As this week is also National Library Week, I'm here to offer some evidence that National Library Week is in fact more than a cleverly branded holiday.
Tonight I'll share what the Contra Costa Library system has accomplished over the past year and how Arinda has played an important role in that success.
The Contra Costa County Library System was founded in 1913.
To date, it includes 26 branches,
plus one supporting juvenile hall,
and serves over 359,000 card holders.
That's a lot of people who know where the good books are.
Circulation.
One of the key metrics we follow is total circulation.
This includes books, magazines, state park passes,
energy efficiency toolkits, ukuleles, outdoor explorer packs,
Wi-Fi hotspots and more. Yes, we lend ukuleles, no, I will not be taking requests tonight.
I already took a chance with a poem. Total physical circulation rose nine percent this year,
reaching over 7.6 million checkouts. This is the entire library system, not just Arinda.
Our digital circulation is also growing and growing even faster. This includes ebooks,
audiobooks, e-magazines, music, movies, and television.
Yes, we do have streaming movies, we do have streaming TV.
Most of these come through Libby, Hoopla, and Canopy,
which means your library card now doubles
as a streaming service, a bookstore,
and a research assistance.
Digital circulation rose 39% this year
to just over 3 million, 3 million checkouts.
And it was right during COVID
where we topped a million and we were trumpeting about it.
Now we've gone three times over that.
Library visits, in-person visits are also up.
In-person visits are also up,
rising 10% to nearly 2.7 million visits.
It appears people are rediscovering something
we have always known.
Libraries are better when you're actually in them.
Virtual library visits slipped down,
although all of our digital circulation
up. This is just because most of our digital circulation. Now you don't have to go through
the library web space to start checking books out. For those interested in what people are
actually reading, our early readers, they're reading Should I Share My Ice Cream? by Mo
Willems. The answer is yes. Middle readers are reading The Ever, Ever Favorite Dogman,
The Scarlet Shredder by Dav Pilkey. Teens are reading A Good Girl's Guide to Murder,
a mystery by Holly Jackson. Adults are reading The Women by Kristin Hannah. So yes, from ice cream
dilemmas to murder mysteries, we have the full range covered.
The library system also has the Rolling Reader. It's a bookmobile. It's traveled over 6,000 miles
this year, 6,600. It's electric, serving nearly 12,000 people. It focuses especially on early
literacy bringing books directly to those just learning to read in vulnerable communities.
It's part library, part outreach, and part we will find you and we will give you a book.
We've added new digital services like PebbleGo for STEM learning and expanded access to the New
York Times. If you haven't noticed, if you have your New York Times subscription through the
library if anyone has questions about that please come visit me that that access has now expanded
but don't forget your library card also unlocks the wall street journal the economist the new
yorker test prep for sat and gre and other standardized tests language learning through
rosetta stone and mango live virtual tutoring from kindergarten through college there's a real person
on the other side of that screen and they are helpful. Kindergarten through college absolutely
free with your library card. In short if you're curious about something the library probably has
it and can support you learning it. Summer services. Summer can be a difficult time for
more vulnerable families when school meals are unavailable. Last summer Contra Costa County
Libraries provided nearly 14,000 meals to children.
This is when the schools are out.
Libraries step in.
Summertime is also when we run our summer reading program
for all ages throughout the county.
Last year, we had over 9,000 participants,
a 14% increase.
It turns out that when you combine books, prizes,
and a little bit of friendly competition, people show up.
Now, focusing on Arinda, specifically,
and are part of success in the library system.
With a population of about 19,000 people,
Arinda leads the county in percentage of residents
with library cards at nearly 50%
and also in youth participation with over 63%
of Arinda's five through 17-year-olds holding library cards.
In other words, if you live in Arinda, odds are good,
you're already visiting us.
Arinda patrons checked out 125,564 physical items this year.
That's about 6.6 items per resident within the city,
which I think we can all agree
is a respectable level of literacy ambition.
We also saw 121,467 digital checkouts.
And the important thing to be aware of here
is the digital checkouts.
The only numbers I'm able to pull
are from Libby by Overdrive.
That's a single e-book platform,
e-audio book platform that we have.
We also have Hoopla,
which is another ginormous e-book platform.
So this means the real number might be higher,
is probably higher, is likely much higher.
Hoopla is really good.
Again, if you ever have any questions,
Look for me, I'm happy to guide you through that process of setting it up.
Mysteriously higher.
We issued 1,021 new library cards this year.
That's 1,021 new people who now have access to everything I've just
described and with no late fees, we got rid of them, no late fees.
The Arendelle Library welcomed 131,700 visitors this year
through our doors.
That's every resident visiting about seven times.
Some of you are overachieving.
We have two meeting rooms in the branch
that are usable by the public up to twice per week,
up to two hours per time.
They were each used on average 20 times each week,
which is over 2,000 times per year.
They're used for school study sessions, remote meetings,
and even quiet reflection.
Beyond what we circulate, we also create space
for people to connect, learn, and show up for one another.
This past year, the Arenda Library hosted 183 programs,
from story times to lectures to special events.
On any given week, there's a very good chance
something interesting is happening,
and occasionally several things at once.
We also visited 21 school classrooms,
bringing the library directly to students
and making sure we meet them where they already are.
Our regular programs continue to anchor community life.
Tuesday, we have English as a Second Language programs
where language, learning, and community grow together.
Thursday, first Thursday of each month,
we have Imperfect Circles, a discussion group
that embraces thoughtful conversation
and the occasional unfinished thought.
And on Fourth Wednesdays, knitting and needle arts
where creativity thrives and projects
actually get finished sometimes.
And of course, story times every Tuesday and Wednesday
where early literacy begins and where we happily accept
that enthusiasm is louder than indoor voices.
None of this happens without the friends
of the Arenda Library.
They fund new technology, including monitors
in both of our meeting rooms, monitors for meetings,
meetings, author talks, and in fact presentation practice. Just thrown it out
there. Our seed library. We have a new seed library. It is very active. Summer
reading prizes, upholstery cleaning, special programs, extended library hours,
books, magazines, and digital materials. If you have ever waited for a book and
thought, I wish this line were shorter, the friends of the library are the reason
and it's not longer.
And if you're wondering what might be happening soon,
we do have some very exciting upcoming events.
On June 13th, in this very room,
we're gonna have the Etruscans,
presented by the distinguished curator of ancient art
from the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, my mom,
who is going to be presenting.
She has an exhibition coming to the Legion of Honor.
And so she will be presenting about that.
August 15, the Chinese in Napa Valley,
featuring a book talk, a documentary screening,
and a discussion with both the author and the filmmaker.
And summer reading, which is open for everybody
with prizes for everybody, begins in June.
Finally, we lost Sunday hours at the start of COVID.
And I am happy to report that library leadership is
planning their return, likely by the end of this year,
which means one more day each week to visit the library
and of course your favorite books and reading notes.
I'll bring more about that to City Council as I hear more.
And thank you all for your attention tonight.
Happy National Library Week.
As your librarian, I love questions.
If you have any questions, I am your librarian.
Your questions or I guess we'll do questions,
see if there's anybody from the public
and then we'll do maybe some comments.
Questions?
How many staff do we have at the Arenda Library?
That's a good question.
We have 10 regular staff,
and then we have roughly 10 library aides who are hourly,
and we pull them in from people who are interested
a lot from Merrimonti.
Great, thank you.
We like to think it's a good foundation
to learn good job skills.
I'll save mine for comments.
Do we have anybody from the public
who'd like to speak on this?
Seeing now, I'll just see if anybody from the council
had any comments on this matter before we wrap it up.
Please, yeah.
Thank you for a lovely presentation.
I just wanted to, I guess, make a couple of comments.
We are so appreciative of everything
that the Arinda Library and the friends of the library does.
It's a real jewel in Arinda.
And to the extent that we can,
I was really excited to hear about Sunday Hours coming back.
I think that I speak for all of us
and that if there's anything that we can do
to help with that, please don't hesitate to reach out,
at least for myself.
And then I just wanted to share,
when you were talking about the breadth
and diversity of programs,
I had this one amazing experience last year
in one of your meeting rooms that you talked about,
which was I'd just been in an arts council event
and I was being interviewed by a student journalist
in one of the meeting rooms,
which in itself was just such a lovely sort of way
that the library serves as a pillar point in our community
and a real community space.
And then we were overstaying our point of time
And it turned out, oh no, when we arrived,
it turned out the person before us was overstaying
and we just ended up going elsewhere
and we didn't want to end and kick her out
because she was an older adult
who was on a borrowed computer
and was communicating with a child in another country
speaking a different language.
And I thought it was just such a great example
of like how you had these amazing,
different, diverse experiences
all using that one community space.
So it's just my way of saying thank you.
You're always welcome to use my office for those interviews.
That's kick me, kick me out.
I'm happy to.
Thank you so much, Michael.
That was a beautiful update.
Your enthusiasm is always just fabulous.
It's just infectious and in a wonderful way.
And for those of us who have shared sitting up here
We know that there are not always that many things in
Arundel as wonderful as it is that people agree on and yet in all the years that I have lived here
Which is this point is getting very close to 40 is I at the common
Denominator that people do love in this community is the library and the library as as
council member Malcani said is just a gem of our community. So we're thrilled that you're the
current steward of it. And so happy to hear that, you know, it is such a thriving element to our
residents and the surrounding community. So thank you. Thank you. And thank you so much for being
so adaptive and creating all the digital resources for the community, as well as the in-person
and resources, I think it's just wonderful
that people can access so many books
in so many different ways and other materials,
and a great presentation,
and thank you for coming tonight.
Thank you.
Well, you guys have covered most of my comments.
I would just mention something that I would love to see
even more of, because it really is,
I mean, remember there was a moment in time
where people thought that libraries
were gonna be obsolete,
and I just, I really, really love both the books,
getting digital, but also the place becoming
such an important third space.
And for people who are working age, especially parents
who can't work a full day or necessarily commute,
I would love to see us continue to think
about how to be welcoming to people
who are working maybe a half day.
They need that third space.
Maybe they're entrepreneurs.
They want to get out of the house.
And so whether it's phone booths or looking for other ways
to use conference room type space.
That's the one group that I think
is a little bit underserved.
And I suspect there are even more people who could enjoy it
as we continue to look at that.
But I always give us updates in the mayor's liaison meetings.
And I just get such joy that I always
look forward to doing this at the city council.
So thank you.
Thank you very much.
I love questions.
If anyone ever has questions, please feel free to come up
and ask questions.
and yes, we want to make the library as open
and as usable for everyone as we possibly can.
Thank you.
With that, we'll turn to public forum.
I do have two speaker cards,
and then anybody else who would like to speak,
please feel free to come on up after that.
The public forum is the point of the meeting
where people can come up and speak about any item
within the jurisdiction of the city
that's not on the agenda,
or a speaker can address the council on an item
listed on the agenda if that speaker will not be present when the agenda item
is taken up. We do ask that people limit their comments to three minutes and just
note that we cannot make any comments on public forum items. With that, Michelle
Hendrickson from the farmers market and I've also got Stacey de Chassier and I
hope I'm pronouncing that right. If you guys care which order you speak in, it
looks like you have the same topic so please come on up. Thank you mayor. Good evening mayor
and council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I'd also like to extend my
appreciation to the city manager Linda Smith, Todd Trimble, and Cole Hayslip for their support and
assistance with our contract for the season ahead. And the season is well on its way. Despite the free
water we're getting today and a couple Saturdays ago this spring has been really warm and that
heat has already started to yield a bounty of apricots and cherries which you will see popping
up the market as soon as this week and that's about four weeks early so we're pretty excited
i ate my first apricot over the weekend and uh you know oranges are great but we're ready for the
stone fruit this year marks this year the market celebrates 29 years of serving irinda for nearly
three decades, it's been a place where residents connect with local farmers, small businesses,
and each other, supporting not just access to fresh food, but also a strong sense of
community every Saturday morning. It's been especially meaningful to me to watch families
grow over the years with Saturday mornings becoming a cherished market ritual. At the
same time, it's exciting to welcome new young families and see their enthusiasm for the
weekly scavenger hunt and ever-changing kids activities. The market's very
excited and proud to once again support Orinda Action Day coming up held at the
same time and nearby the farmers market. We donate fruit to that every year to
support those volunteers that are out there doing their good turn. I'd also
like to note that the market will be closed for the 4th of July to allow
for the parade. So I think it's like every seven years 4th of July lands on a
a Saturday, but we're also excited to participate in the parade ourselves, so look for us handing
out seeds for planting. We're proud to continue this tradition and look forward to another vibrant
season in Orinda and thank you for your continued support. Thank you very much, Michelle.
Good evening Mayor and Council members, I'm Michelle Henrickson, I'm the Market Manager for
the Saturday Orinda Market. As my Director mentioned, the market has become a space where
a strong sense of community continues to grow. Neighbors bump into one another while picking up
Saturday morning smoothies for their kids enjoying a cup of coffee for themselves.
We're also seeing more former residents return to the area to raise their families, rekindling
old friendships and building new connections among their children, which has been really
cute.
The market also continues to remain committed to supporting some of our most vulnerable
community members, particularly seniors, as we proudly accept benefits to the Federal
Supplement Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as SNAP or EBT.
Beyond that, we help stretch those dollars
by matching up to $10, dollar for dollar,
increasing access to healthy fresh fruits and vegetables.
This is made possible through our market match program,
which is funded by local donations and grant support.
Around this time last year,
I believe it was March 18th of last year,
I stood before you to share
that our market match funds were running low,
and we were uncertain how long we could sustain the program.
In response, the Orinda Rotary Club generously stepped in,
providing critical funding that allowed us to continue
serving low income and food insecure individuals
with greater access to fresh fruits and vegetables.
I want to again express our sincere gratitude
to the Rotary Club for their support.
As I know, Michael's a local Rotary
and if he's still here.
In addition to their contribution,
we've recently received grant funding
through the Office of District 2 Supervisor
Candace Anderson's Office to further strengthen
and sustain our market match program.
Thanks to their support, starting this Saturday,
we'll be able to increase our match to $15,
expanding access, again, to fresh fruits and vegetables.
Being able to support our local low-income seniors in this way
has only strengthened our community
and continues to reinforce their role as a true community hub.
It's been really special to have the seniors come
into our market space and feel like they're seen.
We had a local Chinese woman from one of the development
share red envelopes with children in the market
the day of Chinese New Year, which was really special.
More recently, we had a local parent share with us
and educate us on Persian New Year.
So we were able to celebrate and with the kids' activity
to share throughout the market.
So I just come here, and I just want
to share how beautiful the market has
become at building community.
And just to kind of a shout out to Michael.
Michael and I are both working on a schedule
for the Orinda market so we can start bringing
the mobile library into the market
so children can come get story time
and books in the market along with their smoothie
and parents can of course enjoy their cup of coffee
for a good 15 minutes.
So thank you again and I hope to continue
working with Orinda, thank you.
Thank you very much.
Were there any questions for the speakers?
I know we can't make comments, but any questions?
Okay great, thank you both for taking the time
to come and provide that update.
With that, we will go to council member
and city manager reports.
Are there any reports from the council?
Yeah, why don't we go, we'll go outside in.
Okay, so we had two meetings recently.
One was the transportation safety
advisory committee meeting.
And they have started providing reports
from the police department on citations
and accidents and an update on the activities
going on in Arinda and now they're keeping track of where accidents are
occurring so they can better identify dangerous intersections which I think is
really important. Citations are up which I think is really important for more
enforcement. Last month there was a special enforcement day so that was very
effective in the community. So it was great to hear what's going on and the
efforts that are being made to make Arinda slow down and be safer and to
also work towards really addressing whatever issues
are at intersections where we're having repeat problems.
And so keeping the information is the first step
towards figuring out how we can address
those sort of more dangerous spots.
So that was a great meeting and very much appreciate
the volunteers who come and do the work at these committee
meetings.
And then I had the opportunity to meet
with Eloise, whose last name I'm forgetting,
Satello, who is the new director of seniors around town.
And she gave me an update on the number
of rides and the work that they're doing.
Their ridership is down just slightly
because it seems they have fewer drivers right now.
And so it's always a challenge for seniors around town
to recruit drivers.
So if anybody knows someone who would
like to drive for our community seniors, that would be great.
Most of the rides are to medical appointments,
but also to the grocery store and other necessities.
Some rides are one-way, and some rides are round trip,
depending on what type of service they're providing.
But in general, if I could see it,
I could tell you how many rides are being provided each month.
It looks like in January, there were 24 riders served,
And there were 47 drivers.
So the numbers are still small, but it's
meaningful to the people who are living alone
and can't drive themselves.
So it's a great, great service.
And I asked her if she would like
to come and present to the council the work
that they're doing.
I also spoke to her about working on issues of fire safety
and evacuation for those isolated seniors.
And I put her in touch with Mark Evans at FISMO
to see if they could coordinate with regard
to knowledge of where the isolated seniors are living and also maybe some sort of onboarding
for the seniors around town, staff helping people come up with an evacuation plan that
they could work through when they're actually being onboarded for services. So working towards
that. So it's good.
I'll start and I'll let Councilmember Makani fill in additional things I may have forgotten.
We had a meeting this past last week, our regular coordination two by two with M.O.F.D.
And we had everyone there.
So we had M.O.F.D. directors, Craig Jorgens and Steve Danziger.
And Chief Isaacs was there along with our city manager and several staff.
So we got an update from the chief on work to maintain and preserve the north window
fuel break, an update on a number of prescribed burns that they're doing, again, as preventative
fire prevention measures.
We briefed the meeting on our efforts moving forward with our contract with FISMO in terms
of our incentive program and then the work that they're doing for vegetation management.
that was of you know keen interest to everyone and we talked a little bit
about the Lafayette reservoir area and the and got the chief's perspective on
that's an area that in his opinion it hasn't had enough work done for fuel
breaks and we brought that up as a very key topic for our partnership with
Lafayette and Moraga in terms of trying to work together to figure out what
could what could help that situation. Do we need to advocate for more funding? Do
we need to lobby East Bay Mudd higher to make that a higher priority? So that was
something that I think we would like to make sure we can follow up on. So and what
What am I forgetting, Councilmember Mahani?
Oh, and before, I'll let you finish that.
And then I, well, I do have one other thing
that I had already announced and predicted,
but the full board at CCTA did approve
the smart signals going forward.
So, staff at CCTA is working on that RFP,
and that work should be eminently proceeding.
No, I think we covered a lot.
I think you summarized it really well, Vice Mayor.
We're just gonna add a couple little things
that folks might be interested in.
In terms of the group mitigation projects,
we did get an overview of sort of a lot of the,
in addition to the field break,
some of the other fire fuel burning.
They were doing some stuff on Wagner Ranch.
I think some of us in the public have gotten notices.
So when you get those notices,
know that you know this is M.O.F.D. at work which is good, they're at our next meeting or sometimes
soon we're going to hear more about the details which I think was going to be announced soon at
one of the M.O.F.D. board meetings in terms of where what areas of the city they were going to
be focusing on this next year in their inspections which is something that they do they usually sort
to announce to the public, hey, these are the areas of interest.
The chief did not have that list publicly available for us yet.
So we didn't hear it yet, but it's coming soon and check it with M.O.F.D. if you want
to know more.
But I recall he did say that it was areas that maybe hadn't been inspected recently.
So there may be more inspection notices and violations and more interest.
So if we hear about it, it's only because they're out covering other areas of the city.
We did a lot of sharing of sort of the different incentive programs and updates on who was
using what.
And one of the things because it came up before I just took some notes on this.
They had, they had, MOFD had put, it came up they put about 516K, 516,000 into a special
fund to do maintenance on field breaks, and then additional 50K for pile burns.
They were expecting that to last several years.
And then they put about, in addition to that, they have a half-time salary for someone else
who's focusing just on burns.
And then they had put about 500K into home hardening materials was an estimate that was
shared.
just wanted to share that because we sort of talked about it at a prior
meeting and then the other thing was it was a very brief update on zone zero
regulation because it didn't sound like the State Board of Forestry was gonna
come up with anything anytime soon unfortunately which was disappointing
but we did get an update on that. I'll have an update on that. There has been an
update. Some of the regulations have been drafted and there's a draft out now. So,
and surprisingly they're pretty good. People will be probably pleasantly surprised.
And then there was an upcoming fire station, a new office opening or an upcoming opening.
And then the other thing that was announced is both fire stations, 41 and 45, needed a lot of
work in terms of renovation so they were sort of budgeting for that.
Are there any other councilmember reports? I just had two very small things. I got to
do the Rotary State of the City presentation last week. It's all sort of a blur now. And
it's always a fun tradition here in Arinda. We also did the mayor's liaison meeting and
I believe the city manager will share anything news it worthy from that, but I was really
impressed to hear both the ousd and the Akalani school district really engaged on legislative
advocacy to raise the base of our school funding formula. I think they've they've seen an opportunity
in the state budget where there's a reason they might have a chance to get that changed.
they're they're gonna be trying to be as loud and visible and supported as we
can help them be to maybe change the what we always hear about how we're
always on the the worst funded district in the state so I was very very pleased
to hear that that's going to be an endeavor that's kicking off and with
that I'll turn it over to the city manager thank you mayor members of city
council just a couple quick updates Thursday nights and a Brenda start in
June. I just want to remind everybody where we're working to consolidate some
of our activities all on Thursday nights with a branded experience. There will be
something for everybody to enjoy food trucks, movies, concerts. You'll have a
great time. Come join us on Thursday nights. The Orinda Way newsletter has
been distributed to every household in Orinda, so if you haven't had a chance to
open that yet, please do take a read. We've got eight pages of quality
information for the community to know. We have learned that we've also been the
recipient of a TDA grant of $140,000 for a portion of the Camino Pablo Pathway
Rehabilitation Project. That's some funding that engineering helped to lead.
Thank you very much. The other announcement is the dog park fencing is
almost completely installed and we have a planned leash cutting on May 16th at
at 9.30 in the morning.
So we'll be happy to see members of the community
out there for the leash cutting.
Adjacent to Orinda Oaks Park Open Space,
speaking of which in June,
we are working with MOFD on a prescribed burn
for Orinda Oaks.
We'll date to be determined,
but we're working now to firm up a date this coming June.
I just mentioned to you that zone zero press release
came out, it came out on Friday.
I'm gonna hit send right now to forward it to you all
So you can see a copy of what's in there,
but it is far more relaxed
than what we had anticipated initially.
So really focused on home hardening
as being more important than the vegetation.
So it's a bit of a shift from where they started.
So happy to see that.
And I think, oh, just really quickly,
we did receive also communication from Bart
that ridership continues to show increases 10% year over year, so as we move towards
an expected effort on behalf of a citizen's group to help raise funds for BART at the
November general election, ridership is showing some increases.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Just a quick follow-up question about that.
Do we know what current ridership is in terms of proportional, what percentage of pre-COVID?
I do.
You do?
Yeah, from the board directors update at CCTA.
They are back up to March was their highest regular post-COVID month and they're back
up to over 200,000 a day.
That's still looking at about 50% of what the peak was pre-COVID.
They were running a lot at 400,000 a day pre-COVID,
but they're back up to over 200,000.
Thank you.
And I didn't do public comment
after the council member or city manager's report.
So just let me take a moment to see
if anybody would like to ask any,
have any comments before we move on.
Mayor, can I ask the city manager a quick question?
Please do.
Have we scheduled the tri-city meeting
that BART is going to present at?
And do we know when that is?
I believe it is a July meeting
and off the top of my head, I can't remember the date,
but I wanna say it's somewhere mid-July.
It's July 16th.
July 16th, and am I correct that Bart will be coming?
I believe there is a presentation from Bart.
So if the public is interested,
that would be a good meeting to look for.
Okay, thank you.
It'll be at St. Mary's College.
Great, thank you.
No, thank you for bringing that up.
And with that, we will move on to the consent calendar.
The consent calendar consists of items
that are voted on all with one motion.
Before we proceed with that,
ask if anybody wants to pull any items for discussion. Seeing none, I'll ask if we have
a motion to approve the consent calendar. I move we approve the consent calendar. Do
I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. With that, we have approved items F1 through
F5 on the consent calendar and that brings us to item G1, a public hearing introducing
the citywide objective design standards ordinance 26-03 implementing action 3E of the housing
element. And it looks like we've got Christine Thompson here to present. Welcome.
In at home. And we're working to get the, okay, the presentation up. So, yeah, and so
the citywide objective design standards, this is a public hearing as we're moving towards
need to know about the
objectives. The objective
standards adoption of the
objective design standards.
Did we just have a welcome a
background? Talk about state
housing law a bit a discussion
and then go through our
recommendation. So the
objective design standards.
The city put out an RFP. It's
been a project. I'm the
principal planner leading the
project. Selena is an
associate planner who's been
and so on. And, um, so little
background on objective design
standards, Um, the it's really
the city proposed, um,
developing these for
residential development. There's
a lot of streamlining, um, and
expediting of housing in the
state of California on that
objective design standards are
a key to, um. To making sure
development. So the project
timeline was actually
initiated in 2025 and April.
There was a research phase in
June 2025. The citywide ODS
draft was released. And then
we held to study sessions, one
with the Planning Commission,
one with this body, the city
Council on in September and
October of 2025. And here we
are in the spring of 2026.
And here we are in the spring of 2026,
looking at the city-wide ODS and potentially adopting it.
So early in the project, one of the first questions
was where does this apply?
What are the city-wide objective design standards
and how are those distinct from the downtown objective design
standards?
So just quickly looking at the map,
this is really focused where single family, multifamily
residential development will go and throughout the city itself.
So it does apply very specifically to to the zoning
districts, including the high density overlay, the senior
housing overlay, the residential medium density,
residential low density, RLV through RL6, open space, and rezone properties identified as RH12, RH40.
What does it apply to? A question we get a lot, it's residential development, single-family or
multi-family zoned lots. And a typical project might be a new infill single-family residential unit,
second single-family residential unit, or even a single-family residential lot on a lot created
by a lot split. So these are all the focus of SB 9 and we'll talk a little bit more about that.
But then there are also townhomes and multiplex, multifamily residential development
that require objective design standards. So it's a very variable, but it is all
residential development. So the individual projects are fairly variable.
So just a quick background on the state housing law. About 10 years ago, certain residential
projects through the state were identified as wanting really giving them streamlining
capabilities to have ministerial review. So design review was no longer applicable.
Only objective design standards may be applied and they were the sole basis upon which a
local agency could deny approval. So the project team in this context started looking very
specifically at the state legislation, and saying okay the some of the early
legislation SB 35 330 was aimed at multifamily two-thirds residential
configurations, but since then there had been SB 9450 which is which is more
single-family units and SB 684 SB 1123 and that is looking at small
subdivisions. And SB4 looks at religious and campus land, which
Erinda also has some of. Back in 2021, HCD came out with
guidance on objective design standards as all communities
throughout California, we're thinking how do we how do we
write up objective design standards? How does this work?
And so their guidance was that each community must tailor the
approach, and there's no universal method.
And that the focus is on facilitating housing creation,
so creating flexibility, but predictability is the aim.
Arinda itself, in the housing element,
identified objective design standards as action 3E.
And in that stated, that objective design standards
are to apply to all housing development projects,
which objective standards are required. So there's a dependency around the state laws
and the eligibility, and which projects that are residentially oriented use the objective
standards. So we'll keep talking about that. But for these particular projects, state law,
municipal code, and the citywide objective design standards become the three tools for housing
creation. So to move into the discussion, the citywide objective design standards document.
It was a draft at the study sessions. And now it is a public draft. It's refined since then.
And it was again, really that 2017, 2019, those first initial laws were the focus of
making sure that projects could be reviewed against these design standards.
So just to note, the study session in September 2025 was on the planning commission,
city council was in October, and each body was asked to identify priority topics. At that point,
there was a draft, and then it was a question of getting input and direction so as to improve that
draft. The planning commission, they identified that they wanted really to preserve the high
quality design that Arinda has today. Emphasize blending with the natural environment. Focus
on priority topics like colors and materials. Massing and variation being very critical
topics as well. Avoiding being overly specific, making it difficult for homeowners and applicants
to move through the process. And then also wanting, but yet wanting it to have a level
of detail for these projects and be a refined document. City Council, same thing was presented
with the draft and the comments that we received, the direction was really to take the draft
forward to really reflect the topography and the land of Arinda, the public streets, the
private streets mix, the topography. Talked a bit about how the materials are critical,
particularly with fire concerns and the fact that vegetation may have to be cut back in
certain areas.
Massing and proportions are very important, modulating the building forms so it really
fits in.
There was a discussion about architectural style and at that point it was decided to
use massing and other techniques and you'll see that represented as we talk about it more.
Making sure that parking was less prominent and then emphasizing on fitting into the natural
environment, so really making it of a Rinda.
So the document still has three major articles
that include design standards, site design standards,
building design standards, and subdivision design standards.
And then it also has an introduction and a definitions
and a measurement article.
So what has evolved since the draft?
That's why I'm going to go over the key components.
The attention to topography, adding language
incorporated to reflect the hillside context.
Natural features to be retained, cut slopes limited.
I'm really integrating that language directly
in so that an applicant has to follow that direction.
Developing the site materials, adding
a table of permanent fence and wall materials,
saying what's allowed, what's prohibited, being very clear
for applicants, clarifying the difference between temporary
and permanent, and then expanding colors,
and making generally understood color names.
So it's easy for an applicant.
In the landscape elements, adapting the palette
from the Wilder Design Review Handbook
and the Downtown Objective Design Standards,
and then allowing the plants from the table
and plants from the fire-savvy landscape,
both of those to be used by an applicant
as an objective standard.
And then also referencing the city's current plants
for a fire-savvy landscape and the disallowed vegetation list
to have really a comprehensive response to the landscape
standards.
The lot shape and the key were updated using,
so it's a combination of using example photos that typify
and give people a range of ideas about residential development
and building typologies.
And then having descriptive design elements,
having clear diagrams with lots and massing
that is similar to ARINDA.
And then referencing development standards,
making a clear distinction between design standards, which
are in the objective design standards,
and the development standards, which
are in the ARINDA municipal code,
or in sometimes in the state law.
making sure that parking and access,
your shielding or setback covered parking from public view.
And then also dealing with colors and materials
using generally understood colors,
also describing allowed and prohibited materials
by building parts and adding references
to the state fire marshal.
So there was some good close coordination with MOFD
and to make sure that that was vetted.
Building and articulation and masking,
we heard from both the Planning Commission
and the City Council that this was a critical,
important component, and so the methods,
there were a variety of methods.
Clarifying materials by type and color,
the additional requirements around where those
color and material changes happen on a facade.
Regulating entries by entry type,
emphasizing those small scale relationships.
And then setting roof form standards with minimums
for eaves, parapets, and dormers.
So getting into those building details.
There was also a section on large sites providing guidance for sites of three acres or more.
There aren't too many of those in Orlando, but there are a couple and those are the size
of sites that would incorporate streets and open spaces and lots and buildings.
And so there's a particular section for anyone who has that kind of project type.
And then there is another article that includes the applicable subdivision types.
So these subdivision standards are
based on the state law provisions of SB 9 450
that has lot splits and SB 684 and 1123
that has small subdivisions.
And the function of this is to tie it
to the building standards in the previous sections
of the documents so that if there is a lot split
and a small subdivision, that it's also
comprehensive with the building standards and the site design
standards, and then also making it consistent
with the current fire codes, including access standards.
So again, we did not have styles.
There are no architectural styles in this.
But instead, we used building design standards.
So specific standards around building forms
by type, facade design, building entries by type, and roof
forms.
So we did bring this forward.
And we've really been with the planning commission,
and we've been continuing to improve the document.
And so I'm just going to go through these very quickly.
But there are these very fine additions and changes that
are being made to be very clear, an added ministerial path,
not an alternative path, to clarify how an applicant could
move through this, making sure that the plant pallet is
organized and that the references are correct
in terms of the resources of other plant-savvy, fire-savvy
plant resources that applicants could go and look at.
Also use of very trying to be more clear
about the residential development terminology.
We know that there might be a multi-unit development
with single units in it.
That's sort of a level of complexity.
But the important thing is that this is really
for creating residential development,
facilitating housing.
And so just making it clear about all other residential
and multifamily residential is two really key components
of facilitating housing.
So we know that Sacramento keeps changing
and inevitably we'll have some more state housing laws.
So making sure that we can tie that to the webpage
and have those updates for applicants.
And then also a little more expansion
on the information around that particular lots,
trying to summarize them for applicants.
This is in the definition section.
So really a lot of cleanup to just try and make it
as easy to use and as clear to use,
and then also in terms of just perpetually
making corrections and updating.
So we went forward with the Planning Commission
on March in 2026, not last month,
and the Planning Commission recommended
that the City Council adopt the ordinance.
They did add a condition with modifications
to include additional clarity that determines
when the citywide objective design standards apply
and how they are used.
This is now language in the front of the cover
that describes a typical project and the typical process.
And then the clarifying updates,
which I just went through, but just to show them again.
So I did want to note that we continue to update
and improve the draft and that we did issue for the record
a late submittal packet that has been made available
to the council and available to the public.
And the changes really were to just update the draft
to the April 2026 date and then also to remove one
of the lines in the filing because that will be after
ordinance is adopted. So minor changes but for the record just enhancing clarity. So
today it's a public hearing and we are looking for the consideration of this recommendation
to take the following action to waive the full reading and introduce ordinance 2603
amend Title 17 of the Arendelle Municipal Code zoning and adopt the citywide objective
design standards. And then also to find that the ordinance is exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act. And just a quick forward next steps, the second meeting and
adoption is anticipated in the next available meeting. So hopefully that gives you a sense,
but we're definitely open for questions and we have the consultant in the room.
Thank you very much Christine. I'll save my comments for when we get to that part, but
my question is I'm assuming that this gets to be a living document and that we still
have, even after it's adopted and implemented, we still have the opportunity in the future
to amend it, should we desire?
Yes, you will. And this is one of the reasons that it is separate from the zoning code itself
and an independent booklet is so that there is the ability to look at it, to improve it,
to update it separate from updating zoning. Can I just clarify that? Sure. If you were
to want to update that, it would require an ordinance process because it is effectively
zoning because it's being adopted by reference into the zoning code. But we could change
in the future just will be a two-step process the way we do for ordinances.
Thank you for the clarification. So my question is about the new for instance zone zero regulations
which are coming at some point from the state and fire safe building. How much of that needs to be
incorporated into this document and how much is an overlay of state law? Yeah we've um there have
been kind of different ways that we've meshed with different requirements I think is the big theme.
In general, where things are likely to have their own update schedule, things like the zoning code, things like state law, we've tried to cite rather than incorporate, so that these can all be living documents and coordinate with an applicant's project.
In some cases, so that, and I should say also that the objective design standards are design focus. They are look and feel focused.
And so they, they really do focus on, you know, physical look and feel.
And so a lot of the development standards will remain in, in the municipal code or in the state law. So there's some distinction in terms of also those roles.
Just if I could add, state law supersedes local law.
It is state law to have zone zero in place.
We're waiting for these regulations to determine how to interpret that.
So those will trump any over light.
Yeah. Things like I don't know,
under Eve water systems that help prevent fires and other things that
might be wonderful to have a new construction,
more difficult to retrofit or even the gutter guards and the vent mesh.
Is that all part of these design standards,
or is that state law, or is that something totally separate?
Well, I think there'll be some state law that will supersede.
And I think that's also some of the coordination with MOFD
has been to make sure that the codes are referenced correctly,
that it's not just zoning, there's also fire code.
And so that's a component.
And then the question really is about the design standards
and whether those things are incorporated around design
approaches, like a designer view.
Because if it were a product, it would not
be incorporated in the same way.
So I think everything would have to be considered.
Just to make a final point on it,
those are nice to-dos.
They're not required by law.
They're not something that we can impose
for objective standards for development under housing law.
And similarly, like solar or battery backup,
that's also sort of up to the developer to put not something that the city can.
Yeah. I mean, there are certain requirements, I think, for development through state law
where green code, building code, where they have to plumb for certain things, but we can't
require any of those things to be installed, particularly using objective design standards
because these are supposed to help facilitate housing development.
Thank you.
I've got a couple, but I'll.
Okay.
Do you want me to either way?
I'll go, we'll mix it up.
In our study session, we talked a decent amount about requiring color variation on things
like townhomes or larger condominium buildings.
Where did you wind up?
I didn't find it at a glance.
to make sure that we're
making sure that we're
doing the right thing.
We did have a color section
and a material section.
And then also we addressed
it through massing as well.
And I don't know, Tony, if
you want to come address as
well.
Yeah, thanks for the
question, Mayor.
So just to be clear on your
question, are you asking is
there something in these
standards that requires an
that or did we make it more flexible or we made it we made it more flexible and
and gave instructions or gave standards for where to make changes in colors on a
building but we didn't require that a wall change colors along that wall very
happy to hear that thank you next question I'm curious when a project will
still need to go to the Planning Commission design review process and
beyond just the rules I know it's like objective is if you want to get it by
right and if you want to do something discretionary, if you want to do something other than this,
you can always come in for design review. The second part of that is what do you realistically
expect in terms of how much the Planning Commission will see any projects?
Well, I think one of the key things to remember is that this is only residential, so the Planning
Commission will see all commercial projects. So that role will be the same. But in terms
of the residential, I think there will be a significant segment of people that will
try and adhere to the objective design standards and go through a ministerial path with the
state law and also the zoning. But there will be people who won't comply and will have to
go through a traditional path, and then there will be people who will opt to not comply.
And so I don't think we have a good sense of what the numbers might be, if that's the
question.
But I think that we do have a sense that not everyone will meet the objective design standards.
So there will still be residential projects for consideration.
It sounded like there was a part two there.
So one other scenario is that there are often, we've written objective design centers at
and, you know, we're, you know,
we're really excited to be
working with the California in
over two dozen communities.
And what we've seen is that
there are some applicants, some
designers, some architects, some
developers that say, I like the
streamlining that the state is
providing, but I really like my
relationship with the Planning
Commission and City Council.
And I want to work it out there.
And so I would say out of 15 or
out of 10 projects, maybe one or
that Christine mentioned, but there's also that fraction of applicants and designers
that choose that one.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, what prompted it was that when objective design standards started, it was just SB 35
and they were a contingency plan, but what we've seen with SB 9 in practice is that the
planning commission sees almost nothing of new home construction.
So it's just trying to project, and it was really just a sense question.
question. My greatest fear is that design review is out of the process and the fire department
review is now the primary voice in design regs that there's they do get a voice and design review
doesn't and my my fear is that when I see things like composite materials being encouraged over
natural materials I did see things like you could do wood with sealant but I would love to hear just
one of you who's worked on these, can you give us any comfort that these are not going to be so
fire safe that they are no longer beautiful? Yeah, we haven't seen enough of these to give
you any real scientific response, you know, but that, you know, along with Vice Mayor's,
the Vice Mayor's question about modifying or updating these over time, like any ordinance,
you can update them at any time.
And so I would say that even as you are aware of things that should be improved whether or not you've seen them built or not,
if you've seen something, if you've seen an outcome that maybe these standards don't prevent or actually allow,
that would be something to put on the list when you go to update these.
but short of that we don't have any data to say you know we've seen seven
buildings and the ones that we've seen that go through these processes they
tend to be attractive so like I you know I wish I had more to tell you but
that's that's what I have. I just appreciate that I just know if you ask
the fire department there would be no trees at all and it's been an ongoing
anxiety so I appreciate that and I appreciate thank you for waiting. Great
questions. Um actually I'm curious about that because that's that uh raised another question
for me which is are we seeing and I'm thinking of LA and all the rebuilding in general and
architecture are you seeing sort of an incorporation of uh fire safety and fire resilience into
an architecturally beautiful standard and is anywhere is there any effort it seems like it
it would be a natural step to try to merge all of this so that as we have objective design
standards, we incorporate fire safety, but do it in a way that is beautiful.
Yes, Councillor Ioannoni.
What we're seeing is certainly the requirements for materials, compliant materials on buildings,
but what we're seeing more is what you're doing here is the fuel modification area away
from the building itself. We're seeing that as much as anything else. So the materials, there are
already a lot of requirements in the building, fire code to make sure that that doesn't happen,
that bad things don't happen. But what we're seeing now is further requirements to get plants
away from the walls. And that's where it takes an even better design now because you can't put
plants as close as you used to against the walls, right? So the building's even more exposed. So not
Not to make it tougher, but that does make it a little tougher.
And then I just have another question, which was,
actually, two more things.
One is, what sort of resources are available for sort
of builders of smaller projects, or maybe
less sophisticated builders, or just someone
who needs help understanding all this?
The goal is for this objective design standard
is not to be an impediment.
Yeah, I think one of the key things
was really using the building typology structure, where
we was looking at an individual building, a duplex,
a multiplex, so that you can quickly say,
my project is multi-unit, it's not multi-unit.
And you can begin to take that track.
And we made it as user-friendly as possible,
pictures, diagrams.
And so that's been the focus, and then really
focusing on building modulation and not being too restrictive.
Please, I want to make sure we get all the questions.
One more question, which is, during the workshop,
I was very concerned about style and by not limiting style
that we were going to get.
And I understand it's being, I think, I'm convinced about it.
It was a really thorough report, thank you.
And I'm convinced that the proportion and massing
sort of addresses this.
But I just have to ask, can I need the reassurance,
that how do we make sure that we don't end up
with sort of, you know, Rockridge Hills post fire
with one house that is super modern next to like a,
you know, I don't know, Italian villa, right,
next to something entirely different, like a castle.
Because driving around those hills,
you literally see that.
And that's what I get afraid of.
Because I don't have to go through design review, right?
That's what I get afraid of.
That's the million dollar question.
So Councilmember Mcconnie, let me take a little bit
of response here.
It's not a one-liner that I have.
So for example, right now, we're working in the city
of Carmel, writing objective standards.
And there, Carmel is known for how eclectic it is, right?
That's what makes it.
Nothing's the same next to itself.
Like I think we found one block where they're the same style,
maybe on the same side of the street.
But it's just everything, you know,
and the same with the neighborhoods.
So there, it's the opposite problem.
We need to write standards of how to make sure
that it doesn't turn into the same thing
or what appears to be the same thing.
Here, you're trying to keep the pattern
which is not as varied as that.
And it has variation, but not as much as that.
And so you're trying to keep that.
Right now the standards do not do that.
We have not found a way to do that
without being penalizing to the applicant.
So that is the reason why, if you
had a tool such as architectural style,
then there might be a way to do that.
But short of going to that length,
and just again to put it in perspective, out
of the two dozen, maybe 30 of these that we've prepared,
there have only been three that have
regulated architectural style.
Santa Barbara, Carmel, and Marinth.
So that's a long response, but just telling you, honestly,
what is happening and why we're not regulating that.
Well, those numbers are reassuring,
and perhaps the market provides a reassurance on its own.
Thank you.
Any other questions?
OK, great.
I'll see.
I don't have any speaker cards on this matter.
I'll see if anybody from the public
would like to speak on this item.
Mayor, we need to open the public hearing.
Oh, I'm sorry.
formally so let's see I thought if that so if this is a public hearing item that
was the presentation so I think you're at the questions without the comment
portion okay we are now at the public comment portion I don't have any speaker
cards would like to see if anybody from the public would like to comment I'm not
sure why that's different but I think we have officially opened and I still
don't see anybody so I believe I will now close the public portion and bring
it up for discussion and deliberation.
Would anybody like to lead us off?
Vice Mayor G?
Yeah, I'm happy to support this.
I think a lot of work and a lot of thoughts gone into it.
I want to thank everybody on our planning team and our consultants.
I think we've done a good job of trying to balance, and it's important that we have these,
And I think it's the next, clearly it's one of the next key steps in our housing process.
And I think it's time to go forward with them.
I think that they look, you know, very nice.
They might not prevent everything and they might not address everything.
But as we discussed, should there ever really be a need in the future, we can always revisit
that.
but I think that it's it's been a good balance. It's been we've had a lot of input, and I'm happy to support going forward.
I agree with Vice Mayor G and I think the Planning Commission has also had a lot of input into this process and we thank them for that and the staff of course so I feel like it's been well vetted, and we're on the right track, so thank you.
What you both have said, I think the Vice Mayor
expressed it really well.
I did find the materials for us to be really thorough.
And I found the presentation also really thoughtful
and do appreciate that.
And part of my willingness to sort of
drop my concern over this style and go with the
recommendations was that the Planning Commission
looked at this and they have that expertise.
And I do think ultimately sort of the market
does result in building of properties that are desirable to our residents.
I'm very happy to support this. I think it's been a terrific process and you
guys got us up a very big learning curve with a difficult document and something
that Arinda doesn't have a lot of experience with and the fact that we're
also comfortable is a real testament to the the entire team who put this
together. So do we have a motion? Do we formally adopt the first reading of the ordinance? Do we
have a motion to adopt ordinance 2603? Can I offer a first reading? Thank you. It would be to
waive the full reading of the ordinance and introduce it, agreeing with staff's determination
that this ordinance is exempt from CEQA. Thank you. Does anyone want to move that? So moved.
Do I have a second? I'll second it. All in favor? Aye. Thank you very much. The ordinance has been
introduced. It will return to you for adoption on your consent calendar. Was there a procedural
question? Or was that moving on to the next item? Prepping the next item. We're now on to item H1
of our policy matters. We have four policy matters tonight. We've got a full agenda. The first one is
and is the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance, the RAC, Joint Powers Authority,
JPA participation, and it looks like we've got Ryan Kane here to present. Thank you.
Yeah, thank you, Mayor Aberson and City Council. So as you can see, we've got Renta Perkins
is going to present tonight. Tonight is really just an introduction to explain the program,
and then hopefully at the next council meeting, we can come back with a formal resolution
the city of Toronto. And that's
resource management as well.
It's just one of the things
about our recovery allows the
stormwater runoff to enter
treatment facility by gravity.
In addition, there are
significant costs to design and
construct as well as ongoing
operations and maintenance.
So under the current MRP 3.0
Arrenda is required to implement
retrofit projects up to 1.2
acres or at least 1.2 acres by
So we have a shortfall and we're in need of credits of approximately one acre. And then under the new MRP 4.0, which is currently being finalized, the GI retrofit project requirements could increase.
increase. So the Contra Costa County RAC system allows green infrastructure,
stormwater infrastructure treatment facilities or off-site GSI projects to
be constructed within Contra Costa County to generate compliance units that can
then be exchanged through the system. Compliance units can be sold to an
interested party such as a developer or a municipality in need of off-site
stormwater treatment for compliance. To effectively manage the RAC system,
participating agencies are forming a Joint Powers Authority, or a JPA.
The JPA is responsible for administrating off-site GSI certification,
compliance unit accounting, project verification,
long-term maintenance funding mechanisms, and annual reporting to the water board.
So with that, I'd like to introduce Rinta Perkins. She's the interim program
manager for Contra Costa County Clean Water Program,
and she'll provide an overview of the RAC compliance system. Thank you.
Thank you, Ryan. Good evening Mayor Iversen, council members, Orinda staff, and members of
the public. Thank you for inviting me to present on the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative
Compliance System, or the RAC system for short. Rinta, can we, I'm sorry to interrupt, can we
have you speak up a little bit more? Oh, okay, you cannot hear. Okay, let me,
Okay just want to make sure. Can you hear me okay now? Is this much better? Much better. Thank you.
Yes, thank you for that feedback. All right, so Clean Water Program is a consortium of 19
cities and towns, the unincorporated county, and the flood control district. Established in 1993,
the program's primary objective is to coordinate and implement countywide and regional activities
as required by our permit.
So our members, as Ryan mentioned,
must comply with the MRPD.
This permit contains significant requirements
for installing low-impact development facility.
As you can see in this picture here,
this is also referred to green stormwater infrastructure,
or GSI.
Examples include bioretention, flow-through planters,
previous pavements and others. Any new and redevelopment projects creating 5000 square
foot or more of impervious areas must treat their runoff with on-site GSI. This requirement
also applies to roadway reconstruction and frontage improvement. As Ryan indicated,
the city of Orinda must also retrofit 1.2 acres of existing impervious area. Additionally,
The San Francisco Bay has Mercury and PCB TMDL, or Total Maximum Daily Load,
installing GSI in targeted areas helps to meet this goal.
Many municipalities face challenges in meeting this requirement, as Ryan mentioned,
due to limited land availability, conflicts with underground utilities, and other site constraints.
Aside from the initial capital cost of designing and constructing this project,
City also have the obligation to maintain, repair, and replace them on an ongoing basis.
I mentioned earlier about Mercury and PCB TMDL. Within the county, these pollutants are primarily
found in old industrial areas along the edges of the San Francisco Bay. Since Orinda does not have
old industrial areas, meeting this requirement is difficult. To meet permit requirements while
overcoming the challenges mentioned previously, the Clean Water Program developed the RECS system.
It provides a flexible, cost-effective and scientifically defensible,
off-site alternative compliance options for new and redevelopment projects.
cities, private developers and other entities such as Caltrans can participate.
The REC system offer a framework for funding and building regional GSI projects
that treat runoff from a much larger area. These projects are typically more cost effective to
construct per treated acreage and can be strategically located such as in old industrial
areas to address PCB and mercury TMDL. Beyond water quality benefits, they can also revitalize
communities by transforming under-used spaces into functional GSI. One city manager even described
direct system as a redevelopment tool for her city. Many municipalities try go to fund ongoing O&M.
The REC system incorporates a sustainable long-term funding source for maintenance.
We'd like to acknowledge the US EPA San Francisco office for funding the development and implementation
of the REC system through its grant. This system was made possible due to a provisions contained
within our permit allowing an alternative compliance option which became the legal basis.
its development underwent technical, legal, and regulatory reviews with contribution from
numerous agency partners and stakeholders as shown on this slide. I also want to note
that the San Francisco Regional Board has endorsed this concept and recognized that
the RAC system is currently the only one meeting the permit requirement. So think of the RAC system
as a regional stormwater in lieu fee managed as a credit trading or banking system with sellers,
buyers, and a centralized REC administrator. So here's how it works. You start with the seller on
the top. This can be a public agency or a private entity who design and construct an off-site JSI
project. The project generates compliance units which represent the treated in previous areas.
As an example, a public agency that has just completed a roadway project may want to sell
access treated in previous areas to help recover a portion of its capital investment costs.
So then if you look down to the bottom to the buyer, instead of constructing the GSI facility
on site, the buyer noted in the blue color boxes, this also can be a public agency or a private
developer pays a one-time upfront cost to the seller to purchase these compliance units. This
would cover the capital costs of constructing the project. Additionally, the buyers will be required
to pay the O&M costs of the GSI facility they benefit from, and then in the middle,
the RAC administrator noted in the green color boxes, they would certify the transaction of
compliance units, collect payments from the buyers, ensure that the O&M activities are carried out,
also responsible for the annual reporting to the regional board. So in this scenario,
The administrator role is assumed by the Joint Powers Authority, which I will explain in the
next slide. And finally, the last box, which is the community facility district here noted in the
gray box, this has been found to be the appropriate mechanism to collect and manage
this long-term O&M costs in a reliable and sustainable manner. So here is the organizational
structure of direct system. On the left side is the Joint Powers Authority, JPA. Currently,
16 out of 21 member agencies have expressed interest in joining the JPA. In this setup,
the JPA serves two primary functions. The first one is to act as direct system administrator,
As I mentioned earlier, overseeing transaction and payments, certifying compliance unit,
ensuring that the projects are properly maintained, and preparing the annual report.
The second function is to form and administer a CFD to manage the ongoing maintenance and
operational costs. Under this arrangement, only participating JPA members can buy or sell
compliance units through the REC system for their capital projects and also allowing the
private developers, non-profit or other entities within their jurisdiction to participate.
Okay so let's expand a little bit on the implementations. Many cities and counties
are probably members of joint powers authorities already. The purpose of this REC JPA is similar
to what you may have experienced. A RAC JPA is formed to create a legal entity separate
from its member agency. It has its own liabilities, debt and obligation that are independent from the
members. The JPA can only be formed through the approval of a joint powers agreement by city council
and County Board of Supervisors. The Clean Water Program has circulated the JPA agreement to city
and county attorneys for review and we have revised it accordingly. The agreement contains
provisions such as admitting new members, outlining roles and responsibility, indemnification,
and so forth. To avoid unfunded liabilities and pension risk, the JPA will not hire its own
employees. Instead, it will rely on member agency staff and third-party contractors,
consultant and legal firm to manage its operation. Now keep in mind that the RECJPA is intended for
projects only, so this is not the same as the Solid Waste Authority JPA which covers the entire
residence within the jurisdiction. The RECJPA only applies to selected property owners who
choose to purchase and sell compliance units to meet their project permits compliance obligation.
There will be some shared JPA administration costs such as on-call legal services, bookkeeping,
managing the operation and annual reporting. This cost will be split equally among members.
So next I'll touch on the community facility district.
One of the primary goals of the RAC system is
to create a long-term sustainable mechanism
that ensure private buyers contribute to the ongoing O&M costs
of public and privately owned GSI project.
Fortunately, the Melrose Act already provides a legal
framework for this approach.
It authorizes the formation of community facilities districts
which can levy special taxes to finance maintenance,
including repair and replacement
of flood and storm protection services
on both public and private properties.
Under the Joint Powers Agreement,
the JPA would have the authority to form a CFD
and levy special taxes within the member agency territories.
Once the agreement is signed, the JPA would handle the entire CFD formation process,
requiring no further action from initial members. The process began by identifying a private buyer
seeking to join the CFD to meet their project mitigation obligation, followed by adopting
resolution, holding public hearings, and conducting a landowner election to finalize formation.
Once a future annexation area is established, it includes one or more parcel as the initial CFD
boundary and jurisdiction over all initial participants. This designation enables a much
faster annexation process than traditional methods. It only requires the property owner's signature
on a unanimous approval form. This form serves as their official vote to join the district
and accept the special tax levy in future years,
so no additional steps are needed beyond the signature.
When a new public agency joined the JPA later,
its parcel must be added to the future annexation area.
To accomplish this, the JPA Board
would adopt a resolution of intention
to expand the CFD and annexation areas,
followed by a second resolution at least 30 days
after the public hearing.
Now, if a parcel within the new territory is ready,
it can be added to the CFD boundary at that time.
Okay, so where we're at right now.
This table outlines the key task and milestone
for this year.
We deliver informational workshop
for various stakeholders group last year.
So this include city managers, public works directors,
strong water managers, planning directors and so forth.
We held several JPA formation meetings
with interested agency
to discuss operational and logistic matters.
We anticipate forming the JPA
by the end of this fiscal year.
Concurrently, we are identifying projects to exchange.
We have one project ready to be exchanged under the system.
We also have one private developer in the central part
of Contra Costa, interested in building GSI
on his underused parking lot within an old industrial area.
We have initiated discussion
with Caltrans District 4 office,
regarding their needs for offsite mitigation measure
and potential funding opportunity.
We plan to circulate the CFD terms this summer
with the goal of establishing the CFD future annexation boundaries by the end of October.
So with this schedule, we hope to initiate our first compliance unit exchanges in the fall of this year.
So what are our next steps?
As I mentioned earlier, we have 16 agencies that have expressed interest in joining the JPA.
I believe nine of them have scheduled meetings
to ask their governing boards to adopt the resolutions
while the remaining are still in the study session.
We have finalized the RECJPA agreement.
We would like to invite an interested agency
to participate in future technical and operational
discussions.
Our program has prepared a fact sheet,
frequently asked questions and other references
to assist with the messaging.
The next step is for the agency to ask their governing board
to consider the resolution to form direct JPA.
There is a strong incentives to complete the JPA related task
before June 30th of this year
to fully utilize the allocated regional funding.
So this can include my presentation
and I'm available to answer question you may have.
Thank you.
Thank you, I'll ask if there are questions for the presenter.
I have two, so feel free to jump in if there are more.
The first is the managing the supply and demand
seems very complicated in a newer system
or a smaller system like this.
You know, it's like 1031 exchanges
where you need an exact match
because otherwise, it can get messy.
How are you thinking about that?
Yes, thank you for that question.
That's a very good question.
So we have developed a tracking tool, and you are right.
Like with 1031 exchanges between commercial properties,
it has to be exact.
Our tracking tool is designed to take into account
a rainfall data's pollutants load.
So in other words, let's say you have exchanges
between commercial properties with residential.
So it is not necessarily a one-to-one ratio.
There will be some multiplier to account for
what they call a net environmental benefits.
So that has been built into our tracking tool.
But what if you have too many sellers
and not enough buyers or vice versa?
that that does happen it is a market driven and it is so you're saying too many sellers but not
enough buyers is that what happened or vice versa right well let's say you've built up these GIS
projects and then you have to pay to sustain them but you don't have enough buyers paying into the
system it feels like it could get upside down or yes I feel like that's maybe the bigger problem to
Yes. With the market-based system, it does take time to be able to create the balance supply and
demand. There could be some, what I would say is some approach, some circumstances where the buyer,
the demand is higher or the seller is higher. In this case, it is the other way. The demand
actually outpace the supplies. If you recall, Caltrans has a project, Highway 37, from Vallejo
to Sonoma. And that Highway 37 needs to be widened. And right now, Caltrans is having
difficulties in finding off-site mitigation. So Caltrans is very motivated. They are tracking
direct system closely. So if there is any demand that's going to be entered into the clearing
house, if you would, I believe that Caltrans would be very much interested in purchasing those
compliance. So in this case, obviously Ryan mentioned the city of Arindar needs one acre.
Our priorities obviously is to make sure that our members' priorities go first. So this is where the
the priority sessions of who get to purchase
the compliance unit first, right?
So obviously the preference will be given to our committees.
Thank you, very helpful.
One more question.
Of course.
We have another JPA for our school buses.
And what we've seen is that a lot of times either grants
or even state laws or regs are written for agencies
and the JPA is kind of a square peg in a round hole
that we can't fit in these other programs.
Is there a risk of that with this
and have you thought about it?
Yes, thank you for that question.
So the JPA is a legal entity.
We have checked with our,
so a lot of our regional projects are paid for by EPA,
there is also the state fund or state grants
and Cal friends obviously is a very strong motivations
to us with the funding.
So in this case, as a legal entity,
the JPA could enter into an agreement
to receive the funding to construct the regional projects.
Thank you.
I didn't have any other questions.
Were there any others from the council?
And I'll ask, well then I'll see if there's anybody
from the public who would like to speak on this.
I don't have any speaker cards
I don't see anyone walking to the podium and so with that I think we'll bring it
back for any feedback this is not a decision item it's really just comments
and feedback for tonight. My question was more for our staff mayor about sort of
how Orinda would comply with these laws if we did not join the JPA what would
our ability be to comply and what would we have to do? Yeah it would be a
a challenge. We did, as part of the paving project last year, we did a small buyer retention
at the end of Camino Sabrante on Camino Pablo. And so we would just, that took a while to
find a spot that would work, like you said, with the topography and being able to gravity
feed to it. We've looked at other places nearby. It's preferable to put these in kind of downtown
areas as well so that people see them and we can maintain them easier.
So it would just it would take a fair amount of effort to find probably little places to
put these in.
You know there there are things we could do like tree well filters where you can do it
if we have a wide enough sidewalk we could put in a tree well filter.
But again those they're expensive you have to then continue to maintain them.
then just to make sure that it's going to work in our city. So I think we would we just
have to continue to try to chip away at it with these smaller areas since we don't really
have one spot that we could just you know do it on one project. So this would help.
This is something we've kind of been looking for or looking forward to the possibility
of joining. And how would you quantify how many of these we would need to purchase if
we were to join JPA, like how do you understand what our need is to purchase someone else's
GSI?
I mean, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, Rensa, but I think that we would pretty much
be one to one with the amount of acreages that we would need, so if we're around an
acre that we need right now, we would do that. And I do know that there are, there is a surplus
right now with some of the cities that have joined or that are planning on joining. So
the way that I've kind of understood it is that these cities already got their grants,
they already constructed them, they're already maintaining them. And then now with this opportunity
to join the RACJPA, they can now help them maintain it by selling this off to other cities.
what additional costs are there to the city to join the GPA? Obviously we would end up paying
for some of the administration of the JCA itself. Yeah may I just continue on to the previous
questions. So it actually costs more to construct a small bioretention as Ryan mentioned versus to
to construct a much larger project
that treating a much larger areas.
So just to give you a point of reference,
it's actually more cost-effective,
particularly if that city received grant.
So now you are paying a less,
I guess, unit cost per compliance unit.
So to answer your second question about the cost,
we did some calculation.
The initial cost, so one time for the first year to join,
for the JPA, we have anticipated,
per agency is about 2,800, one year.
And then subsequent year, so the annual cost
is about 1,500, and subsequent years
because we have to hold our JPA meeting,
our JPA board must hold meetings.
We also have to hire a bookkeeper to do the auditing
and state reporting and so forth.
So it costs about 2,850 roughly per agency
for the initial, the first year
and subsequent years would be 1,500.
I think the JPA members try to keep the cost minimum.
Yeah, I think this is an excellent idea that this is a difficult set of regulations from the state
and they're not going to get any easier. And being a little tiny jurisdiction like we are and the,
you know, the size projects that we have. And I just think this is an excellent thing for us to do.
And I appreciate all the information that you've provided, Grinta. Based on what you just said,
But I also assume that a part of the administration is the JPA would also keep the documentation
and records of everything that's transpired that the JPA has done.
So I think that is also a great backup help to the city as well.
I mean, we would keep our records, but I think that's very important.
So overall, I think, assuming, and I am very appreciative of the fact that it doesn't expose
us to any kind of pension liabilities, any kind of any other liability, it's just literally
focused on what we would have to do to comply.
But I think being part of this would be very beneficial for Arinda.
And may I just add something also this will allow private developers within Orenda who may have trouble putting in by retentions I when I gave a presentation previously to another city council, one of their pet peeves is losing onsite parking, simply because there is no spot to put by retention
this right away.
So that is a challenge for them,
particularly if they have some specific general plan,
some vision for their downtown.
So just something to keep in mind.
By being a JPA members,
you allow your private development community
to take advantage of this as well.
Thank you.
That's a great point.
Yeah, I also, I think this is a very, very good idea.
think it we should I really thank staff for bringing it to us and you know water
quality is sort of a regional issue and I think solving it in a regional way
makes sense I think that sometimes to the vice mayor's point I had sort of
this similar reflections and that I think that sometimes there are some very
well-intentioned and well-meaning laws and ways to address California's big
problems, but the way those laws impact a small jurisdiction like ours can be really
onerous and burdensome and costly just because in part of the administrative, you know, implementation,
right, and can have a disproportionate impact and join in in JPA to address that is an excellent
way to I think solve for that and meet our legal obligations and I also too did look
at the contract and I assume that the final contract will make sure that a JPA has its
own insurance and that we don't assume the liability in any way because that seems to
be consistent with all JPA's and I'm looking at our city attorney but provided that is
there I wholeheartedly bless us.
Thank you.
Mr. Mohawk, did you have anything to add?
I mean, given the cost, which seems relatively low,
it seems like it would make life a lot easier
for the city to do something like join the JPA.
So I'm in favor of moving forward with it.
And I concur, I thought this was very well thought through
and that you sort of thought through all of our questions
and it was very easy to understand
from a complex topic.
So I support and is there anything else for us to do tonight
other than to give that direction?
I think that's it. That's all you need Ryan. Okay. Well, thanks. We got a full agenda. So we're going to move on. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you for being really appreciate it. All right.
And we are going to move to item H two, which is a discussion regarding the Mills Act ordinance and a render and its potential implementation. And it looks like Christine is back for back for more.
So again, thank you Mayor Emerson. Thank you council members. Thank you to the public who is here and listening online.
This is a program discussion. We're going to be talking about the Mills Act which is about historic preservation.
And in general wanted to just go through we're going to go welcome a background, have a discussion and then ask for direction and next steps.
So, in terms of the Mills Act and what it is, it's focused on historical property.
It was established in California in 1972, and it sets these contracts, a 10-year automatic
annual renewal contract, which is an agreement around a restoration plan and it's a tax abatement.
So just to be clear, it's Article 12, Section 50 to 80 to 90, and it's to encourage the
maintenance and restoration of historic character properties.
It has to conform to U.S. Secretary of the Interior standards.
It allows for a 10-year automatic renewal contract, and it's enabled with the taxation
code at the section that's listed there.
A key component is this is a tax abatement contract, so there's a commitment around
historic preservation, and it is a tax reduction, roughly 40 to 60%
conservatively, but some properties have been less, some properties have been more.
Contract cancellations have a penalty of 12.5% of a property's fair market
value, and that is a significant penalty should someone break a contract, not
fulfill the contract. So thinking about Orinda, a local ordinance established the
Mills Act applicability to Arinda.
The earliest designation is actually in 1988,
the Arinda filter plant.
And this applicability does identify the importance
of preserving historic structures.
It encourages the owners to participate
in preserving historic landmarks.
It sets eligibility for the Mills Act contract
and Arinda does not have a Mills Act contract program
that was adopted at this time.
So this is what was adopted.
The municipal code, title 17, 25, 22, and 23.
So just really identifying the importance
of historic structures and that it's a benefit
and has economic development benefits.
The City Council is encouraging owners
to preserve historic landmarks
first. The other portion of
the of the code is the
implementation of the Mills
Act, talking about what the
contract is. Um and that it is
about, um, only can be entered
into after the designation of a
historic landmark. Um it's
reviewed and approved by the
City Council. Um it's entered
between entered into between
county level. So talk a little bit about the historic resources of Arinda, the
historic landmark designation map. This can be found on the Arinda web page
shows the individual properties as well as their physical location. And
just to give a picture of what the historic resources are in the city of
Arinda, there are 20 landmark designations, nine designated privately
the city. The city is currently
owned potentially eligible due
to size and scale for the
Milzac contract. A total of two
Milzac contract requests since
it has been enacted six great
Oaks in 2015 and 5 11 minor
road in 2025, which is being
considered by the city today. Um
one current Milzac contract
tracked request. That's the
road. There are two inquiries and then the the
landmarking process is described in the code in 1725.5. It
establishes eight key criteria and it specifies that no fee
shall be imposed by the city at this time. And so the historic
landmarks is has these eight criteria. Yeah, these eight
criteria, A through H. And Six Great Oaks, the Bueller House,
was the first request in 2015 for the city of Arinda
to enter into a Mills contract.
At that time, the city council directed staff
to take no further action.
There were a lot of factors considered,
but some of the factors were the balancing
the public benefit to the tax reductions and also concerns about funding maintenance over
rehabilitation. In the staff report it does talk about how many of the major upgrades had already
been completed. 511 minor road, the property was designated in 2019 and then the owner has
made a request to the city to enter into a Milzak contract. So the staff took a look at
what's going on with Milzak contracts and other peer communities and and look throughout the
region. It is a state law and really noticed that there are some challenges with these programs
and noticed that there's a lot of places have paused or are significantly reconsidering so
Berkeley has paused its program. It's not renewing contracts on equity concerns. Los Angeles has
paused while it reviews its program. Redwood City has voted in 2026 to suspend its contracts
and other cities, San Jose, Saratoga, and more. They're reviewing key aspects of their
programs and specifically the administration has been challenging for many of these municipalities
and then there are fiscal concerns relative to the public benefits.
So just a little bit about the administrative challenges and in terms of this ongoing
investment Los Angeles had mentioned that they reviewing the applications takes 49 hours for
a staff person. Saratoga has a much less time. It requires six hours, and Redwood City said the
inspections and the reporting are challenges. And so it's important to have the qualified staff
available, and then also to get an understanding of how much staff time and what the cost burdens
will be of that staff time. Also the potential tax revenue loss. You can see a couple of the
great properties that are Anorinda. But then looking at the 2025 property tax, you know,
thinking about that these are 10-year contracts, so even just five of these. This is a sample
of the historic properties. Five of these properties, looking at the overall property
tax annually, is about $149,000. And then with an estimated Mills Act tax reduction
as well. Um, you might be
reducing at the 40 to 60% You
might be reducing city
revenues and county revenues.
59,000 59,000 to 89,000 per
year. And then if you think
about that, this is a 10 year
contract. It might be 597,000
about the demonstrated public benefit. There have been concerns that the broader public
might not be getting the benefits, that they may be concentrated in high resource areas,
or that the restoration is not occurring as the plan has specified and that there isn't
the ability to inspect. Berkeley, as I mentioned, had an equity and sustainability questions
about their program. LA also noted that these are high-income areas and low-barrier areas
that are benefitting. And then in the case of Aravinda where most of these properties
are residential, the question of are they publicly visible, is that clear public benefit?
So the staff has come forward with this research and has asked for direction and really wanted
to lay out three options.
Option one for consideration is repealing the code 1725, 22 and 23.
So the action or the direction given would be that the council repeals the above listed
a random municipal code due to administrative burdens impact on municipal budgets and the
potential for limited public benefit. But a random residents could still apply for designation of the
property as historic landmarks and that does not have an application fee. Option number two for
consideration. Proceed with no program. City Council retains the ordinance but a render proceeds
without a formal program processing on a case-by-case basis. That's similar to how it is today.
It does rely on ongoing individualized efforts. And so you have to evaluate each request as they
come up. And so there is some uncertainty for residents and staff alike as to how that gets
enacted and every time a project a request comes forward it might be a little bit different.
options. Um, option three for
consideration proceed with the
formal program, Um, so if that
this option if the direction is
given for this option, the city
Council proceeds with the
development of a formal
program. Developing a former
formal program would be
important to evaluate and
implement the program. Um so
that it could ensure
the number one question of the
county and the district. You
could clarify potential benefits
as well as establish a city
objectives and participation
parameters. And address many of
the of the concerns that that
had been brought up by other
peer communities. So this is a
request for Council direction.
There is also a staff
recommendation. Um so the number
one question is should staff
the city of Milsak. The city of
Milsak is a city of Milsak act.
Effectively opting out of the
program on the basis of the
concerns that other communities
are facing with their Milsak
programs. Two, how should staff
process a current Milsak request
for 511 minor road, the Nelson
House, in light of the council's
direction on the ordinance? Just
to note, if the city council
the application is denied. And then the third option is if the council chooses to retain an
ordinance, should staff begin the formal evaluation and drafting of a Mills Act property tax abatement
program or continue to process applications on a case-by-case basis. So the question is similar to
to today on the case by case or whether a full program.
And I think the staff noting the challenges
of the other communities and the concerns
and the pausing that's happening today
is really why there's a recommendation
for less interaction and not a full program.
But certainly the three options are put forward
for discussion.
So that is just a very concise way
to kind of start the discussion.
And the next step would be to return to council
based on the direction received.
I will begin by asking if there are questions for staff
before we do public comment.
Yeah, please.
Well, it wasn't clear to me
and maybe I just didn't understand this.
What is it ideally that a property owner
would be doing to maintain a Mills Act,
if a property owner was awarded a Mills Act contract,
what is it that the property owner has to do
to maintain that in a historically preserved way
that is sort of above and beyond or more costly, I infer,
than any other property owner in Arenda.
And so I guess I'm just trying to understand a little better
what the original goals of the program were.
Sure, yeah, no, there would have to be
a restoration plan developed.
And that restoration plan would have capital improvements.
So replacing exterior materials, improving the roof,
restoring windows.
These are common components of a restoration plan.
That restoration plan has to conform
to the US Secretary of the Interior's
historic preservation guidelines and rules.
So there are, a lot of the communities have said,
well, we have an outside consultant who helps
because you need someone who has the expertise
in historic preservation.
So that is the basis of these contracts.
It's an agreement to perform that, the restoration plan.
Part of a restoration plan might also be ongoing maintenance.
There are concerns about it making it too much maintenance,
but it usually is a component
because that certainly is also part of preserving a property.
Okay. And is all of that, just one follow-up and then I'll.
Is, you know, it's a 10-year contract, right?
So this, and the staff report does recognize
this is investment versus maintenance dichotomy.
But I see that very clearly if you're talking about,
old Victorian in San Francisco, right?
I see it a little less clearly that dichotomy
potentially in Arinda.
And so I guess as part of that initial,
before awarding a MILSAC contract,
is it appropriate or is part of that assessment
to actually look at how costly will it be to maintain this house?
Because if you do really have to in order
to maintain it as a historic landmark have
certain types of windows or certain types of doors
that are limits variety and limit increases costs,
then I can understand the mitigation
through tax incentives, I guess, to maintain the property.
But I guess, so that's, I'm curious,
when does that assessment happen?
Can you clarify your question?
Well, before someone's awarded a MILSAC contract, right?
Or before that's entered, is there sort of a, you know,
listing of these, this is all the types of investment
I need to make on this property for the next 10 years.
And this is why it's more expensive
than my neighbor's house.
Well, some of the premise is that historic properties
are often targets of redevelopment.
So that's sort of the premise of it,
is to say that instead, we want to incentivize
the investment, the preservation,
and not make redevelopment an economic result
that is the only path forward.
So they're trying to create a secondary path.
That being said, the restoration plan is detailed.
It has those capital projects.
It has maintenance identified and usually is also
created in coordination with someone who really
understands the security of interior standards
and has that historic preservation expertise.
If I can just ask a build on question to that.
I think it would help the group to hear you talk a little bit
more about what the Department of the Interior Standards
are because it's a pretty impressive bar
to have to maintain.
And I think it would help with the confusion.
Sure, yeah, some of the key components
are really thinking about the, so their emphasis
is on repair, not replacement.
They're trying to keep the historic integrity
of identified landmarks.
And so in terms of really requiring very similar cladding
materials, some of the early homes
might have a board in Batten.
And so the question of, can you replace something,
not exactly, but something that keeps
the same historic quality, might be slightly upgraded
in terms of other more contemporary concerns
around fire, but that has still the look and feel
of that historic property, that thing that made
the house distinctive.
I think windows become a real focal point.
And the question about whether to update
with modern materials like vinyl,
that is generally frowned upon.
And so then there are questions about full panes
versus divided light windows.
And in terms of also the roof being a really important
component of preserving a home, keeping it sealed and weather
tight, but because of the visibility factor and the association with an aesthetic, you
can't see the top of the roof in many cases, and so there are relaxed standards around
reconstruction of the roof.
So hopefully that helps some.
Maintenance it sounds like regular maintenance, I guess the point is maintaining something
that was architecturally significant at a certain time
is very difficult to find the materials
and to meet the standards.
And I just want to make sure people understand
that when you're not abusing the law,
the maintenance is actually very,
it's much more expensive than regular maintenance.
Thank you.
I think I grasp what the Mills Act is all about and why.
I mean, I understand that.
Can you remind us what any property gets,
and I know that there's no property tax benefits,
but if something becomes a historic landmark,
what goes with that, or does that,
or what protection does that offer?
Again, recognizing there's no property tax benefits,
but if, but these properties would, you know,
be similar in terms of, they could be both, I presume, or if they were just historic landmarks,
remind us what that means.
Sure. It's a local designation. And so there's recognition, and there's a historic landmarks
committee that discusses these resources. There's recognition on the webpage. But I
also want to stress that that's the local designation, but properties can also have
a state designation, they can have a national designation, and so there are other designations.
In general, it's a recognition. It doesn't confer things. That's why the contract is
the agreement around improvements and tax abatement.
Can I ask a question and maybe jump in? So 17.25, 0.15 has an application if you want
to make a change to a landmark? If you were going to try to remodel your landmarked home,
wouldn't there be a planning process as well? I believe that the historic landmarks commission
would still review. Okay. I guess I'm thinking there might be some additional regulatory
limitations in the municipal code if you endeavor to change your landmarked house.
are you there. I'm I'm I'm
reading that correctly. They're
there. Yeah there may be. Um
yeah. Yeah there there's a
there certainly a code section
on historic resources. Um and
then there's a statement about
about the no no fee and you
know, and sent and the historic
landmarks commission. And so
there's processing. I'm I'm
getting at no person may make a
change to historic landmark
without first obtaining city
So it does give a little bit of protection, so to speak,
in terms of?
Maybe some additional process before you.
Before you majorly affect something
that's being classified as historic.
OK.
I had a question.
Yeah.
So it seems like the original intent of the Mills Act
was really more for commercial buildings.
I think I read that the first building
was the Del Coronado Hotel that benefited from the Mills Act.
And I can understand it better in the commercial context
because more public tends to participate
in commercial buildings.
I'm surprised that the Orinda Theater isn't on the list
of Orinda designated landmarks.
And I wondered if you could help me understand why that is.
And also, if we were to repeal the ordinance,
how would that affect if there was a request
from a commercial building in Arinda for help.
It seems like we would also then not be able to provide them
with any Mills Act relief.
Yeah, that's true.
I think the emphasis on the public benefit
is probably why the commercial is a higher priority
because it's visible, it's, you know, there's sidewalks,
people are near them, there's-
People go to it.
there's that integrity and the link with the built fabric that happens in everyday life.
So the idea that commercial scale buildings would be first priority, that would be pretty
normal with the public benefit component. And I don't have a background on the Arrinda theater.
I have the benefit of being online while you're talking.
in the national, I just looked at what of the National Register of Historic Places is in Arinda,
and it's the Joaquin Moraga adobe, the Arinda Theater, the Bueller House,
and the Charles Merrill House. So we've got a combination.
But I guess I personally am asking because I would might feel differently if the Arinda
Theater was coming to ask us for this kind of a tax abatement because it's a more public
benefit. I think the public, and I'm wondering if we can think about ways of separating the two
private versus public. So I don't know the answer to the question whether we could
have a Mills Act program for only commercial, not for residential, but we could get the answer
and report back. And I don't know if my council members, and we'll get to discussion, it's just
trying to understand what the Mills Act applies to what type of properties and what the benefit
fit to a Rinda is, because really, that's, I think,
what we have to think about.
Are there any other questions?
I just want to make sure we're all getting
because this is a new matter for, I think, a lot of us
to get our arms around.
Yeah.
I mean, there was some public comment about sort of,
you know, that raised the question for me, how if between
sort of the, you know, there's three options, right?
between option two and option three,
how much staff time would option three take?
Yeah, the question about the staff time
is that there's just to create a program itself,
thinking about there would be a legal component
and then there would be a planning staff time component,
and the idea of the hours,
that we did a rough back of the napkin estimate,
legal services might run $5,000 to $6,000,
and then planning staff time would be likely around $5,000.
$10,000, $11,000 total.
Any other questions?
I do have a few speaker cards.
So I will first invite SB Master to come up.
And after that, Tonya DeGroote, we'll
ask you to limit comments to three minutes.
So thank you.
Hi there, my name's Espy Master.
Thank you for this opportunity to talk with mayor
and city council members.
When my family bought the Nelson House,
it had been owned by the Nelsons for 25 years
and then by another family for 25 years.
The Nelsons, everything they did,
they ran by Mr. Neutra.
He stayed with them when he almost got the job designing
the Oakland Museum.
The second 25 people did all kinds of bad things.
And I've spent the next almost 25 years
undoing those bad things.
And that's an example of how vulnerable these houses, which
were by nature minimal, how quickly they can be messed up.
And some people have mentioned how costly it is
to undo bad things and get back to the original intent
of the architect.
Three Minutes isn't enough to really address all of this,
but the idea of the Mills Act.
So the original, I applied to be a landmark.
And I think Vice Mayor Gee was on the board then
and went through that with me and may remember.
And in the end, I got lots of praise
for wanting to protect this house.
It's not easy to become an Orinda historical landmark.
And most houses of this era have been messed about,
added to, renovated, second stories added, all kinds of,
it's, you know, there are not a whole lot of candidates
in the residential realm
to become an Orinda historical landmark.
When I bought the house,
a demolition permit had been issued
because the third owners bought it to knock it down
and build a big Mediterranean.
And they lost the money they planned
to spend in the 2000-2001.com 1.0 era.
Realized they couldn't build their dream house,
put it on the market.
And when we bought it, the only people looking at it
were real estate developers, because it's
a very small house on a big piece of land.
And they could build a 5,000, 6,000 square foot house.
Real estate developers, UC Berkeley architecture professors
and students and architects from San Francisco and me.
And that was the market for this important house.
I know I'm out of time.
I'm gonna give you a little bit more time
just because this is, the public benefit question
was one that we can have.
Okay, yeah, I will get to that.
The suggestion said we do a question.
Yes, we will ask a question. Thank you.
Could you address how you think the public benefit
is there with your-
I will, I will.
So there is a Neutra owners group.
There's not many of us here in Northern California,
but we have all sponsored visits and tours by students
and by architects.
I hosted recently an event for the Humanities Institute
of the University of California, Santa Cruz.
We've been visited by the Berkeley Art Museum.
So when anyone asks, yes, the public is invited,
We'll all put on an event for anyone who's interested.
I recently had a UC Berkeley graduate student
who was studying Richard Neutra.
Find me and come and go through the house,
and we discussed it in great detail.
I've also had visitors from other countries.
So the Danish seem very interested in Richard Neutra.
I've had a Dutch group.
So anyone who's interested, yes, very open
to that kind of thing.
In terms of this process, and I guess
this was kind of the topic of my letter,
I kind of tried to start this last year
and began inquiring back in August, September.
Eventually, the city or planning made a little application,
which I filled out and paid my $4,000, which I understood
would help.
Okay, yeah, so I think the thing I'm most unhappy about
is it wasn't until four days ago,
although I'd inquired multiple times what's happening,
can I answer questions, can I do anything to help?
It wasn't until four days ago I heard from staff
that this was coming up before City Council.
And we saw your letter and wanted you to know
that we all saw it and it's here.
So that will be taken under advisement.
Yeah, I feel like I applied in good faith
under the existing code.
And to spend six months kind of trying to make it happen
and being willing to pay for it with my fee, which
is meant to cover the consultants.
I really apologize, but we cannot talk about your
application at this time.
But we might ask you some questions later.
Are there any other questions for the speaker?
OK.
I really apologize, but during the public comment,
that's all we can talk about right now.
Okay, but the measure would eliminate my ability
to pursue my application.
Yes, we do understand,
and that is something that is part of the discussion tonight.
And I just apologize.
Well, happy to answer questions.
I see this is another way to protect it
because it's still vulnerable.
We understand, thank you.
That's all we can do right now.
Thank you.
And then Tanya DeGroote is our next speaker.
Thank you, Mayor and Council members.
I will be brief.
I just want to let you know that I,
as a member of the Historical Landmark Committee,
we were advised that we had an application
where an interest in a owner of one of our properties
applied for the Mills Act.
And we're interested in seeing how that would progress.
So when I got the email last week, which I appreciate,
be included in a separate email.
I actually didn't really read it through until last night.
I was sort of blindsided to see that it's now
being considered to be abolished.
And even though there's a discussion on the agenda
at 9.30 on a Tuesday night, it seems
like it's kind of a heavy topic to really cover in detail.
So I just want to say that I support and appreciate
that Catherine and Jean had sent in their opinions.
I completely endorse them.
And just I would think that it's more thought
and discussion should be given to this big topic.
I think we do wanna encourage the diversity
that Arinda has in architecture
and all kinds of different arenas.
it's in a part of what makes it charming.
We are considering actually downtown commercial buildings
from landmarking, so that's kind of a cool thing.
And I would hate to anyone be discouraged
if they happen to ask if the Mills Act is an option
in this town and are told no, it's not.
That could definitely limit some of the applications
that we get, which are few and far between.
So I think that's all I have to say.
And if anyone else can use my extra minute,
I would donate it to them.
Thank you.
Thank you.
There are no questions for the speaker.
We do have one more from Jean.
It's Wang Li.
And tell me if I'm mispronouncing that.
Yeah, I'll make it quick because I did send in my letter.
The points that I wanted to bring up
were what cities, in terms of historic landmarking
and restoration does Orinda want to emulate?
I know that it seemed that the facts were cherry-picked
in the staff report,
and the administrative and fiscal challenges,
we don't know, they may or may not be.
There was a comment regarding how residences
may be harder to access, and that's actually untrue.
Architecturally significant homes are uniquely sited,
And Arinda has a lot of, after the post World War II era,
it actually has a lot of historically significant homes.
And so architecture fans, I mean,
we see people walking up randomly all the time
to study and to draw and to really just take it in.
I think about Sea Ranch, which are residences,
but it's open.
The fencing is visually open, and you can access it.
And there is value in that type of historic restoration.
The other thing I wanted to give you a little bit.
I can also address why the Orinda Theater isn't an Orinda
landmark, if you wanted to know that answer.
But we renovated a Julia Morgan at the Haas School of Business
on Piedmont Avenue.
And it cost over $12 million in terms of historic,
if you want to keep it historic and for accuracy.
So that gives you kind of an idea
because you can't paint it.
You want to keep it the same.
you could maybe power wash it lightly.
There's a lot of different considerations,
but thank you and thank you for the consideration
of my comments and my letter.
Thank you.
I don't have any more speaker cards,
but I'll ask if there's anybody else
who'd like to speak tonight.
With that, we will bring it up for discussion.
I'll ask if anybody would like to start us off.
It seems like we have competing concerns, right?
We have concerns to maintain historic properties to make sure that they're preserved.
We understand it's more expensive to do that.
We also live in an area where most people who purchase those homes can afford to do that
maintenance. That's part of probably the whole thing that went into whether or not to buy
that house, because obviously people understand that that's part of the cost of owning that
type of a home. And yet, it doesn't seem to me quite fair for someone to have put in an
application and then not get a response and then all of a sudden to have us talking about
abolishing the whole act under which they put in the application. If it were a clean
slate, I would say I don't personally think the tax abatement is something that the city
of Orinda can afford that money doesn't just go to Orinda it goes more to our
schools it goes to the fire department and so that's that's an issue I think
we have to talk about and think about and then I feel like we have to
understand I mean obviously the Bureau home is very architecturally significant
and yet that council determined that they did not grant the Mills Act contract
to that project. I wasn't participating then so I don't know why and all the details of
that but I just feel like there are a lot of things to discuss and I understand the
homeowner's frustration to have it coming to us in this way where her application is
sort of getting caught up in this whole discussion of whether or not Orinda should have this
kind of a program so I wonder if we can separate out that particular homeowners
concerns from the more basic question of going forward is this the sort of
program or Linda should have and then maybe make as a separate determination
about that homeowners request in the few you know at a meeting where it's
properly noticed and that's the subject of the discussion I don't know what my
my fellow council members think,
but those were some of my initial thoughts.
I agree totally with council member Hoxie.
In the long and the broadest, you know,
perspective of Mills Act versus Arinda,
I, you know, I don't see the benefit overall because,
you know, if it's residential, if it's something else.
But again, we're such a small jurisdiction
And I think it's fabulous when people
want to preserve historic properties.
I think that's amazing and wonderful.
So do I think this is really a program that
has a great deal of public benefit
as it applies to residential for Arinda?
No, but I do feel really badly about the existing
application and the timing.
And so I agree with council member Hoxie in that regard.
I, yeah, I went into this discussion really
with a lot of questions and pretty open-minded about it.
And I, to that end, I think both council member Hoxie
and the vice mayor expressed sentiments
that I tend to agree with.
I mean, my sense is to sort of,
I guess on some level favor at least,
it at least option two because, you know,
the current application on the Nelson House
does seem, you know, appropriate for certain reasons.
And I don't know if we're supposed to be discussing
that per se tonight.
I was a little confused from the staff report
much you want us to weigh in on that though there was it and well it was one
of the questions for direction so it is appropriate okay so I mean my sense on
that is yes and so when I'm saying yes to that it seems contrary to not sure
what the value of the program is so I kind of see why this was brought to us
from staff because we do have these competing interests but I I guess from
that sense I'm leaning towards option 2 which I think is to sort of preserve the
status quo and take things on an ad hoc basis. I'm not sure that it makes sense
for staff to develop a whole program that has such limited application in
Arinda, right, but I don't really want to foreclose it entirely. I mean in
terms of the property value amount, I think if this were something that we're
on a broader scale, I think the amount of issue
is frankly pretty minimal.
Not to minimize the policy, it's important,
but the amount of issue here is frankly
gonna be very minimal.
And this, and you know, for those,
maybe not as aware of this, the amount that Arinda,
the city of Arinda gets from property taxes is so minimal.
This is not about that at all.
It's really about a policy decision.
And I would concur, I think option two
is the right way to go,
but I actually feel very strongly about this.
So if I can influence the longer term thinking about it,
I think that significant architecture in Arinda
is one of the things that makes us really special.
It's something that people know about us.
I mean, we've got a Frank Lloyd Wright and a Richard Neutra
and the places that we have,
You know, we have four places on the National Register.
It's a big deal with our history
and our mid-century modern.
I was lucky enough to be on the Planning Commission
when the Neutra House came before us to be a landmark.
And I will never forget that day getting to tour that house.
It was an incredible feeling getting to see
that architecture and realizing how special a place is.
And I've also toured the Bueller House.
I think it's a big deal.
And I'm a god that people could make that, well,
if the homeowner can afford it, that's not something we value.
I mean, the Mills Out Act exists as an incentive
to preservation.
It's not a needs-based statute.
And Arenda's adoption said we encourage
historic preservation.
It's a core city value.
And you see it in our historical landmarks commission.
So the only reason I had such a hard time with this issue
is that when three people from staff who I pretty much agree
with all the time were against it,
I don't take lightly going against that recommendation.
And so I think ad hoc is the way to go.
I don't think we need a program for nine total homes,
two of whom either have come, you know,
first of all, it was 11 years
between the first application and the second.
I did do some asking around about the Bueller House
and the fact that the Frank Lloyd Wright
conservation easement and there's a whole other board
that was gonna control what was done with that house.
That's why the weighing of the benefit burden
went the way it did in that hearing.
It wasn't the tax dollars to Orinda.
It's the fact that they were already
obligated to do all those things.
So there was no incremental gain on that individual site.
But the fact that it's only our second application,
I really hope that all the things you've
learned in your research about the potential for abuse,
the really awful, the evergreen renewal,
just so you guys know what I learned, it's a 10-year program.
but then every year it gets extended by one year.
So if you're gonna non-renew it,
you non-renew it with a 10 year runway,
and even then the owner can sort of appeal it,
I mean it's functionally permanent, which blew my mind,
and it's tough, but by doing ad hoc,
I think we can negotiate with each individual property owner
to say well, are you gonna get 10% abatement
or 90% abatement, right?
I mean, how much public benefit is there?
Do you do architecture and student tours?
We can look at the individual facts and circumstances,
the type of architecture that is to be maintained,
all those things.
And I think the Planning Commission or the Planning
staff can deal with a very, very, very small number
of these that would come through.
And to me, getting rid of the Mills Act,
ordinance in Arrenda is a symbolic act.
It's not just due process on this one application.
To me, it goes to core values.
So sorry to grandstand a little bit, but this one,
it's really something that I'm proud of as an Arrenda resident.
And I would like to walk the talk a little bit if we can.
Well, I mean, I think by having a historical landmarks
committee and by supporting that and having a huge emphasis
there, we do.
I mean, I don't think there's any question that anyone here
really values historical landmarks in Arrinda.
The question is, should there be?
I mean, the Mills Act and something you,
the question is about whether or not
there's a need for sort of the tax abatement, right?
And that, to me, is a totally separate question
from the Mills Act, I mean, from the valuation
of historical landmarks.
I mean, it's the policy behind it,
but it's a separate question.
I did not understand until now
that these contracts work that way.
And that actually gives me huge costs on them.
I think I misunderstood that it was a 10-year contract
that then could have another 10-year renewal.
But that makes, I mean, where in the world
do you have a contract that extends by one year
with a 10-year off-ramp each time?
Is that required under the Mills Act?
Yeah, well, that's the standard agreement.
I think what we found in looking at other communities
is that some communities have actually said 10 years
and then it ends.
Or they've said, at nine years, we're gonna have a re-up,
we're gonna decide whether we wanna continue.
So there's some ability to modify, but yeah,
if going straight into the predictable,
then it would be, yeah,
that updates every year and in perpetuity.
Does that assume that continuous updates in renovation
and restoration are going on on those types of properties
because they're so old, there's always something to fix?
Yes, it does.
And so I think with every 10 year element,
there would be a revision to the restoration plan.
it would still be on the basis of a restoration plan. Yes. Good evening, Mayor, council members,
Director Cross here. It's every five years you have to inspect. And so what Christine was trying
to mention is one of the jurisdictions is trying to consider contract non-renewals and revocations.
So that's what's happening with Saratoga and Santa Monica.
And is that all negotiated as part of the contract?
Or is that required by the Mills Act itself?
Not required by the Mills Act itself.
Each of these jurisdictions have a variety of programs.
There's not one that's the same.
So Santa Monica is basically going
before their city council with ways
to revocate and proceed with non-renewal after the 10 years.
So, the Mills Act does lay out the 10-year rule and the you add one year every year rule
and the five-year inspection rule, and also has a process for if you want to give notice
of non-renewal and that there's a, it's not an appeal, but you could protest that, and
also has the process for revocation for failure to comply. So I don't know what
the other jurisdictions are doing but if we bring you a Mills Act contract we're
gonna go through the Mills Act to make sure we've checked off every box and
require met the state's requirements. Okay. But I would hope we can do things
with cost sharing with the owners so that we're not unilaterally bearing the
burden. If they need to hire somebody who's a little who's got Mills Act
inspection experience we I mean it's not that our staff needs to do all of this
ourselves at our cost correct is that something we can negotiate I think it is
but yeah when we if we proceed ad hoc and this is our only one at just economy
of scale it's naturally going to be I think quite expensive it'll be more than
$4,000 that we've already been collected as a deposit. So a degree of that I think will be
the city's cost to come up to speed because we don't have one of these yet and a good portion
of that will also need to be paid by the applicant. Well and then it probably will have a presidential
value because it would be the first one and then other interested and appropriate historical
Landmark owners would then look to what we did there I would guess. So I guess I
want to clarify. I don't I don't know how any of us could weigh in. I was just
referring to that to the one application as one that seemed to fit within the
overall potential criteria but I don't think I don't see how the Council could
weigh in without looking at the restoration plan. It seems like it's a very detailed analysis
that requires sort of the expertise of a consultant and a consultant report. And then it has to
be an independently done report. We can't just rely on the, you know, to protect the
city's interest it would have to be an independent report.
Um...
All right, so just to be clear, you're not prejudging tonight whether you approve the
contract.
But we wanted to bring you this policy question before spending city money, applicant money
to do all that legwork to bring you a contract that you would then decide whether to approve
or not.
I guess I think it's important to me that our residents feel that they're treated fairly
by their city.
So if the Mills Act is on the books and we have residents applying under the Mills Act,
I feel strongly that we have to go through that process for that resident, whether we
approve the contract or not, but we have to go through that process.
And that's a different conversation than whether we should have the Mills Act available for
other owners in the future, right?
I feel like those are two separate things to me.
I don't know how everyone...
I feel like, to me, I wouldn't feel comfortable telling the owners of 511 Minor Road.
Well, we changed the rules and now there's no more Mills Act available, so sorry.
That to me doesn't seem like it's the ethical thing to do when they applied long before
this conversation under the understanding that that was available to them.
I guess the flipside of that could be that we're looking at an individual case as opposed
to sort of the policy decision of whether or not we should continue with the status
quo on the Mills Act in Orinda or, I mean, it did feel that way to me initially too,
now I'm kind of coming to the decision that the policy decision is the one
that we should probably be making. I mean I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just
saying I think they're separate. I don't think we should make a policy decision
tonight that retroactively applies to an application we got in 2025. I mean I
support the policy so I'm not constructive to any because I think we
should you know there's only nine total homes that are historic landmarks and I
Again, it's not even 100% abatement.
It's anywhere, you know, it's 40%.
I actually think you are creating an incentive
for something that's expensive and hard
and has a public benefit.
So that's why I'm being a little quiet.
And my only caution is that
the Historic Landmarks Committee would make it too easy
to become a landmark and then we're having to deal
with a higher number a la Santa Monica.
But I've seen their process for you know, since 2016 and I have found it to be very careful and a high bar and very thoughtful.
So the fact that my house is 85 years old, not going to be coming through.
I agree with you. And I feel like option two might very well be the right way to proceed.
I understand where staff is coming from though because it will take periodically it's going
to come up and they're going to have this work to do and no one's going to remember
what they did in when the last one was 2015 or something you know so you know it does
create a bit of a burden for staff and I understand that I appreciate that but I'm happy to go
with the ad hoc route if my fellow council members think that's the approach we should
take. I mean, I do worry about the property tax issues, but that's just because it makes you feel
better. I did the, well, the Arinda portion is small, three hundredths of a percent,
if you kind of do the math through. So, I mean, how much do our schools get to keep for property
tax anyway? I would just point out, I think they get like 50%. That's what I thought. But it's a
a bigger number than the city gets for sure. But I don't think that's the reason to make
a decision tonight to not go forward with the ad hoc approach. I think then we'll have
at some point in the future, the application come to us and we'll have a full discussion
about the public benefit of granting the abatement and we're not, right?
I would love to see the Planning Commission take a big role on this before we see it.
That's right.
I just want to be clear that there is no language with the Mills Act that would say that this
would go back to historical landmarks.
This would go back to Planning Commission.
So if there's some desire by the council to remand any of this back for discussion to
any contract or otherwise.
Individual applications.
No.
So the only application I've had so far was for the Bueller House and I don't recall if
it went to the Planning Commission staff, do you remember?
It's just to say we don't have a program.
We don't have a process, we don't have a draft contract.
This would all need to be developed for this.
Well, I hear you.
Personally, even if we take an ad hoc approach, I would encourage a Planning Commission review
in recommendation so that they do the deep dive and we can do a shallower dive by the
time it gets to the City Council. If that's possible, I think that would be a good use
of the talents of that group. Again, for. In terms of the restoration plan for the property
because individual meals are not really subject matters of the planning commission where they
they would recommend deal terms for a contract.
Isn't the deep dive what staff and the consultant
are doing, right?
I mean, a restoration plan requires, I guess,
the review and approval of it.
Right, so that's what staff, I mean,
that's the question before, should the,
as I understood it, that's the question before,
should the council, should staff spend the money to do,
do we want to maintain the program,
at least as an ad hoc, or at all?
And if so, then should council, then if so,
because that means that staff then will need
to hire a consultant, there will need to be
a restoration plan developed and reviewed.
And that will involve expenses to both the city
and to the applicant.
And it's a disservice to go down that road
for anybody if we're not, if it's not, yeah.
The policy question isn't brought to us first.
I understand why it's here.
I think it took us a while to get there, so apologies to staff, but to me at least, so.
But thank you.
I know you guys are running up against your 10 o'clock requirement to check in on a motion,
so I'll just leave that 957.
Thank you.
I move that we extend the meeting until 1030.
I'll second it.
All in favor.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
It's a reluctant bunch of ayes, so let's see how we can do here.
Maybe we do we have a motion for h2 at this point. Are we getting a consensus to
Keep
Proceed with the current application but go ad hoc and not develop a broader program for now
Or are we not at that consensus yet? I'm still having a hard time. I don't know. I what I'm hearing from them
for vice mayor I'm
I'm still
Wanting to hear from my colleague. I think I know I would have a much easier time with this if there wasn't this pending application
I need to that's what's me too bothering me, right?
And I really do treasure everything that's historic. I don't have any issue with that
I think we should you know do everything we can to
encourage and preserve historic things but
You know the amount of work this is for
residential properties
You know, it doesn't strike me as something that really for the long term is
Optimum policy for a render, but I understand you feel differently and I don't have a problem with that but
But I just feel terrible about this pending application
It just seems
you know that
I agree. Yeah, I think I agree.
One thing I would suggest is other jurisdictions are
suspending programs that have been in place for a while.
So it doesn't say that we can't suspend it
if we have second thoughts in the future,
which is what other jurisdictions have done.
So it's a strange thing to say about a single application,
but it's not all or none.
If you're interested in,
what I'm hearing is perhaps some consensus or staff direct to give staff direction to maybe
proceed with this one application. We could learn a lot from going through this process in terms of
the negotiation with property owner, what things we're looking for, protections for the city,
limiting us to the extent possible, you know, the amount of time and effort it's going to take,
pushing financial burdens for inspections, a cost of those back to the property owner.
We can go through that process, learn some things. We could table the discussion around
the repeal of this until we get through that process. But one of the things you could look
at with if you're interested in maintaining Mills Act, it sounds like there was some discussion
around the import maybe of commercial properties and having more public benefit than others.
You could certainly limit your Mils X. We're going to look into that. You could limit them
to commercial properties versus residential properties, if that's something you want us
to look into. No decisions have to be made tonight. We're just trying to figure out how
to move forward. It sounds like, unless I'm wrong, there's consensus to move forward with
We can learn from that experience. But I think what we would love to get is any direction because for us we would otherwise just generally bring it back to you. And but if you're interested in having the Planning Commission involved in a process related to processing this contract, we should probably get direction on that.
direction on that maybe it's just looking if there's a restoration plan
looking at that you know the deals in terms of the contract I wouldn't think
that that's a purview for the Planning Commission no and by the way it was not
my intent to create I know I'm just Weiss as much work I was actually hoping
to reduce the work so please disregard my comment and if you after going through
this you feel like there's a Planning Commission role that that can be
something that we think about and learn so didn't mean to make a mess there's
One thing that, I don't know if we could create this, if we brought this back, I mean, one
of the challenges is we didn't get to hear from the owner and the applicant hardly at
all tonight, right?
For most of us, this sort of is the first time, I don't know, even myself wasn't on
the council for the Bueller House.
Okay, so this has been kind of a new topic period, but I have a lot of questions for
owner about, you know, the why and the, you know, and understanding more thoroughly why
they want to do this.
I understand the benefit of getting the property tax reduced.
I mean, that's obvious to all of us, but, but I'd like to really understand so much
more about, about this because quite frankly, there's so many, so many hurdles and hassles
and costs and expenses associated with all of this and obviously this property owner
has already been very committed to this property and has already been restoring it and everything
else so the you know the trade-off between all the stuff you would have to do versus
the property tax savings I mean I would just like to understand this whole whole lot more
before we send staff all the way down you know a rabbit hole to come up with a program
Yeah, I just wish we had some forum.
I mean, could we create a forum where we could actually
understand this a whole lot better from the applicant
before we ask you to do more stuff?
Well, I think it'd be kind of a study session.
Yeah, a work session or a study session on this item.
We could certainly try to schedule something
in advance of an upcoming council meeting.
Why wouldn't we just put the matter on the agenda
and discuss their application?
I just don't understand why we would do a study session.
It doesn't seem that different from any other agenda item
that would come before the council.
We get a presentation, we ask questions.
I mean, because we haven't seen the actual application, right?
Like, that was not part of the package.
No, it was not, no.
We've been holding on to the application.
This Mills Act discussion has been something
that we've looked at when can we schedule this for council,
given all the other topics that needed to be discussed.
wasn't terribly time-sensitive although we were holding up this applicant
moving forward. So this was the night we thought we could make this work. We could
as a mayor suggesting just bring you back we can go back talk with the
applicant work out what we think are the right and appropriate steps for a
meals act contract based on all the lessons learned from the other
jurisdictions and propose that back to the council that would be the
opportunity for the applicant to give you more detail and testimony about why they're interested
in proceeding with this application and you guys can make a decision on the merits of the application.
That's I mean that's the most straightforward approach. We can hold off on having any more
discussion on item one on this list until we get through that process and then we've learned some
things and maybe you guys have some different feelings. You could also give us direction to
to not accept any additional applications
in this period of time while we're trying
to make a decision about this.
I would wanna do that.
Me too.
Yeah, me too, don't accept any other ones.
And give us the opportunity to fully discuss this one
with everyone having notice and an ability
to present their information.
I would also like to suggest,
if the applicant is amenable to offering tours
in groups of two, that's what they did
When the landmark decision came before the commission,
and it might be very helpful to actually tour and talk
and see things so that it's less abstract.
So again, not a requirement,
but it might be a nice suggestion to the applicant
to make this conversation more concrete.
We can do that if that's the will of the council.
I'm sure the property owner wouldn't mind
showing her house.
is that enough direction for us to move through the agenda? Yes, great, not to rush this. Thank
you to all the public. Thank you to everybody who came to talk tonight. Mayor, I just want to
offer for the Council's benefit, the two items remaining on your agenda are not time sensitive
tonight. If you wanted to move them to the next meeting, or if you wanted to have a discussion
about that, you certainly could. I have an important question about one of the items that
might take a little thought. So even if we tabled them, am I, can I ask that question?
Please. Yes, but I'd say if we have a member of the public here to speak on them, we should
hear from them. We should hear from the public. I agree. I know we have an adopted agenda. Are we
allowed to move H4 instead in front of H3 because H4 feels pretty quick. Yep. Yep. You can just make
that motion. I would like to move that we talk about rescheduling June 2 before we deal with
H3. Second that favor. I don't remember who brought this up but I believe it
was just a proposed schedule change and I would love for whoever brought it up
to say what date they would recommend. I brought it up because of two reasons one
it was primary election day when we sometimes do change for election days
that we normally do it in November not primaries and then my understanding also
was that we are already down to four that night because councilmember Riley
had a conflict and so the question was could we move it to June 8th or 9th?
That's all I wanted to ask. I mean that's fine with me it's a five Tuesday
month so would you want to then have you know June 9th and the following week or
would you want to skip a week and go June 9th? And we're not agendized moving
anything else, so we would go with the second Tuesday would be the 16th we have a meeting
scheduled June 16th, the second we have a meeting that we're moving, the 16th we have
a meeting.
9, 16 and 7, I think.
7?
What's 7?
Yeah, why 7?
Oh July 7th.
So we would skip from the 16th all the way to the 7, the fact that there's an extra
Tuesday in the month. That's what I was trying to say. There's fewer meetings not more meetings.
So we always need two meetings in June because we're going to have to adopt the budget at the
first meeting in June and subsequent to that typically we take contracts and everything
else that need to be in effect before the July 1 fiscal year. I would, you know, for our benefit,
you know, we are planning to adopt the budget on June 9th. So we would only have four members of
of the council currently if it's June 2nd between now and that is not currently a four
members moving forward for the meetings. When you said we were going to adopt the budget
on the 9th do you mean it was going to be on the second or the 16th is it would only
be on the second the second was the date currently planned for adoption and then subsequent to
adoption we typically at the second meeting in June bring back contracts that we need
for the next year. And if we had the meeting on June 9th, would we have five council members here?
Do we know that? I'll be here. Yes, we would have five council members here for budget adoption.
I mean, I think that's good. And I'm in favor of it. My only question was just given the way
of the layout, you know, should we also be looking, is it okay to have a meeting on the 9th
and the 16th? It is. Yes, we won't have any known public hearings on the 16th. So we won't have any
the city attorney will not be
here for the June 19th.
Correct.
I will be running solo.
And this time I cannot zoom in
because I will be at scout camp.
No, zooming in for a camp.
I'll be at camp.
Anyone willing to go to scout
camp deserves luck with that.
I know.
I think the ninth works for
everybody here.
Do we know if council member
I mean, she couldn't do that.
know if council member I mean she couldn't make any way but we were
triple checking that I have not heard back from her on that but I presume that
eight there yeah I'll make a motion that we move the meeting from June 2nd to
June 9 provided that all five members are present yes okay provided that all
five members can be present second all in favor I it's 10 10 do you guys want
to try to hit policies and procedures.
I'm sort of in favor of getting stuff done.
You know, touch it once, don't touch it twice,
but don't have strong feelings.
I just have a question about it, that's all.
There was one, I had no issue with anything except.
Should we, let's try it.
Okay.
And let's go to item H, yeah, we can always continue it
if we run out of time.
Touch it twice.
Let's go to item H, three, policies and procedures.
Would you like to present or should we just dive in?
We just dive in.
Great, Vice Mayor G.
Here's my question.
And I have a terrible feeling it has no answer.
And, but in today's world,
it really bothered me when I read it
because I had never once thought about it
until we changed the language in here.
And that is the part where it says
any member of the public can record our meetings.
They can do that anyways.
I mean, people can record anything they want,
walking around with iPhones these days or whatever,
but I guess my question is,
and this is what's so worrisome in today's world,
is do we have any protection whatsoever
of somebody then taking that and modifying it?
I mean, you can take people's voices, you can take video,
you can change it.
I mean, they could start posting the city council
saying things on wherever they want to post it that
has been completely modified.
And I don't know that we do anything that's so interesting
that people would be prone to want to do that.
But it does become very, I mean, it
could extend to individual members as well.
I mean, people have to campaign.
They have to run elections.
I mean, all of a sudden, you get somebody recording somebody
and then modifying what they said
and posting that on social media and saying,
here, you shouldn't vote for council member so-and-so,
look at what they said.
And what if they didn't say that?
I mean, is that just a hazard of our current society
where pretty soon all of us are just gonna be subject
to being recreated by AI and none of it's true?
I mean-
We will have an official rhetorical question.
Is the city manager is saying,
yes, that's the answer, Vice Mayor.
watch the city.
There will be a session on AI and local government at city
summit, so I'll go to that session.
And I'll say, I fortunately do not know the answer to that,
because it has not happened to a client of mine.
But we do have, of course, rules against slander and libel
and saying things that aren't true about somebody
else in our society.
But look at how well that's worked.
Right. I know that that's cold. Also, I mean, there's public figures, there's things in the
public sphere, so that's not an absolute, you know, there's... I would also say with the new
Brown Act rules, that all meetings have to be recorded, so every politician in California is
going to be subject to the same risk. Well, and you have an official recording, so if someone
documents, you know, changes that official recording, correct, you know. And this is also
evidence, but there's also a lot of video already up on the web. Yeah. From every one of our meetings
during COVID, from this meeting tonight. Okay. I mean, isn't that kind of what deep fakes are?
And it's prevalent everywhere in every segment of our society, including in politics. In the spirit
of the fact that it's 1015, and I'd love to think that we're that interesting, but I think we're not.
No. And I don't mean to make light of an important question, I just don't think there's an answer to
it. Were there any other comments or questions on the I had one question to
this group and that's that I've been moving the city manager and council
member reports up in the agenda as a trial to see how we like it. I've been
enjoying it and thought that I would suggest making it permanent whenever it
came on the agenda for the policies and procedures after some testing this seems
to be that opportunity. I don't feel strongly about it because it feels like a big change
even though it's maybe not. But I like it and would recommend making that change permanent.
I'm in favor of that. You guys agree?
I'm in favor of that. I'm in favor of it because a lot of the public
has commented favorably on it. Okay, you've convinced me.
To be clear, that would be an amendment to section 3.1. And items J and K, councilmember
reports and city manager's reports would then go between E and F, right?
I don't have that page. Can you tell me what page of the package?
Oh no, right.
There we go.
Between F and G, between public forum and consent.
Consent calendar, consent calendar is F, so it would be after public forum before consent.
Just like-
And I think we sort of mixed it up. I don't know that we've done it the same way every time.
That's true.
City manager, do you have a recommendation when you think that would be a better fit?
I think after public forum and before the consent calendar is probably appropriate.
Okay. So I would recommend changing the 3.1 to put J and K up between F and G. And otherwise
I agreed with all the recommendations. And then did you have a message?
Yeah. I had a well, it's more of a comment. So do you want to call public comment first?
I'm sorry, do we have any public comment on the policies and procedures manual?
Seeing none.
We will bring it up for discussion.
Thank you for that reminder.
Sure.
No problem.
So the one thing I thought about just because it was brought up here is I and this is not
a subject.
The good the good thing is this is not a discussion point for tonight.
It is something I would like to bring back if there's interest in doing it amongst someone
else on to a future agenda, which is we, some cities do have sort of every city handles
proclamations a different way, right? And I don't know that we necessarily want to change
how we do it, but I'd like to really see how other cities do it. And so, you know, what
I've heard everything from the council votes and says that, you know, these are all the
proclamations we're going to issue this year at the beginning of the year, and it sort of
keeps going every year unless someone changes it. If something else comes to the council,
they can vote on that as well. Some have no policy whatsoever. So I just wanted to see
how other cities do it, and so I was sort of bringing that up. It's really more of a matters
initiated, I think probably, but because it's related to policies and procedures, I'm bringing
up now. I'm not recommending a change now because I kind of want to see how other people
do it first. So the request is to bring it back at a future date. And I don't think it's
urgent. I think I know we have some jam packed agendas, but it's more of a, I was surprised
by how the city did it because the school board did it so differently. Okay. That's
interesting to me. See how does the school board do it? I'm just curious. The school
Board has a vote on every proclamation and most proclamations are jointly read out after
the vote. So, people have the chance to make a public comment on the proclamation and discuss
whether they want to adopt it, then it's adopted, then it's read at the meeting.
Are they relatively common or relatively uncommon?
Well, they were trying when I left the school board to get to a schedule so that, you know,
the big things aren't forgotten and that you have some sort
of rhythm to it.
And I think, at least from the school's perspective,
trying to reduce some of the numerous proclamations
so that it was a little bit more directly related
to the mission of the school district.
And I think that could be a good thing for the city to do as well.
I'm interested in sort of looking at values of issuing them.
And then there's all these, some people read them,
some people issue them and don't read them, some people like.
And obviously, there's inefficiencies
in reading every proclamation aloud,
especially at a very long meeting.
But so I don't know.
I thought it would be, maybe we changed nothing,
but I'd like to see what others do,
because I didn't even know that about the school board.
No, I agree with you.
I think having some understanding of what types of proclamations we as a community think are
important maybe is a good discussion to have. Can I interrupt here to say, I think what we're
doing right now is talking about Section 8.1. Yes. We're beyond, normally matters initiated,
we don't deliberate, but I think that you are agendized this evening if you'd like to talk
about this topic and it's because it's part of Section 8.1. Yes, and that's why I brought it up.
Exactly. It's because it's of 8.1. But the reason I want it to come back is because I'm not ready to
make a proposal about any changes to 8.1 now, but it's relevant to the text of it and I'd like,
even if we adopt everything tonight that is here, I would like to have 8.1 maybe come back to us with
with an understanding of what other cities do?
I will make a counterpoint.
I am not interested in staff spending time on it
for the sole reason that we have a weak mayor system.
The mayor only does ceremonial things.
And I have enjoyed, this is my fourth year on the council,
seeing the style of the other mayors.
Some have lots of proclamations and read a lot.
And it's a way that I feel that the very little bit of color
mayor gets to add during their year is the where they place emphasis and it's a way of signaling
sort of their style. So I think that's an enjoyable thing of the having the one-year
rotation of mayors and so I kind of like the fact that it's not standardized because I feel like
there's never been a problem. But I mean it's a great question. I just I sort of enjoy the
they're going to be able to
way the city did it, and then
you get used to it. It's all
good. I mean, I think that the
general idea is to honor
citizens and groups and things
that have brought benefit to
the city, and I think we all
at least the mayor's I've had
we'll be happy to have a conversation about it if others wanted to. So I'm not
gonna second the motion just because of my style thoughts but if somebody else
would like to second we can make it a matter initiated. Would it be considered a
matter initiated or would it just be staff direction? I guess it was wanting to give
us direction because you're agendized this evening to talk about it. Okay to just come back.
Just if there's direction consensus from the council or majority of the
council that wants to hear about what other agencies are doing around this we
could bring that back so later date not time sensitive. We could go ahead and
adopt everything else tonight including ordering yes okay we could adopt all of
that and then we could still explore it and and we can always change our policies
any month of the year that's right okay so I I would be in favor of doing that
going ahead with adopting everything including your change for the reordering
and then I'd be interested in discussing the topic further simply because even though I
appreciate the mayor's comments and really hadn't thought of it that way, but I also know how
challenging it can be to be a new council member and to be a new mayor because there's no training
ground, right? No one tells you how anything works. It takes five years before you figure it out,
Okay so so I think it would be perhaps helpful for you know maybe some kind of
a framework that would be you know doesn't have to take away from
somebody's individuality. Not to beat this to death but as the mayor I'm gonna bring
this to a vote because I think we got consensus. Would anybody like to make a
motion to adopt the policies procedures with the order change that I
suggested and a direction to step to come back with some some survey advice
on on the proclamation topic. I'll make a motion. Second. I would a motion in a
second all in favor. Aye. I move we adjourn. Great thank you all.