Good evening and welcome to tonight's what is this? A special meeting? Special meeting
of the GAD. Sorry. Working on it. And I believe we will start and I'm still getting my agenda
handy with a roll call, correct? All board members are present. Thank you. Oh, before
we do that, I would just note for the record that there were no reportable actions from
the 515 closed session and that all members were present within a few minutes at the start
time.
So with that, all members are present of the GAD meeting.
We will now adopt the agenda.
The Pledge of Allegiance wasn't on this agenda.
Do you guys want it?
Let's do the Pledge of Allegiance.
It'll be fun.
We're going to do it twice.
Okay.
I dare anyone to complain that was not on the agenda.
Now we're going to adopt the agenda with the change adding the Pledge of Allegiance.
would ask if there are any other changes to the agenda. I will move we adopt the agenda.
Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. And with that we will move to public forum.
I don't believe I have any public forum comments. I don't see one in the audience coming to the
podium. And city clerk, do we have anyone on Zoom? No board member chair. Thank you.
With that, we'll move on to the consent calendar. Are we aware of any items to be removed before
discussion? Seeing none, do we have a motion to approve the consent calendar?
I move we approve the consent calendar. Do I have a second?
All in favor. Aye.
Aye. And with that, we'll move to policy matters. We'll start with item E-1, GAD governance.
who is going to present this. Okay, thank you. All right, good evening board members.
I am your GAD Council and I'll be presenting this item. I'm going to shorthand it by calling
it the GAD Good Governance Check-in item. It's being presented to you in response to a matter
initiated at your last GAD board meeting, which was June of this year. And I'm going to try to
keep my remarks short to maximize the amount of time the GAD board has available for discussion.
But I will say as a reminder that GAD is of course is a separate legal entity from the city of
Arinda. As you can see in the staff report we go to great lengths to make sure to maintain that
separation. While the two are separate legal entities many of the same good governance
principles and laws from the state apply to both the city and to the GAD and I have done my best in
the colorful pages packet pages 23, 24 and 25 to review some of those for the board um wanted to
in particular draw your attention uh to two of the items um on the table you can see that in
In the right-most column, I've reviewed proposed updates for the Board to discuss this evening.
Wanted to flag for you a couple of those.
One is a suggestion that for the time being, we hold more frequent GAD Board meetings than
we have been having historically.
In order to both increase transparency and keep the Board and the public informed, but
also to address the important issue of the open space property transfers which
is of course the next item on this agenda so that's one of the proposed
updates for you the other for your discussion and consideration is the
question of whether to add the city manager in a GAD role overseeing the
contracted services the NGO provides as GAD manager and I'd say the other items
in that right-hand most column are just to advise you that these are things staff, your GAD staff,
are working on including regular reports by your treasurer, checking in to your insurance,
and that sort of thing. So I think with that I will just stop my prepared remarks and be prepared
to answer any questions the board has. I would ask first if there are any questions
questions for the GAD attorney.
Seeing none, let's see, would the next step be public comment on this item?
And I would say we have one speaker card that just says GAD for Mark Ashby, so I would just ask that person to indicate with a hand if you want to wait until the transfer item or speak up, thank you.
Thank you.
So we don't have any speaker cards on this, is there anyone on Zoom who'd like to speak on this matter?
Great, with that we'll bring it up for discussion.
I would love to lead off because this was my matter initiated.
And I found it difficult being asked to prepare for the meeting with the GAD manager because
I was so used to preparing for meetings with the city manager and knowing that the city
manager was so deeply involved in the developer agreement, you know, the compliance and that
agreement being out that to me at the continuity theme in the staff material
was the thing that I primarily wanted to address in suggesting that the city
manager be the GAD manager no other changes to the you know the way the GAD
is managed the day-to-day staffing but having that interface I think is
particularly helpful just because the City Council does have more turnover
The leadership of the council has more turnover.
And I would feel better advised by having the continuity of that role.
And I appreciate the GAD attorneys letting us know all of the cautions.
The risks in doing that, whether it's conflict of interest or
just sort of the separation of city and GAD roles.
And notwithstanding that, I would like to support or
recommend having the city manager in that role,
I think it would improve the way that we are
able to manage that in our role as directors.
I wanted to thank you Mayor for bringing that up
as a matter is initiated because I think it is
really important I had the same similar feelings
in preparing for our last meeting and sort of,
you know, I would, I think you've expressed
the sort of reasons and rationales and pros and cons
of doing this very well.
And also, so I also do support adding the city manager
in the GAD role, you know,
overseeing the contracted services.
I just wanna add that it's also really important
that the city manager has the relationships
with community members, right?
And has a pulse on those relationships
and also does sort of have a pulse
on the relationships of other stakeholders
that can add a huge value, right,
and bring value to the GAD,
whether it's other governmental entities,
you know, locally or in Sacramento,
and I see a real benefit there.
So, you know, I fully agree.
And I also agree with the, you know,
recommendation for having more frequent meetings.
I think that would really be beneficial for us as well.
I just, I had a question,
and perhaps I should have asked it earlier,
but is there a fiscal implication?
So it would be possible for the city manager
to keep track of the time she spent on GAD matters,
but then would we need to pay for that time differently,
or is there any fiscal implication
of having her be the GAD manager as well?
great question. I would ask the current GAD manager or the GAD attorney, whoever feels they
can speak to what is common practice? I can start and I'm sure Uri can weigh in.
If the GAD directs me to bring back an item to establish a formal role for the city manager
in the GAD, I would recommend doing that by resolution and a agreement basically between
the city and the GAD. And that would make clear that when the city manager is doing her oversight
of services provided by NGO, she's acting as GAD staff and vice versa, right? When she's
doing city managers, she's acting city staff. In the case of the clerk and the treasurer,
which have a similar dual role. There's a very modest cost reimbursement, like very modest.
I don't know if I put it in the staff report, but it's a couple of thousand dollars a year.
And you could do something similar for the city manager, but it's not something that we're,
you know, we've made a strong recommendation one way or the other. So I think that would really be,
you know, what we need to be very clear about here is neither entity is going to subsidize
the other. They are completely separate. There will not be sort of improper use of resources
one way or the other. And so that was, that's my thinking there. Did that answer your question?
Sort of. What is common practice? Well, actually, Linda might be able to answer that question from
from the city of GAD. And I'm
going to go ahead and say that
I'm from Dublin because she
comes from a city with a GAD and
was in the kind of role that
you're considering. Thank you.
Members I have had a role as a
GAD manager in my previous
community, and there was some
appropriation of my time. I want
to say it was under 5% of my
time was appropriated to the GAD.
they want to appropriate my time you have other time appropriated for GAD
staff currently that would probably do a lot more of the actual work than what I
would do. You could leave me at zero, we could appropriate a amount of
budget towards my services but it doesn't have to be significant. All right
so we have one data point and that's not something you have to decide about
this evening. But you could give us direction to come.
Early was just leaning over to say that, of course, you've already adopted a budget
for the year that we're in. And of course, that budget doesn't reflect that kind of expenditure.
And so might need a budget amendment if you wanted to implement it immediately.
But of course, next year is a new budget.
Right. It just seems to me that if we did have the city manager keep a timesheet of her
So.
For gad time separate and appropriated separately,
it would help maintain the separation of city business and gad
business for everybody's records and.
And whatnot, so that there wasn't a conflict of interest.
There wasn't a conflict of interest between.
The city and the gad that was apparent.
On paper. So I just feel like it's something we should think about.
I don't feel strongly about it, but I wanted to raise it.
I agree with all the comments so far, and as far as the question of Hain for the city
manager's time, I'm thinking out of fairness, if two others are being compensated, even
though it's nominal, we should be considering treating her similarly.
To be clear, I wouldn't be compensated, you would just be budgeting for it.
the one agency is compensating the other agency,
the individuals are not double dipping.
Right.
Clarify.
OK.
Right.
Vice Mayor, did you have any comments?
I guess my question would be, would making this change?
Which again, I agree with all the comments that
have been made, but making this change, how would that,
or would it in any way materially affect NGO's contract?
My expectation is it wouldn't change anything
about the amount of work NGO does,
the type of work they do.
I mean, they'd be basically providing,
continuing to provide all the expert technical and staff,
work that the GAD needs under the contract
that you already have with NGO.
it would be more as I described it in the staff report
and as I was envisioning it,
it would be more in a oversight
and sort of coordination role, I guess.
But this is really,
there's a great deal of flexibility that the board has
in deciding how you want to staff the GAD, you know.
And so it doesn't have to be any certain way.
It's really, we're here this evening to hear from you
what you would like it to be.
appreciate that distinction because I think that's right this was in no way
meant to be a reflection on the performance of NGO it was that it was
that intermediary role that we felt that we were missing and I that was a great
point about the community is generally going to contact the city manager I did
like in the staff report and I can't remember where it talked about
increasing contact with the Wilder HOA while there are a lot of issues right
now and I thought that was a really good step not instead of this it's an
and not an or. On the compensation matter, I guess my reaction is hearing nobody with
a strong preference either way about this year's budget. I'm inclined to lead this year's budget
and that was a good point about maybe having a nominal and I mean nominal amount so that it's
not, you know, it doesn't look completely unfair. I would only say I would really like to see it be
a fixed percent, not hourly billing because I do think that hourly billing could have
some unintended consequences and I don't know how the city manager feels about billing time,
but I despise it and I don't ever want to push it on other people. She currently does
not have a job that makes her tracker time. So I would think something like a, you know,
X percent, you know, single digit percent allocation is a maybe something that has people
and not watching their time and just performing.
Please.
I think that would work.
And I think that if we let it see how it goes this year
until the contract comes up for renewal,
and so we can kind of get an estimate
as to how much actual time the city manager felt
like it was taking her to do that role,
that would make sense too.
Also, it sounded like the other positions,
the treasurer and the city clerk,
if the amount given there is currently only about 2,000,
I think is what the dad attorney was saying that,
and if this time was either equivalent to that or less,
I don't know that we even need to go to a percentage.
We might even be able to go to a numerical amount
that was somewhat comparable, right?
So maybe it's only a thousand or something like that.
I don't know, but I would also favor,
Because the idea here is,
as you put it very well, Mayor Ant,
this is not an or, this is an and,
and so I think it's a recognition of a role that
sometimes de facto has to happen anyway.
I'm less concerned about a new financial arrangement.
I would say that unless it's recommended to have
a financial compensation attached to that,
for because of the good governance structure absent that I don't I don't
personally need to see it here but in any case putting it towards revisiting
that and getting a recommendation maybe from our GAD attorney and I'm sure this
you have other I'm sure NGOs familiar with other GADs that also have you know
gab managers that were the city attorney overseas as a gab manager as well. So I mean, I'm sorry,
the city manager. I would want to revisit it when we revisit the budget again.
The one thing I would like to do is hear from our current gab manager, because I'm
sorry we didn't ask you your thoughts and opinions about this if you had any concerns or
things you wanted us to consider? I think to echo the GAD attorney's statement we just have to make
sure that there's a clear separation mostly to protect the city and it's important that the GAD
not become indistinguishable from a city department from the perspective of the property owners within
the GAD to protect the city when the inevitable happens, right? When there's a landslide or
there's some other emergency, there's good reason to keep that separation.
Really appreciate that. And one thing I will say is I, Captain Member Malcomi had mentioned
something about the fact that a lot of the oversight role is happening informally right
now. And I think one of the things that I was hoping to accomplish is to create some
authority for the city manager to act solely with a gat hat on. And so I hear that feedback
and the hope is actually to create more clarity rather than less. And you might keep reminding
us of that. And it's always appreciated. Any other comments or thoughts?
I would say given that comment and sort of instinct that I came to the conversation with,
I do think it's important to set aside some nominal amount of money for the city manager
to be paid for her time by the GAD.
Were you thinking of a budget amendment or in the next budget cycle?
I think it's probably better to do it as a budget amendment.
I'd like to wait until the next budget cycle, but I think that separation I think is important
and we want to maintain it from the start.
and it's usually late spring uh and it goes into effect July one okay um other okay please
Councilmember Hoxie's comments right can I ask is part of the compensation
that exists even if it's nominal is that is the point of that
and that's not a good governance principle to maintain that separation.
In other words, I'm asking sort of everyone.
Yes, you see it in the agreements that are attached to the staff report.
So in the agreement, we would make clear when you have your GAD hat on,
you're acting for the GAD, and these are two separate legal entities.
I think the current compensation that the city receives
I don't know that. I don't
know if. If it works treasure
and the treasurer's services
are not totally nominal. I
mean, it is a few thousand
dollars a year, but I wouldn't
say that there is 100% cost
recovery happening here. So if
I think there's the. Signaling
right and stating in the
agreement. That's probably the
most important part. And then
if you'd like us to really try
to get down to complete cost
you know, it has a, it's computer systems that published tonight's agenda. For example,
that's, you know, a hundred percent city paid for. Um, I don't know whether the city clerk's
time is fully compensated in the amounts that we're getting, um, transferred to the city,
but we could try to figure that out if you like. But providing some compensation does support the
sort of separation of duties. And it is a good governance principle then. I think so. Okay.
And I wanted. Yeah. But I guess what I'm sharing with you. Do you have comments on that?
I could go either way on whether the city manager's time is compensated. I think it's,
it's already quite clear in the records. And if you'd like us to go that route, we can. If you're
not interested, we don't have to. In the interest of time, I would like to see if anybody has a
a motion they'd like to put forward for deliberation.
Oh, I'm sorry, the manager.
Yeah, I think the contractual instrument
is probably more important than the question of compensation.
And frankly, the messaging, the behaviors and the messaging
and that sort of thing is more important than some token
amount.
But there needs to be some consideration for a contract
have to be valid. I mean, I just think there has to be some consideration. There has to
be some compensation state. Would you like to put a motion forward? Sure. I move that
we approve the changes to the GAD contract. I'm trying to phrase the motion. I don't think
we're being asked. I think it's a direction to me, to staff, to bring back a resolution
that'll include an agreement between the GAD and the city, and I'll include in there compensation
for the city manager's time when she's in this oversight role. Thank you, that would
be the motion. Super. Do we have a second? All in favor? Wait, hold on. Before we, we're
not being asked to, are we being asked to have a motion? No, we're just being asked
for feedback. You just gave me the direction. We're giving direction. We're direction for
something to bring back that we could vote on. Right. And everybody's heads were nodding.
I can tell that that's the direction is we're not we're not being asked to write on our correct. Thank you
No, and I just I know that the next item on the agenda is one that deserves some time
so I didn't mean to rush the process it just felt like a consensus was pretty close to the finish line and with that
We will move on to e 2
Which is just a status update of the transfer of plan of control responsibilities and property ownership in Wilder development from OG
LLC to the GAD. And I would ask, is GAD Manager Eliyahu going to present on this? Or will
it be? Eric Harrell will present for NGO on this?
Super. Thank you. Come on up, Eric. Good evening, Chair Everson and board members.
My name is Eric Harrell. And this request came from the June 16th meeting to provide
an update on the GAD transfer activities. This presentation, and do we have that up?
Okay. Sorry. We'll give it just a second. Thank you. Perfect. Thank you. This presentation
focuses on the activities of the past three months, which have been significant. However,
are prepared to address questions from any of the transfer aspects even before that.
Tonight we would like, as that GAD staff, would like for you to receive the transfer update
presentation and then provide any direction to the staff. So real quick, there are four parcels out
there just as a review. There are four parcels out there that have not been transferred to the GAD
for plan of control responsibilities, and these include the development buffer, eastern
hills, quarry hills, and western hills.
And these are, the reason these haven't been transferred, the rest of the parcels within
the Wilder Development have, is these are controlled by California Department of Fish
and Wildlife regulations right now.
They're the gatekeeper for the GAD to accept its long-term plan of control responsibilities
to have access to the endowment funds. So that's the reason we haven't taken
these through to GAD ownership and GAD providing all the functions yet. The
California Department of Fish and Wildlife is working on getting their
obligations from OGLLC satisfied and so that's why we have these far parcels
that are different than all the other residential and other GATT-owned parcels
such as the detention basins. This is just a quick map of the GATT area and
the parcels where those four parcels are within the GATT. So the
recent correspondence that we've received or has been distributed, the
California and I know some of these were reviewed based on the development
agreement compliance meeting some of these have already been the board's
seen or been aware of through the September 1st meeting so the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife has issued two letters one on July 3rd and
one on August 6th they for outlining the OCL OGLC briefs of secured obligations
on September 1st, OGLLC issued a response. And one other item that we have received is Wildlife
Heritage Foundation, who's the conservation easement holder out on the Wilder development,
issued a letter documenting illegal trails on the Western Hills Open Space. We previously had one
for the eastern hills open space. So they issued a second letter for another area within
the GAD that will be East Bay regional park owned property eventually. But it is not now.
All these are still owned by OGLLC. So the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
requested that OGLLC provide a clear and concise plan to cure the failures and to comply with
its remaining obligations related to the Wilder project. This letter, the
August letter, identified about a 1.67 million dollar cost for mitigating
these remaining obligations. That was down from the July letter. They counted
several things twice, so it's not that they changed significantly what the
amount where it's just how they added them up the August letter was correct.
Of these obligations of the total of 1.67 million dollars the GAD requests so
far has been for a product just over $300,000 is the GAD's portion of that 1.67
million dollars so infrastructure and mitigation of existing compliance issues.
OGLLC, in their response letter, identified three different funding sources to potentially
cure these unfulfilled obligations. One was from the endowment that OGLLC provided to
the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for the maintenance obligations once the properties
they're transferred to their East Bay Mudd, East Bay Parks and the GAD. The
second funding source they suggested was the assessments
collected from the GAD property owners within Wilder and Orinda Oaks. And the
third one was that the OGLLC funds that they have on deposit with the city as
as part of their subdivision and development agreement
for the property.
OGLLC also made a claim that their bond had been,
substantially work had been substantially completed
and that that was not going to be an available funding source
for any significant amount
when we're considering almost $1.7 million.
So a couple of the comments we had for the initially we won't be the responding agency, although we work with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife they will provide the response, but we did have comments on some of the funding source requirements that they were pointing to.
The endowment funds that are and there's approximately
1.93 million dollars in endowment funds for the GAD to maintain its properties in perpetuity
Those are not available to the GAD those are controlled by CDFW and will not be a lot not be released to the GAD
until conditions
the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
feels like
conditions have been met to satisfy those. So while they identified as the funding source,
it's not something the GAD has any availability to or control over right now. The second was
GAD assessments. GAD assessments currently have been doing some health and safety such
as firebreaks, litter removal, and things within the OGLLC-owned properties where they haven't
been transferred but our current our use so far has always been for health and
safety not things that OGLC is needing to complete in here such as
infrastructure and things like that so we have not we have not dedicated any
funds to things like that in the past the city health deposit funds we really
appreciate the city's help with that and the city's efforts in the firebreaks and
and the Eastern Hills Open Space and getting that accomplished this year and
having some of the deposit funds go towards that. The last item is we're not
in agreement that the bond has been depleted and CDFW is of the opinion that
there is bond money available for these unfinished obligations. Sorry, that's a lot here. And
then just a couple updates for this. GAD manager has met with the Wilder HOA. The GAD attorney
continues meeting with the other attorneys from East Bay Mudd, East Bay Regional Parks,
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Heritage, and they met just most recently the 10th of
September here. And the city manager and the GAD manager have also met to coordinate the transfer efforts.
Just some more updates, onsite activity updates since we last met. Firebreaks have been completed in the Eastern Hills Open Space, graffiti over painting and litter removal within the development buffer area.
GAD staff is currently working with WHF to improve open space signage.
and then GAD staff is working with the Wildlife Heritage Foundation to document additional
violations of the conservation easement to see if we can also as this progresses have
additional claims against any bond money that's available.
There were some questions on trails both from the public and the board last time.
What the GAD does is the GAD goes and accepts city approved facilities.
The GAD and wildlife heritage have been working through with the 2018 circulation plan and
that's kind of been our guideline of what trails out there are authorized and which
ones are illegal pass.
And so this is the document that we've worked with so far because this is the city approved
plan and so just wanted to show you what we were doing on that. I will point out
really quickly talking with East Bay Mudd, East Bay Regional Parks last week.
They have eliminated one of the trails here south of Wilder that's shown on the
City of Arinda plan and that's because it was not constructed by OG LLC so the
trail going from Wilder Road extension up to the ridgeline is no longer on the
East Bay Regional Park map. They said if somebody built it they would maintain it
but they're not planning on building it. So just as a note why there's a
difference between East Bay Regional Park the rest of the trails look very
similar to what the 2018 circulation plan shows. This might be a little hard
to see, but I just wanted to provide this one. The yellow areas you see on this plan
are all the areas that the GATT is currently providing M. Muraga, Rwanda Fire District
weed abatement on. So all these yellow areas are areas that are currently being cleared
to meet the wildland fire requirements. So this is quite an area, both the eastern hills,
development buffer areas and so it extends quite a way right now even though the GAD has not yet
taken ownership of these parcels. There are a few detention basin parcels that we do own but
they're rather minor. If you can see them here we just also plot it up from Wildlife Heritage
Foundation, their purple trails, the trails in purple in there, if you can see them,
are the illegal paths that WHS has documented. So we just wanted to show in the eastern hills
open space and also the western hills open space where those trails are that WHF is notified of
to mitigate. And then we'll say delinquent property taxes. On our 2025 letter there
were outstanding taxes of $25,000. The tax bills just came out on the eighth for the
2026, 2027 fiscal year. Currently it's down quite a bit. There's about $11,400
in delinquent taxes, half of what was on there, and that's a lot due to the work
of the city manager and some other support, but it's been brought down by
about 50% and we think there's a little still some to be brought down in there
this year that got tagged on there and shouldn't still shouldn't be on there so
the delinquent property taxes number has been going down significantly can
sorry I don't want to interrupt but the slide that you were we were just
looking at referenced a much lower number it looked like a 75% reduction
yeah is that correct and that's that was before the September 8th numbers came
out because the next fiscal year they'd add on the additional taxes that were
doing taxes become delinquent. So this was the number before September 8th. We
just got the update today on the new number about $11,400. So it just we this
was published last week and so we weren't getting the numbers quite. We're
just going to report them to you orally here because we just got those in today.
So we think it's somewhere right now it's less than 11 more than 6 and we're
going to work on that with the school districts and the other agencies to make
sure those are cleared up. So the future actions is CDFW is working on a
response to OGLLC September 1st letter that's in progress we don't have a date
on that yet when they're going to issue that but say we have we have heard that
they are working on that and GAD staff will continue to work as we get updates
or additional conservation easement violations or whatever that we can
update our figures on the endowment or on the mitigation needed to bring these
back up to the obligation satisfied then we're going to continue working on that
So, I think that's the end of
that.
And then that is the end.
And I would be glad and
hopefully have enough time to
answer any questions or any
comments for this.
I know we just talked about
this, about a lot of meetings
ago, but I'm sure there are
questions.
It looks like councilmember
Hoxie has got some.
So, I understand the next step
in calling the bond is for the
And so, I think that's what
we're going to look at, but
then what are the steps after
that? And what can the bond
money, if it actually is called,
be used to complete? Can it be
used to wipe out those illegal
trails? Can it be? What could
that money actually be used for
if they're successful in calling
that bond?
So, all those items, taxes,
fencing, corrals, water troughs,
those as things that we would like satisfied under the bond what there will
be discussions on that we don't think it'll be between the bond company and
CDFW will be a discussion but we also like I just talked about we want to act
we want to things are happening even in the last year that had degraded those
properties some and so we want to make sure when they're ready to submit we've
updated everything. Thank you. I believe there's a question
from Vice Mayor. Thank you very much Eric.
In all these discussions I can't ever recall an exact number. Is there an exact
number that the bond represents? I'm gonna turn to Osa. I think
she might have the most. Did we not include that?
We think it's far in excess of the amounts
that are outstanding. I think the number that sticks in my mind is 6.7 million. And so there
should be adequate funds. What will that process look like to speak to your question? It could be
a lengthy process. So my expectation is that the first step is for CDFW to respond to the September
one letter they got from OG LLC. The next step is for them to formally reach out to the bond
surety and tell them we're calling the bond and then then we're off. This would not be as far as
I understand it the first time CDFW has called such a bond. I believe there is litigation pending
currently in Riverside County probably you know factually different from our situation but still
CDFW calling a bond. So it's not completely uncharted territory, but that litigation has
been going on for a couple of years. So I expect it to be a slow process.
Is there any requirement that we use other funds before we use bond funds or is there
any order of the funds available that we have to use them in? So no, you understand what I'm saying.
I do understand what you're saying. And I think a surety company saying something like, well,
you have these other funds that you could use to mitigate these issues, you should use those first
before calling the bond. Right, well that is the argument OGLLC is making in their response letter,
but I think our position is that this is exactly what the bond was for and this is why the surety
should pay out. And that the responsibility was OGLLC's and they have declined to meet their
responsibility. Correct, that's the argument. Yeah, that's been through California Department
efficient wildlife response and everything is this is your obligations this 1.67 million dollars
is what you have not met so this is not looking CDFW is not looking to anybody else to provide
these funds and so then if the bond is actually 6.7 million and it's something less than 2 million
to cure all these problems what happens to the rest of the bond well so the bond is not cash in
in the bank. The bond is a contractual obligation to perform. So once performance is complete,
then the bond is released and the surety can go on the merry way.
And is there any obligation for like the endowment future maintenance that OG LLC was supposed
to be providing other than that endowment?
put away funds that were at the time considered to be adequate. And then the bond includes
enough money for a true up. So if the amount needs to be adjusted upwards to reflect what
it actually costs, then the bond is supposed to be there for that as well.
And can the properties not be transferred until all these problems are solved? Or could
properties be transferred prior to with the understanding that they're in process.
So one of the things that we're working with CDFW on is can we transfer them as they are
they're ready basically. The key here is that the future property owner, so the GAD,
is going to need the endowment in order to pay for long-term management of the property. So we
need CDFW to say to us, yes, that property is ready to transfer and yes, here is the
endowment you can have. And for the GAD properties, there's one endowment for multiple properties.
So, yeah, so the CDFW has said they have no concerns on the development buffer areas. They're
saying, we're fine with the development buffer area, but they won't release any monies to do
from the endowment to do just that one parcel that we've already asked that question and
got a response that everything needs to be satisfied before we can't partition the endowment
money. Okay, thank you. Vice Mayor Gee and then Riley and then Mel Connie. I see a lot of hands up.
Okay. So the only party in all of this complicated scenario, the only party that is allowed to
what's going on the only party that is allowed to
quote call the bond is cdf and w right correct so my question is is
is there a mechanism for the city or is there some political mechanism is there how
how i am i'm not sure you know i know that you're in regular communication with them but
Um, it does seem like this is dragging on, has drug on, continues to drag on.
Everyone's very, very tired of that.
I mean, is there a way to bring more pressure on them to act, I guess is my question.
Uh, I would say at this point you have CDFW's full attention.
And I think we have through the city manager's office, we've brought maximum
pressure to bear on CDFW, but, you know, I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
These, you know, the surety, if they fight, could make this a longer process.
I can understand that part, but it also seems like, you know, we have our state
representatives, we have our, um, you know, our political advocates.
I mean, it does seem, again, CDF and W is a state agency, right?
They do report to the state of California.
So it does seem like this is a scenario that, you know,
maybe there needs to be more impetus to cause them to,
you know, to help move forward.
Yeah, and I can, I don't know, Linda wants to,
do you want to give any more background
on where we are with the state?
I could say in my communications, just like I said,
we have their full attention.
My, they are cooperative.
They want, from what I can tell,
want to help us solve this problem. Everybody is convinced that transferring
these properties into public ownership is going to solve a major problem that
we have. So that's what we are working very hard to try to do as soon as
possible. We have several more questions and then we're going to take public
comment. I know this is going to run a little bit past our seven o'clock
finish time but since we're in the middle of the process we are going to
finish asking questions take public comment and and just it's not a specific
direction it's mostly an update but I just want to let people know that we're
still mid mid-process here. Please go ahead. I feel like I need to take a
couple steps backwards and when I hear that OGLC doesn't thinks that the bond
is depleted or somewhat depleted I don't understand how a bond could be
depleted it if it hasn't been called. That sounds like someone's been spending
the underlying money to me? I don't know. They in their September letter they
provided a spreadsheet September 1st letter showing the categories they felt
like and this is their their interpretation of it that they were they
had satisfied a number of categories and there was about $80,000 left on what they
felt was their bond. That is not the the that was their opinion and the bond
holders opinion not CDFW is not taking that approach as the as the bond holder
you know okay so yeah it was okay so that's their opinion and showing what
They want to show.
Okay, got it.
Thank you.
Two quick things.
One is, can the city held deposit funds
be used to pay the back taxes, the delinquent taxes?
Yes.
So since that was negotiated to a huge,
huge savings by our city manager and GAD staff,
Why shouldn't we clear that bank before they don't...
I mean, don't we wanna clear the credit card right away?
So we had considered what we should pay down
before the end of the fiscal year
and determined that while we had the funds available
to do it, we didn't have to in order to avoid
this going into tax sale.
So we're watching very closely to make sure
that that doesn't happen.
And before it goes into tax sale, we will make sure to pay.
Okay, we just don't want to see that number creep up.
And then my second question, I know we don't,
we're running out of time tonight,
but the next time the GAD meets,
there was a reference in the staff report
to a community outreach meeting with the Wilder HOA.
And I would really, really like to hear,
personally, I would like to hear a more descriptive feedback
about what came out of that
and what the Wilder HOA's feedback is as to prioritization
and use of funds.
I am concerned about wildfire remediation, especially.
Let's make that a question versus if something didn't work.
Can you at least give the recording?
So this is just something I'd like to hear more about in the future.
I'd like to hear the short answer now.
The story was participating in that meeting,
so I would like him to address that.
Yes. We had a meeting with the HOA Board and perhaps a week later or so,
we had a follow-up to address some questions
that hadn't been addressed during that meeting
and to provide clarifications.
I know there are members of the board here
and I believe we've addressed the questions
that the board had, it was a very productive meeting.
I think we certainly learned a lot in that exchange.
Thank you, before we take public comment, more questions.
One quick question for our GAD attorney.
If this bond were to be called,
and you mentioned a minute ago, litigation,
conceiving that that could happen in some way, shape,
or form, who has to pay for the attorney part of,
I don't know which side it would be, I mean.
Right, so my expectation is that CDFW
be represented by the state attorney general's office.
So they would, the state would pay on the state side.
And yeah, does that answer your question?
Are there any other questions?
Seeing none, we are gonna open this for public comment.
I've got Bob Finch first, followed by Mark Ashby.
And then we'll see if anybody else wanted to speak.
Those are the only cards I've got.
And I'll just ask you to limit comments
please to three minutes.
Thank you for the GAD board and the ANOSA manager
and the efforts of Linda Smith
in whatever capacity it's been.
Thank you very much for your additional impetus
to get this over the finish line.
I really appreciate it.
That's it.
Thank you so much.
Mark Ashby, please.
Hi, my name is Mark Ashby.
I'm a Wilder homeowner in resident.
I also want to express Wilder Community's appreciation to the GAD Board, the Arinda
City Manager, the City Attorney and the NGO staff for their collaboration toward our shared
goal of transitioning the open space parcels surrounding Wilder to the respective management
agencies.
The operational work that Eric mentioned earlier performed this summer, weed abatement, litter
and graffiti removal, signage installation, they're visible and appreciated by our community.
September 1st City Council meeting the Wilder HOA has submitted letters to both
CDFW and Assemblymember Bauer-Khan's office urging CDFW to find OG property LLC in
default and call the Shirty Bond to fund the outstanding obligations described in
the August letter. We're encouraged that Bauer-Khan's office has been active in
active contact with the city manager and that progress is being made towards this
resolution. We urge the board to work closely with CDFW and other agencies to
ensure OG is found in default and the surety bond is called and the outstanding obligations
are fulfilled as expeditiously as possible so that these parcels of land can be transferred,
the virus mitigated and these lands can be protected as promised. We note that tonight's
agenda acknowledged and Eric mentioned and also GAD staff's concern about the viability
of OG's proposed funding sources. These are concerns that the Wilder HOA share and we've
communicated these concerns to CDFW as well. OG proposed using legally
restricted endowment funds and GAD assessment balances collected from
Miranda taxpayers, neither of which are appropriate for OG's pre-transfer
obligations. In addition, we asked the board to ensure OG is held accountable
for the approximately $164,000 in outstanding GAD transfer review charges,
costs that should be borne by OG not by Arinda taxpayers. Finally we ask the
board to continue the stopgap, fire a fuel management on the hillsides adjacent
to Wilder and also require OG to maintain adequate liability insurance
until the parcels are fully transferred. The city's attorney city attorney's
preliminary review suggests that OG's recently obtained insurance certificate
may not meet the development agreements requirements and Wilder families cannot
be left without meaningful protection in the interim. Many of us chose to make Wilder our
home because of the surrounding protected open space, a central promise of this development
that OG has failed to honor. We ask the board to hold OG to these commitments, support CDFW
in calling the bond to fulfill OG's outstanding obligations so these lands can finally be
transferred to the agencies that will manage them as promised. Thank you.
Thank you.
I'd ask if there's anybody else here tonight who'd like to speak on this matter?
And seeing none, is there anyone on Zoom with their hand raised?
No.
Okay, great.
There's no specific request for direction here.
Were there any final comments before we finish this matter?
No, I just appreciate the work that's being done to bring this and keep moving forward
and apply the pressure to move forward with calling the bond and taking actions necessary.
I would just make one comment that we haven't talked about tonight, but that's the hard
work from everybody on the GAD team and the City team to alleviate active fire risks.
So to prioritize getting the cattle fencing, the cattle grazing, coyote bush removed.
And I know there's a lot of collective efforts out there that we're not waiting for those
bonds to get paid before we focus on safety.
And so I know there's sort of some parallel tracks and I just appreciate everyone's efforts.
that, we will move on and I'll ask if there are any matters initiated. If not, we will belatedly
adjourn the GAD meeting. Thank you all for the time. And does anybody need a break or should we
roll right into the city meeting? We'll roll right in. Just a minute.
Well, the flowers are somewhere and they're supposed to be there. They're still in there,
on the table. No, I can't. Can you? Oh, wait, I'll go right on it.
Good evening. I know a few people are getting settled, but because we're starting late,
we up here at the oh, wait, we are missing our city manager. I'll talk slowly. Let me
give it a minute. There is a festive atmosphere in the room. We'll call to order the meeting
anyway and we will begin with the roll call I believe just noting that all council members
are present and if you'll all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. 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 thank you uh we reported previously there
were uh no reportable matters from the closed session and with that we'll move to adopt the
agenda i'm not aware of any changes and we'll move that we adopt uh no changes mayor no changes to
the agenda from staff great do i have a second second all in favor aye with that we'll move to
items for the good of the city beginning with E1, the proclamation declaring the month of September
as emergency preparedness month. I know most of you are here for item E2, but we love emergency
preparedness in Orinda. Looking at you, police and fire in the room. So I'm actually going to read
this one. It's long. I'm going to read most of it. Proclamation declaring September 2026 as emergency
preparedness month. Whereas the city of Orinda faces risks from wildfires, earthquakes, and other
emergencies and preparing for these hazards is a shared responsibility among residents businesses
and local government. And whereas maintaining defensible space, preparing emergency supplies
and go bags, signing up for emergency alerts and knowing evacuation routes are essential steps
residents can take to protect themselves and their families and their neighbors. And whereas
the city of Arenda encourages residents to utilize ArendaReady.com as a central resource
for emergency preparedness information including evacuation planning, emergency alerts, wildfire
preparedness, earthquake safety, and other tools to help the community prepare for, respond to,
and recover from disasters. Whereas the City of Arinda works closely with the MOFD, Arinda Police
Department, Contra Costa County regional agencies and community partners to strengthen our resilience
and awareness. And whereas emergency preparedness month prepare provides an opportunity to remind
residents. The preparedness begins before an emergency and that every household and community
member has a role in making Orinda safer and more resilient. I therefore proclaim September
as emergency preparedness month in Orinda. Now we move to item E2. I would ask my fellow
council members to join me. Can we use the mic at the podium? Yeah, I think you can. We're going to
take turns reading the whereas's because this is a fun one. Can we hold it? It's nice. A proclamation
honoring Sherry Marie Smith and declaring September 26, 2026, Sherry Smith Day in the City of Arrinda.
Whereas Sherry began her service to the City of Arrinda on September 26,
I'm sorry. It's not my bigger
version. I'm a bigger version.
Whereas Sherry Marie Smith has
devoted an extraordinary 34
years to public service,
including 10 years as the city
clerk, demonstrating unwavering
professionalism, integrity and
commitment to good governance.
And whereas Sherry began her
2016 and will officially retire on September 26, 2026, exactly 10 years to the day proving
once and for all that no city clerk would ever leave such an important date to chance.
Whereas Sherry's career reflects exceptional expertise in municipal administration, elections,
records, legislative processes, and City Council operations, along with a legendary ability
to locate any document ever created. And, whereas Sherry has consistently demonstrated
exceptional attention to detail, sound judgment, professionalism, patience, and the remarkable
ability to remain calm while everyone around her asked Sherri you know where
we can find and whereas she supported Arinda's modernization efforts led
improvements in records and agenda management mentored colleagues and
maintained the calm patient professionalism that has defined her
service and after 34 years of calendars agendas elections minutes resolutions
records, requests, deadlines, public meetings and Brown Act questions, Sheri
has more than earned the opportunity to enjoy a calendar free of City Council
meetings and whereas although the city of Arinda will greatly miss her
professionalism, knowledge, humor, friendship and steady hand, Sheri is
looking forward to retirement with her husband Fred,
trading agencies, agendas, and staff reports
for a time together, regular gym visits,
we'll be checking on you, leisurely travel,
new adventures, and the occasional fine bottle of wine
enjoyed without wondering whether an agenda
was posted 72 hours in advance.
Okay, let's go back over here.
now therefore be it proclaimed that I Brandon Iverson, Mayor of Orinda hereby recognize and
honor Sherry Marie Smith for her 34 years of distinguished public service, including 10
outstanding years of service to the City of Orinda, expressing sincere appreciation for
her contributions and hereby declare September 26th, 2026 as Sherry Smith Day in the City of Orinda.
thank you Mayor we also have other presentations this evening from other folks and so I want
to make sure we get those presentations together then I could say a few words and then we could
perhaps turn the floor over to Sherry to say final words let's bake that in after we do
the sure that'd be great let's do that we will go ahead and start do we have any we've
We've got representatives from Congressman DeSaunee's office, representatives from Senator
Grayson's office, representatives from Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan's office, and representatives
from Supervisor Anderson's office.
So we'll start with Congressman DeSaunee's representative.
Thank you.
My name is Kaylee.
I'm here on behalf of the Congressman's office.
Sherry, I've had the pleasure of getting to know you at our Arinda liaison meetings.
And I just truly admire your professionalism, your responsiveness, and as people like you
who make the city run. And so I want to thank you for all your hard work on behalf of the city
and wish you the best in the next chapter. So congratulations this letter on behalf.
Present that esteemed mayor and council members. My name is Marilyn Lucy and I am representing
I'm Rachel Zenner with State Senator Tim Grayson. We have a joint resolution from our offices and
legislators. We would like to read the last clause to you, Sherry. Our bosses wanted us to do that.
So I will go ahead and do that for myself and for Rachel. Yeah. Be it resolved by Assemblymember
Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan and Senator Timothy S. Grayson that Sherry Smith be extended
deep appreciation for her dedication and contributions to people throughout the state of California
and conveyed best wishes for all the richness and rewards of an active and productive retirement.
Congratulations.
questions. We have Sam here as well from the city to take your photo. Hello board members.
Council members. I'm sorry. I'm Rasha Chapman and I'm here representing Supervisor Candice
Anderson from Contra Costa County and I have a proclamation here for Sherry which I'm not
going to read because this is personal for me. So Sherry, first of all, congratulations
on your retirement and especially the 10 years that you work for the City of Veranda. Nine
those years, I had the privilege of working with you. And I have to say that you demonstrated
exceptional work ethic with grace and professionalism, always willing to help,
always caring for people. Whenever there was an issue, remaining calm and collected,
whatever happens. And I just have to say that you will be dearly missed for all of your hard work
that you provided for the city of Arenda and just a very caring and thoughtful friend for me.
And on behalf of Supervisor Candace Anderson and the full board of Contra Costa County,
We appreciate your outstanding leadership and your service to all of us.
And congratulations on your retirement.
Mayor, if I could say a few remarks on behalf of me myself and the staff.
I've had the good fortune of working with Sherry now for two over 10 years and Arinda,
but it did not take long for me to understand just how deeply respected and appreciated that
Sherry is in this community and amongst the city staff and the city council.
One of the things I appreciated most about Sherry is despite having more than three decades
in local government, she never stopped being willing to learn and evolve and improve the
organization.
When I arrived, we talked about embracing technology, digitizing all of our records,
modernizing our systems.
She could have very easily smiled politely at me and waited for me to move on to something
else, but she did not.
She jumped in with both feet.
She really helped move this organization forward, updating all of our technology, spending countless
hours preparing the organization for online records management.
Anyone who has undertaken a records management project knows how hard it can be to convince
an entire organization to move that direction.
But beyond her professional accomplishments, she's just simply somebody you want on your
team.
She's thoughtful, decent, principled, dependable.
Supportive and incredibly committed to doing things the right way
You know, we were marked in the proclamation about her retiring
10 years exactly but also remarkably she had her
Party in Brisbane ten years ago tonight as well when she retired from Brisbane
So she's been really precise about getting these states down and we really appreciate that precision
Sherry, after 34 years of public service,
you have certainly earned this next chapter.
I hope that it involves a lot of time with Fred.
Wonderful adventures for you, great meals,
and a few games of blackjack for me, if you wouldn't mind.
And most importantly, I hope you enjoy waking up
and realizing that whatever is happening
at this evening's council meeting
is officially somebody else's problem.
I wanna thank you again for your friendship,
your council, your service,
and everything that you've done for this community.
You will be missed tremendously
and we could not be happier for you.
Thank you.
Take any public feedback?
We are now gonna see if anybody from the public
would like to speak on the Sherri Smith proclamation.
We'll do Mr. Wornoff and then Mr. Kosla.
Good evening.
My name is Nick Warnoff
and I just want to, on a personal basis,
thank you for working with me professionally and extremely competently. As many people in this
room know I have been very involved with the city and I've had a lot of occasions to work with Sherry
And her work has always been of the highest quality,
the highest level of professionalism.
And although I know at times I can be a challenge
to deal with, Sherry always treated me kindly.
So thank you very much.
And may your retirement be as good as mine has been.
Thank you so much.
Nick, you're up.
Other Nick, you're up.
Thank you. Mayor Iverson, Vice Mayor T, members of the Council. My name is Nick Costla, long
time resident of Orinda, people like to brag about that here. I just had, you know, I don't
prepare anything. So I don't know what's going to come out of my mouth right now. But I just
thought I was thinking because I saw Amy and a bunch of other folks. And Darlene, you're
on the Council. I think when I started on the Council, 2018, I'm going to say, it was
It was going so great like we had here's our priorities for the year there was public safety
we were bonding for things it was um downtown revitalization like it started off great
then all of a sudden on halloween of that year there was terrible terrible event that happened
we're into a bunch of people got murdered um and that led to trying to figure out how we were going
to deal with the Airbnb I think we all made we went on the council our big I remember we had a
meeting and the first thing we said is this will never happen again in our town.
So that led to a lot of discussion and then we got to COVID happening which was about a year later
after we got on the council and then after that there was the BLM movement. I think for the first
time Amy would probably know better than me. I think we did a curfew in Orinda for the first
time for 902, kind of right around COVID. So it was just a wild, wild time. I'm sure you've had a
a lot of those in your career, but through all of it, it was always Sherry who was steadfast.
She was the one the community would call. I can't imagine the phone calls you got during
that time, but always just cool headed, in control. It just felt so nice to know there's
an adult in the room and that was always Sherry. And I think, you know, in thinking about you,
I started to think about who the best, have a minute, 20 seconds left, who the best bosses
I've ever had were. And they were all female bosses, and I have two daughters, so I think
a lot about them. I think about Maxine Grant, who's my first second job out of college.
Ali Sweeney, who I'm working for now, and you're the third best boss I've ever had.
So again, I've told my daughters about you, and I always try to think, because one of
them's in college, one of them's a junior in high school, and we talk a lot about their
careers and what they're going to do in life. And I always talk about your professionalism,
which we've heard that a lot here tonight.
And if they can be just half the professional
that you've been and just holding all of us together
and just being such a great leader in this community,
I'll think that I've done a very big success
with my parenting.
So thank you so much for everything.
Thank you, council.
And I have 30 seconds left
if Nick Warren off wants it or anyone else.
Thank you.
Sorry, you got to wrap it up, Nick.
Would anybody else like to speak on this matter?
think we have a lot of reception attendees here tonight. Amy Wirth, please come on up.
I love being able to fill out a speaker card. Here. Well, gosh, Sherry, what can we say? Lots
of stories, but we'll save those for the reception. But, you know, I just, I don't think we can thank
her enough and it's so wonderful that the council has organized this great celebration for you,
Sherry. And I remember when she came, and as a matter of fact, last week on the front page of
the Chronicle was a big article about Brisbane. I just want you to know you don't have to go back
there. You have to enjoy your retirement. You earned it. But, you know, Nick mentioned all the
challenges that we dealt with during those 10 years and how calmly Sherry helped all of us
navigate it. And I particularly remember when the COVID hit. And we went from meeting in this
beautiful auditorium where everybody knew the protocol, everybody knew what to do. And I talked
to Sherry, I think, at the time. And I said, well, you know, our book group uses this thing called
Zoom. And of course, we were all jumped on Zoom. And Sherry knew exactly how to handle that. And
I think we were lucky. I think we were one of the few cities that didn't get hacked because she did
such a fabulous job of organizing it. But the other thing that Sherry does as the convener
of the Mayor's Liaison Meeting every month, she really has the opportunity to work with
all the community groups in Arinda and outside and all the community members who interact
with the council. And every person she talks to, you do it with such grace and warmth and
kindness and openness, and truly lived the dream and the idea and the goal that local
government is for local people. So just want to thank you so much, and say how fortunate we are,
how blessed we have been to have worked with you, and to know that we're fortunate that you're not
going too far away, and we'll continue to be involved in the community. So Sherry, thank you
so very much. Is there anyone else in the audience who'd like to speak? And if not,
I'll ask if there's anyone on Zoom. Okay, Sherri Smith, we'd like to see if you'd like to see a few
words. I would. And actually, I wrote it down because I didn't want to forget anything. And
also, hopefully I won't, there will be no tears, hopefully. I am so incredibly grateful and honored
of the city. I'm so honored to
have served the city of Arrinda,
its residents, mayors, council
members and staff over the last
10 years. My heart is full
tonight as I stand before you.
Thank you for making me feel so
appreciated and for giving me
the privilege of being a part
of this wonderful community.
When I think back on my career
over the past 35 years, I
But who's counting?
And of course that means so much more than simply attending the meeting.
It means preparing for them, managing all the logistics at the meeting and following
up on the actions taken afterward.
After all these years, I am finally ready to hand it all over to my successor.
Our new City Clerk Joelle Faulkler is an extraordinary person and so very qualified to step up into
this role here in Arinda.
I know she will bring great care, dedication and professionalism to the serving the city
of Arrenda.
I also want to take this moment to say how much I admire each one of you for your time
and effort and hard work you give to serve this community on a volunteer basis.
You do this all while holding jobs, raising families and being deeply involved with volunteer
work and other organizations throughout our community.
It is evident to me how deeply each of you cares about Arundah and its residents.
I have had the privilege of witnessing the commitment firsthand and I want you to know
how much I respect and appreciate each one of you.
As for me, I am excited for a whole new adventure ahead.
I am looking forward to having more free time to pursue all the things I love, to enjoy
the beautiful city of Arundah that I am so fortunate to call home, and to simply have
a little more time to enjoy life. I hope to see all of you around town at community events
and perhaps in places where I am no longer carrying a city council agenda. And finally,
I want to thank my wonderful husband, Fred, who has provided his year, his love, and his
unwavering support throughout my time here in Arinda. Fred, I love you so much. And thank
Thank you to all of you here tonight and in the community from the bottom of my heart.
It has been an incredible honor to serve this city and I will always be grateful for the
people and the community that I have made this year's soap a special for me.
So thank you.
Thank you Sherry for such beautiful words and that's a really hard act to follow.
So thank you.
Hard act to follow, public forum.
we don't have any speaker cards, although I've got a Pamela West speaker card, I'm not
sure what matter that's for. Was that for public forum? Come on up. You're our only
speaker card and then we'll see if anybody else would like to speak. Three minutes, please.
Well, that's a very hard act to follow. But I also realize how well, oops, that's okay.
city's been run and thank you so much I my name is Pamela West and I am running
for Contra Costa County's Board of Education in area two which includes
Orinda because I care about educating our children. For years I served on the
Orinda Union School District's governing board and I have to say it was one of
the highlights of my life. I attended a board meeting last night and I had that
warm fuzzy feeling all over again as the OIS leadership class made a
presentation so I look forward to serving on a board a school board again.
Contra Costa County has been our home for about 40 years and we have raised
our four children here who all went to public schools and graduated including
from colleges. My goals on the County Board of Education will be to help ensure that every
student receives the best possible education and a chance to reach their highest potential.
I will bring to the Board a collaborative, results-focused approach to building strong
schools and communities where every child can succeed. But members of our community
and community surrounding this area and I have come to the conclusion that there are
lots of things that the County Board of Education could do for our area. And they include cyber
security systems, AI approaches and monitoring, mandated programs, guidance and instructional
tools, professional development for teachers, proven special education programs, funding
advocacy, more collaboration between the county and the districts.
And to those, I would add adequate counseling and health services, an emphasis on reading
that begins with early reading programs, math and science programs that serve the needs
of all students, all of which the incoming county superintendent agrees with me on.
So I've had lots of input, I think I have a mandate, and I'd like to follow through.
I hope that you will vote for me on November 3rd, and I want to thank this community for
all that they have done for my family and myself.
Thank you so much for your time.
Thank you.
I don't have any other speaker cards.
Is there anyone else in the room for public forum?
Seeing none, do we have any raised hands on Zoom?
with that we will go to Councilmember Reports. I think we will start with
Councilmember Hoxie this time. I don't have anything to report tonight.
Councilmember Malconnick. Three very brief things. One is that there was a
meeting of the County Elections Department and I serve as the Mayor's
liaison liaison to that and the one feedback take away from that was there's
one change in the mail ballots are going to be postmarked when they are processed, not
went by the postal service. And so there was a real, the county offices are telling everyone
to vote early, turn in their ballots early, to allow for that time or after sort of October
23rd or so, place them in the drop boxes. We do have a drop box right here outside City Hall.
And then number two is we have a new restaurant in Theater Square that is going to be opening
and they're doing their, soon Sarso is coming. I'm sure our city manager will talk more about that.
And I will save the next thing. It's not timely for our next meeting because I know we have a
a reception and get to. All right, Vice Mayor G. I don't have a report tonight. There's
been no meetings in the last two weeks. Council Member Riley, no report tonight. All right,
we did have a mayor's liaison meeting and I may be stepping on the city manager's toes,
but I'll go fast. September is annual transit month in the Bay Area. And so celebrating
public transportation, a lot of events around that. Last week we had the 25th anniversary
of 9-11 and some really important events remembering those who died and those who served heroically
on that anniversary.
This Friday is Miramani Homecoming.
Go, Matts.
The classic car show was last Saturday, a big success.
OIS Soccer this fall had 800 kids sign up, which I believe is a new record.
We love OIS, O-Y-S soccer.
the Parks and Rec one, not the middle school. The Miramani Latin Club is number one in
the nation of enrollment and our APs had a 95% pass rate this past year. So with that,
I will turn it over to the city manager. I will try and go quickly as well. Thank you,
mayor. We are putting out just social media and communications around election signs.
They're starting to pop up around town. There are 13 designated locations for the placement
election signs. We've gotten a lot of feedback from the community directly about those signs.
Please do not tamper with those signs. If you have any concerns about those signs,
please call City Hall and we'll address those concerns. We had a road closure this week due
to a severe accident along Camino Pablo. I think that caused a lot of concern in the community
about our ability to respond in the event of an evacuation. Please know that if there was an
evacuation that was required, we would have not conducted a
full investigation and closed the road, as was necessary for
this event. But I did want to acknowledge Officer Talifero and
Officer Grossman, they saved the life of the man who was hit by a
vehicle of somebody driving under the influence. So we are
very grateful to them for saving that person's life. October 22,
we have our trunk or treat event coming up and they believe we
either close to sold out or nearly sold out. We have one stall left or are we done? We have
a little space left if you'd like to participate in trunk retreat. Thursdays in Arinda is coming
up this week. We have Tom and the Broken Hearts performing on Thursday evening, so please come
out and enjoy that. And on October 1st, the free stone peaches will perform. We are having to do
some repair work. East Bay Mudd is working on a water issue in the Sleepy Hollow neighborhood.
There will be notifications going out for next week. There will be water shutoffs required in
order to make this repair, and so those residents will be notified of that water shutoff requirement.
We have an event called Safe at Scale coming up on October 29th over at the Arinda Theatre. It's a
viewing of a show on PBS called Weathered, and it's a story about after the L.A. firestorms,
and we're going to have an interesting panel discussion following the showing of the
55-minute film, and it'll include Senator Grayson, Assemblymember Bauer-Cahan,
the director of the movie, the fire chief, and really talk about wildfire readiness and
preparedness, and of course members of the council will also be present at that as well.
We have a parent education night plan being planned for October 8th working in conjunction
with OUSD and we're very excited about that as well and I think I got through my list.
Terrific, with that we will move right into the consent calendar. I would ask if there are any
items that people would like to pull for discussion. Seeing none, I will move that
we adopt the consent calendar as proposed. Do we have a second? A second. All in favor? Aye.
And with that, we will move right into Policy Matters.
That's K-1, a work session on the Downtown Precise Plan.
And looks like Darren Hughes from Planning
is going to be our presenter.
And I've been giving clear instructions to Darren.
15 minutes, Darren.
We have people here that want to enjoy a party tonight.
I get very excited about the Downtown Precise Plan.
It's what I was tired of.
15 minutes, I'm starting the clock.
I have a script.
I will keep to that mostly.
All right, so good evening, Mayor and members of the City
Council, members of the public.
We are here to hold a work session regarding
the potential update and re-adoption of the Downtown
Precise Plan, or DPP.
Tonight, we'll be looking at proposed amendments
that would enable the DPP to be re-adopted
with the continued existence of the downtown commercial
and business zoning districts in mind.
And I'll present some safety modeling and strategies
to ensure our downtown remains vibrant, safe,
and aligned with our community's vision.
All right, so this will be a high-level overview.
We'll briefly review the background of the DPP,
discuss some proposed administrative amendments,
provide a quick update on the Arinda BART station
and staff's efforts to prepare that site for future housing
element requirements, and touch upon a proposed housing pool
concept.
We'll also review some recent LADRUS evacuation modeling
and discuss updating Connect Arinda, the Connect Arinda
plan to better align with our future goals.
So for a bit of context, the downtown precise plan
was crafted over a period of years, starting in end of 2019,
leading up to the adoption of the six cycle housing element
and the safety element, which altogether composed
the project we call plan Arinda.
When it was conceived, the DPP was
intended to pave the way for rezonings
to allow mixed use housing in the downtown
so that the community would be able to meet its assigned
capacity for housing production during the 6th cycle. Plano Rindo was
approved and the DPP was adopted along with it on January 31st, 2023. Overall,
the core purpose, the ongoing purpose of the DPP was to serve as the city's
comprehensive visioning document for downtown revitalization. It was intended
to serve as a policy framework rather than a strict regulatory mandate. So I
do want to emphasize a critical point. The DPP did not rezone property or grant
entitlements or approved specific projects, it was a guiding document. If re-adopted,
it would not necessitate or call for any additional rezoning beyond what has already
been established. So, as you know, the DPP was set aside in
October 2024 to allow the city to remediate the environmental impact report following
litigation against the city. Following that, in March 2025, when the EIR was re-certified,
the city council directed staff to look at how we could revise the plan rather than re-adopt
it as is. Staff was directed to ensure the revised plan would comply with current state
housing mandates, would include updated local and regional policies, and would directly
address wildfire evacuation concerns. So to meet the council direction, staff has proposed
several amendments included in a red line document with the agenda materials. First,
We propose making administrative changes to accurately reflect the newly established downtown
core and downtown general zoning districts as existing conditions alongside the older
downtown commercial and business districts, rather than posing them as something that
would ultimately replace the older districts altogether.
We are also shifting our policy language regarding the objective design standards since they
have been adopted, the DPP will focus on implementing them rather than creating them.
We are also proposing amendments to acknowledge the updated regulatory landscape. State laws
passed from 2023 onward have the potential to heavily influence downtown development.
In the red line text that we provided, proposed amendments would identify and discuss these
laws within the DPP including AB 2097 regarding parking deregulation near transit which has
had the biggest impact on downtown development applications. AB 1287 regarding density bonuses
and various streamlining laws like SB 423 and AB 2011. Acknowledging these in the DPP
insurers so that we are planning with a clear understanding of state parameters at this
minute at least. All right. Proposed amendments. So wildfire evacuation and safety. Proposed
amendments reflect current downtown conditions and provide an overview of the updated MOFD
We also proposed incorporating the use of
laterist evacuation modeling software into our guiding policies to ensure that future
development and planning efforts are continually evaluated through a data-driven safety lens.
And here on this particular slide is a map that shows the very high fire, or sorry, the
fire hazards of Verity Zones as they are currently implemented through MOFD policy, which actually
shows a huge difference from the 2020 approved very fire hazard severity zones, which actually
only had very high fire hazard severity zone going down Camino Pablo.
So we've got a lot more regulations regarding fire safety in the downtown just as a result
of these policies.
So for the San Pablo Creek, that's a chapter we want to keep.
We want to keep it largely intact.
we would propose making minor updates to reflect the ongoing efforts by the friends of Urinda
Creeks and staff would work directly with them to accurately characterize those recent
trail and restoration efforts. Overall this is a chapter that's been cited as showing
off the community focused placemaking that exemplifies the vision of the DPP and how
we want to shape the downtown. So it's a pretty important component of the plan.
to the housing pool proposal. So, staff researched this concept at the direction of a council
member to address some early interest from property owners of non-upzoned downtown sites
who wish to develop housing. I'll show a little bit more detail on this proposal in a few
slides, but first I'm going to provide a bit of context. So, first we have no net loss.
the slide illustrates why flexibility is becoming increasingly important regarding our housing
capacity. Our previously established buffer for low income housing and the six cycle housing
element has been drastically reduced. When the Caltrans gateway site was not accepted
by HCD prior to the housing element adoption in 2023, we were left with a buffer of only
five units for lower income housing categories. Subsequently, the approval of the payment
project at 31 Orinda Way which is a housing element site without a residential component
triggered state no net loss rules which erased most of the rest of our surplus buffer for lower
income categories. If any additional sites slated for low income capacity gets developed without
housing during the cycle the city would be forced to navigate further no net loss challenges
which typically requires identifying and rezoning other sites to maintain our capacity.
This brings us to an update on the Arrinda BART station site. As you may recall the
2023 housing element included specific actions to prepare the station's parking lots for future
housing development and in 2024 staff secured an MTC grant to pursue a memorandum of understanding
with Caltrans and BART that would pave the way for that development and that planning for the future
housing element cycle. Unfortunately in July 2026 Caltrans officially confirmed that they have no
intention of releasing the land for housing development. Because the station is located
entirely within the active median of State Route 24, freeway right of rules reserve the
land exclusively for transportation functions. Caltrans determined that introducing permanent
housing into this controlled access environment would create fundamental conflicts with state
and federal highway safety regulations, emergency response protocols, and structural integrity
of their facilities. Releasing the parcel would also trigger significant logistical
and engineering complications negatively impacting highway maintenance and interchange
capacity, all while requiring extensive noise abatement for non-transportation uses.
Ultimately, Caltrans noted that there is simply no precedent in California for developing
housing within an active freeway median, no matter how large it is.
In response to this definitive determination, staff is redirecting the remainder of the
MTC grant funding to enable our consultants to begin preliminary research on alternative
sites that may be suitable for upcoming so the upcoming seventh cycle of the
housing on so effectively there's the potential for a squeeze on options when
we head into that cycle and staff wants to ensure we're examining any creative
solutions that could help build bridges to accommodate further growth so for the
housing pool the basic concept here would be that the council would
determine a total number of units that you would be that you would be
comfortable with supporting across the downtown 200 for instance based off of
the maximum zoning capacity the density capacity for a given parcel outside the
and this would be outside the already up zone parcels and any projects that come
forward requiring rezoning into downtown core or downtown general could opt into
a community benefits program to earn support for the required general plan
and zoning map amendments the community benefits would be based on a menu of
options pulled from city goals like the connect to Rinda document I'll talk about momentarily
that reflect desired place making and connectivity in the downtown. It's kind of a flexible this kind
of flexible approach could ensure that we have a comprehensive strategy for accommodating any
interest in development outside the housing element sites. While it may serve as only a minor
buffer for our housing numbers the primary takeaway from this option is that it functionally
signals that Arinda is flexible and open for business for high quality development.
This is simply an additional option that could be included with the DPP,
but re-adoption of the DPP does not hinge upon its inclusion.
So to understand how future downtown development might impact safety,
we ran a series of LADRIS evacuations simulations for both the North Arinda and South
Arenda evacuation routes of an example of North Arenda here, and we'll go to South Arenda next.
We compared our current baseline conditions, which also assumes development of housing at
the housing element sites that have already been upzoned against a scenario that assumed a
theoretical maximum build out of 887 additional residential units across the downtown if one were
to rezone everything in one go. And we did this at this scale because this shows the two extremes
that are possible within that we're not proposing that full pool for the purposes of a housing
pool. Data is encouraging while adding housing density would add vehicles. The impact on
the typical evacuee would be minimal. In the north the medium trip time only increased
by one minute and in the south the medium trip time remained flat at 17 minutes. This
This is averaging multiple scenarios, and the graphics here show clearance times for
one of the scenarios used to calculate an average.
The basic concept here is that because the downtown is immediately adjacent to Highway
24, the added vehicles would ingress into the evacuation routes without creating massive
cascading bottlenecks for the rest of the city.
And this is just a table showing those averages.
So bringing us to Connector Rinda.
So this document was originally adopted in 2019.
It's now seven years old.
This document focused on connectivity and placemaking
within the downtown and proposes a series of projects,
some of which are high in the sky,
some of which are a little bit more feasible
that might better connect the two sides of downtown.
We recommend reopening it for updates
so that it aligns with our current needs.
If we utilize developer contributions in the future,
Connectoranda could serve as a good menu
to ensure funds go towards council-approved projects
like creek access or pedestrian pathways.
We would also want to consider integrating the 2023 draft
civic space standards, which were originally
a part of the objective design standards
but not adopted as the final version of the standards,
to establish enforceable baselines for public plazas.
Furthermore, we could re-evaluate older 2019
streetscape concepts like curb extensions
to ensure they don't accidentally constrain
critical evacuation routes.
And as a brief aside on this,
this is something that we actually explored last Thursday
with how Arendelle works.
So we had the workshop for planning last week
and we handed them,
I think there were about 18 residents
that participated in them.
We handed them maps and had them mark up areas on the maps
that they thought might be right
for additional considerations and placemaking.
And we got a lot of enthusiastic ideas.
They ranged from downtown shuttle connecting
the two sides of Arinda, better utilizing the BART parking
during community events, and beautifying
the pedestrian walkways past BART
to make them more interactive, including
musically interactive.
So that's the kind of public engagement
that we would be looking forward to with reopening
these particular documents and trying
to assess what is appropriate for downtown Arinda.
So that's just, okay.
So recommendation, our recommendation tonight
is to provide direction to staff
regarding the proposed scope of work.
We are looking for your guidance on the DPP amendments,
the reopening of Connectorinda,
and whether you have interest in exploring
the housing pool concept further.
And then based on your feedback tonight,
staff anticipates making a full set of in-depth changes
to the downtown precise plan
and drafting the updated document
the housing pool. So that's
for future city council review.
So thank you for your time,
and I'm happy to answer any
questions. Who would like to
lead us off? This may be more
of a question for the next time
this comes back to us, but I
would like to hear more about
how the housing pool concept
could actually encourage more
mixed use development in the
you know, external sort of feedback we've gotten
or the external limitations of two sites
that we were hopeful would come through
both the Gateway and the BART site.
Given that those are no longer really viable
for various reasons is what I'm hearing from this report.
So given that, was that a comment or a question?
I guess more, I'm actually, I'm asking you if,
I don't know if that's something you can answer briefly
or if it would be something that would come back
with a, I don't wanna press you with the press of time
for a response that is quick
if it's a more thoughtful, nuanced response.
I'm just asking.
I think it's something that we could come up
with a more nuanced response on.
Generally speaking, the idea is that this is signaling.
This is showing, like I said,
it's showing that we're open for business,
it's showing that we have a route, a pathway forward,
and that we're actually looking for high quality projects
to move forward.
It doesn't really change a whole lot about the processes
that someone would have to go through.
But it offers some additional reassurances.
It offers additional certainties for developers
to want to work with Citi.
The objective design standards do that pretty effectively.
It shows exactly what we're looking
for within the community.
And it gives people a document to say, hey,
if you can produce this, we're going
to get you through this process for the sites that
have already been upzoned.
And the Downtown Precise plan also to a certain extent
manages that.
This is a document that shows this
is what we want to see in a Rinda.
This is how we want the community to unfold.
And if you can play within those particular rules,
if you can come forward with projects
that are going to support that vision,
then even without a housing pool,
we might be able to find reasons to support
some of these projects.
We saw it with 23 Alter Rinda Way, for instance, recently.
this is just another mechanism that helps signal that support ultimately.
I have a follow-up question because I the phrasing of a downtown precise plan you know I'm aware of
downtown specific plans and it's interesting because our subcommittee member from the city
council at the time is here in the audience and might be able to help clarify if he's up for it
but a specific plan you know the Broadway Valdez specific plan in Oakland gave actual zoning
to everything in those couple blocks. So that you could just administratively do something.
The downtown precise plan is expressly described as a vision document, which then requires
implementing zoning ordinances. Originally, I think when we heard this in 2023, I believe
the vision was that we would vision, we would implement the DP, we would adopt the DPP and then
proceed immediately to the implementing ordinances.
When we talk today about re-adopting the DPP,
the impression I'm getting is that we would adopt it
without the sense of there being
an immediate next step of doing the zoning.
This is more of a, we've up-zoned the housing element,
there's a vision document for the rest,
and individual sites would come in for their zoning.
Is that a correct understanding tonight?
There's some nodding over here.
OK, and so the pool, because I really struggled.
This was my matter initiated, and I had the thought at the time
that it would basically create a guaranteed guess
of some sort, so a ministerial process, for example.
And a finding of statement at this point
would be that the CEQ was done, but we
do the statement of overriding considerations
that the first 200 units that come in are deemed to be satisfactory under that EIR,
and therefore, they could sort of coast through.
And having asked some questions, my understanding is the pool would do none of those things.
And therefore, a pool is really a symbolic act, but it is not, see, more nodding.
So just to clarify, because I had brought it in with the intention of it being a ministerial
zoning vehicle and it is not. It really doesn't do anything different than adopting the DPP
and then individual sites would still come in for discretionary zoning.
Yes, that is correct.
I know I'm just talking rather than asking, but it was so confusing to understand the
reality version of what a housing pool could do as presented tonight. And I just want to
make sure we're all kind of in the same songbook for that. So, okay, other questions?
I'm trying to understand the why because I know as part of our settlement with OC we
suspended the DPP and now we're looking at it again as a policy, an overriding policy
without actual zoning attached to it, but we have the ability at any time to approve
any specific zoning for any projects that actually come to us.
So I'm trying to understand what we're trying to accomplish with this discussion and putting
forth the DPP again at this time.
It's confusing to me.
I wasn't here at the start of the DPP process, and I was participating in all of the negotiations
to settle, and that wasn't an easy process.
And I don't want to backside, I see the evacuation component of what was presented, but I'm just
trying to understand why we're doing this at this time.
Well, I can start by saying that the council asks us to bring back the DPP at a future
date.
So that's part of the reason why we're back in front of you.
It's been a while because we wanted to address some of the other implementing things that
we needed to do, which is we needed to address the housing element zoning, then we had to
address the objective design standards and get those things in place.
and we felt like we were at a point in time
where we could at least start the conversation
with you again about what is it that you want
the downtown precise plan to be?
And then we realized that the version that we have
doesn't reflect a lot of the things
that's happened over the last few years.
So if it's still the council's desire
to put together a policy forward statement
about what you wanna see in the downtown ultimately,
the zoning's already been taken care of
with the housing element,
there's obviously additional zoning you could do
if you wanted to, you don't have to,
but if it's the signaling to the market
that we are wanting to see change in the downtown,
there's policies around that.
There's policies around the creek
that would need to be readopted
as part of the precise plan.
And, you know, whether or not we should be,
the Council asked me as part of strategic planning,
we need to revisit Connect Orinda.
So we wanted to tie all these things back together,
noting that it doesn't have to be more than it is now,
which is a policy framework for the Council,
for the community, for the development community to see
that we are interested in seeing revitalization efforts
happening in this community.
And that could be in beautification,
it could be in development,
it could be in a lot of different ways.
Is that accurate?
No notes.
Thank you.
And I just wanna make sure that our doing this at this time
doesn't conflict with any of the mitigation measures
that we took as part of the settlement with OC.
That's an interesting and important question,
but no, I can't think of an inconsistency.
Other questions?
I admit that like Council Member Hoxie,
I'm, even after listening, studying, reading,
doing it all over again, I'm still a bit confused as to,
and I admit to also being confused
with the housing pool part of it.
But nevertheless, and also recognizing how,
as you mentioned, how many laws and changes there have been in the state level since we
undertook the original DPP. I'm just curious as, and I mean, we can't be the only community
in the state of California that would like to see, you know, some kind of economic revitalization
in an area. So I'm just curious, is there another example, another recent example of a community,
you know, undertaking something like this that you know, is for the same sort of intended purpose,
but being undertaken now in light of all the most recent laws and rules. And I'm just curious
whether we would be, would we be sort of plowing new ground in some way, even if this has been kind
of done in the past. There certainly seems to be an unlimited amount of opinions as to what's
allowed and not allowed under this whole combination of state laws regarding housing.
And then we have the complication of our own settlement with OC. And I just find myself
wondering, you know, are we doing anything that people are going to point to that says, you know,
so I'll let planning speak to if they have any specific examples. I know that they're, I mean,
as the mayor pointed out, a lot of agencies put together specific plans that are more
regulatory in nature. This is not a lot of agencies put together sort of master plans for,
you know, investments they want to make, Martinez or Antioch waterfront master plans,
things like that, where they're putting their policy statements forward to the
signaling to the development community. This is some things that we'd like to see happen in our
town. And I mean, those, those signals are important. And if without them, they wonder
what the council's thinking. And if you put it down on paper, and you adopt it as policy,
they know what you're thinking. And it takes a little bit of the risk out of it for them to
proceed and look at opportunities in your community. But I don't know if planning you
have any examples of any of those types of ongoing planning documents that other agencies are looking
at. I would have to look for specific examples. I did a little bit of research on examples when
I was originally looking at what is a specific plan versus a precise plan. Where are we falling
short of a specific plan, and how is that potentially beneficial.
In this particular case, primarily what we are talking about is signaling.
We have a comprehensive look at the downtown and how it's laid out right now, all the policies
that are applicable to it and potentially affect development in the downtown.
It outlines consideration for what we want to see in the future as it relates to the
creek.
about you know it's kind of the we originally sold it as the the one-stop shop you could look
at that document and say here's a snapshot in time of the downtown and some of the considerations
that have already come up you can point to that and say hey we've talked about the power lines
for instance and we've talked about you know how certain setbacks work and how certain
there are a couple of other examples in there but we've talked we've had these discussions before
we are putting that into this one document
so that we can use that to reference
at some point in the future to say,
we're not just trying to restart something
without understanding the history of that
at some point in the future,
if we elect to take on any projects
that are listed within the downtown precise plan.
So it's ultimately, it's a visioning document.
It's the thing that says,
this is why we set up the objective design standards
the way that we did.
This is why we're interested in development
to the scale that we're interested in that development.
And it's the thing that has all of these supporting policies
that we can point to at certain stages
over the next several years to say, hey, that's
a policy that we identified as something that was important
as it relates to the downtown and development
within the downtown.
And we can use that to support decision making in the future.
So it is not regulatory.
It is not something that is intended to be regulatory
and to provide very specific guidance.
It is intended to be that selling snapshot of the downtown.
I guess the last question or point I would have then
regarding it is, I find myself wondering,
should it now have a different name?
Because to me, a precise plan, and again,
I'm not as well versus the mayor in development,
but certainly I've been exposed to a lot of similar things
and capital improvement over the years.
But it no longer seems to me like it really
is a precise or a specific plan of any,
it's a bigger picture document.
I don't know if, and I don't know what,
whether we have the option of, you know,
giving it a different name.
You have all the options in the world.
Your document, if you'd like to change the name of it
or change its scope, we could do that.
That's what Riley.
I just wanted to confirm that something
about the housing pool?
If we adopt that and a pool is created and units
are established, do any of those units
count towards our RINA obligations?
No, they wouldn't count towards the RINA obligations.
Well, it depends on when they are approved.
So as an example, the Memory Care Facility and Vista Verde
were both two projects that had been approved prior
to the last cycle but hadn't been hadn't started development yet and we
actually got credit for both of those projects moving forward into the next
housing element cycle so but those weren't house that wasn't a housing pool
was it they weren't part of a housing pool so I'm just in the case of a
housing pool I'm asking if the units were counting towards our 1350 units to
for clarification councilmember you're referring to just the numbers that are
in the pool not necessarily someone comes forward and has a specific project
within the pool?
I was thinking about units produced
out of whatever the pool is called.
If units are produced, we will be able to count that
to show that we made progress during the cycle
or if they are produced at the end of the cycle
and are still in development,
then we get to count that as credit for the next cycle.
Can I just clarify that it's a production number?
It's not a number that counts against your 1,300 units.
So your 13,000 units would still be out there,
but when you make your annual reports to HCD,
you would be able to count those units
that are produced as production.
Right, which is not meeting your 1,300 requirement.
It's not, those sites have not changed,
but you, I mean, you get a little bit of credit,
but we're all gonna fall short.
Right, but I just want to be clear
that it's not the same thing.
Yes. Thank you.
And one other potential advantage that is,
this is agnostic of a housing pool. Just when someone comes forward and develops,
redevelops a site, when we got the housing element sites approved, there were 26 within the downtown.
Those were, they required support to HCD. HCD had to believe that those were potential sites
for redevelopment and we had to make arguments for that. If you look at the church sites as an
example outside of the downtown, we were able to say excess parking lots at churches have been
been redeveloped in Arinda because we
were able to point to the projects along Irwin Way.
So similarly, if we get more projects that
are coming along on these sites where we didn't originally
look at them and think that there was redevelopment
potential there, we can potentially
use those as case studies and arguments in future housing
element cycles to say, hey, if we need to expand capacity
over here, we can do that because here's
a project that looks like what we're talking about right now.
So it just gives us a little bit more flexibility in future housing element cycles.
Are there any other questions?
One more question.
One of the biggest things that impedes development in downtown Arundah, I understand is the PG&E
poles.
I understand that's particularly true at the Rite Aid site.
We did get a grant to look at the possible building of the BART station.
Is there any grant, anything we could get to actually look at what we could do about
PG&E polls, because it would have a tremendous impact on our ability to develop downtown.
So those are high transmission lines, and they're very expensive to relocate,
and we would have to determine the cost benefit of doing something like that. I'm certain that PG&E
wouldn't want to foot the bill for that moving of those lines and be tens of millions of dollars.
But I do have a conversation scheduled this week with PG&E, so I will ask.
correct. Great question. Uh Are
there any other questions
before we open it to the public
comment? Great. I don't have
any speaker cards on this
matter. It looks like we've got
Mr. Warnock coming um to make
comments and if anybody else
wants to speak, please come on
up after him. Oh, the first
preliminary really real quick
on the power lines that was
exhaustively considered in
connection with the housing
element. Every possible
the city did everything it could at the time
to consider every possible alternative.
And pretty sure Nick Hausler was on the council at the time.
The city ran into a dead end.
Redirecting them around Safeway and down Camino Pablo,
there isn't a big enough easement.
I don't remember all the details,
but it was considered exhaustively.
There are two different threads running in this discussion.
One thread is, do we need to do something
for the seventh cycle of the housing element?
I submit it's too early to worry about that.
I explained in my exhaustive memo
why if there is any additional housing,
it'll be de minimis.
We'll deal with it at the time.
The other thread in this discussion
is that there are some people who
think it's good to add more housing and other development
downtown beyond the state housing mandate.
It's just amazing to me.
18 months ago, almost to the day,
you same five folks adopted and certified the EIR
and the findings that said adding housing downtown
to our already constrained evacuation routes
will have a significant adverse impact on evacuation.
Now, staff comes forward with this larger study,
if you look at pages 153 to 156 in the packet
and you look at those stream captures,
the staff presentation is, I hate to say this
because I respect Aaron and I respect LaShawn.
The staff presentation is completely misleading.
They only studied evacuation on each side of the freeway.
They didn't study the total horrendous evacuation.
My zone, 005, wasn't studied.
All the zones on the north side,
they studied three zones adjacent to the freeway.
On the south of the freeway,
they studied three zones, owns adjacent and one more.
But all the rest of South Arinda down Moraga Way
wasn't even studied.
So the ink isn't even dry on the housing elementary zonings.
They're less than a year old.
We have, I don't know, 20, 30, 40 sites
with ministerial approval.
We haven't given that a chance.
And now you're gonna add 200 more units.
And the last thing I'll say is,
because I see my time is up,
the cap is illegal and you will be study assued
the day after you adopt it.
Thank you.
Do we have anyone else, Mr. Casa, please come on up.
I think you know what to do.
Mayor Iverson, Vice Mayor G, I'm from the Council.
Yeah, so just a couple quick things
just because I was a part of it
I'd love to get out of here.
The power lines are, we looked at it as a waste of time
just because you'd have to vault.
I think Amy, you have to a vault basically
under Camino Pablo and it's gonna cost like $100 million.
It would only free up 10 acres of land
or something like that.
And each acre of land is only worth like $4 million
at townhouse purchase price.
So, I mean, the math just doesn't work to do it,
unfortunately, even though it is a great idea.
What's with that?
What's that gonna say?
The specific plan, it would be too much of a,
It would cost you like $120,000.
You didn't have getting sued again.
So I think you got to stick with the precise plan.
A specific plan would have been better originally,
but just that didn't happen.
There wasn't any appetite for it.
So it's with the precise plan.
And then what I would do
instead of wasting too much time and money
is I would just reach out to like the five,
reach out to Branaw,
reach out to Summerhill Homes,
reach out to Shea,
reach out to the address company.
There's like, it's very common.
So I work for a real estate development company.
Like, staff holds like a, they set up a call for like two weeks, whenever you have an hour,
have the precise plan, have the zoning, ask them, you know, what things would you do? What would you
change in here? And that's going to be just staff time. It's not expensive. I mean, council members
will re-talk to me and do that stuff, not in Arenda, but in other jurisdictions. I think that's
the best waste use of the money and the time and just see what interest they have. It's quite
frankly, I don't think anyone knows the precise plans out there. I'm on all these boards with
all these presidents of housing, departments, commercial, and no one brings up Brenda. So I
think starting to get the word out there just by using your staff is probably the best idea. But
also might say that some reason you can't do that. I don't know. I assume you can do that.
Thank you. Is there anyone else from the audience who would like to speak?
And do we have anyone on Zoom? Okay, great. I know we have an 830 target. We still have
Plenty of time. I would love for people to begin with feedback who'd like to lead us off.
That's about it. I do like the signaling and I think the policy documents matter and I think
that this was like a very impressive and very thoughtful plan when originally implemented and
now with sort of amendments and the added strength of wildfire modeling and mitigation measures,
it could be stronger. However, I, I, I still have a lot of
questions. And I think that there's been a lot of good
questions raised tonight. I mean, everything from a name
change, should we call it something different, right? Not
specific, thank you. But but you know, or, you know, the, the I
have questions about the housing pool concept. I'm intrigued. I
want to learn more. And I don't want to rush this disk. I don't
feel I would like this to be a longer study session I hate to say that I know
we want to move forward on things efficiently but sometimes we need a
little more time and I would like this to come back and and maybe we could all
sort of chime in on what we want to hear more about and you know and also I do
want to hear more about whether to what extent this signaling matters are there
other forms of signaling. I have questions. I agree with you 100%. I feel like this needs
more thought and discussion than I feel comfortable giving it tonight. I appreciate that the city
manager and staff brought it back to us to discuss, and we had asked for that, and I
appreciate that. I also appreciate that some of my questions have been asked by councils
in the past, and I need a little history update, but thank you. I just feel like there's a
a lot to discuss anew about what we want our downtown to be. And I'd like us to be
able to take the time to do that, and I don't think it's tonight.
I absolutely agree with both council members, and I very much appreciate former council
member Kossel's suggestion of getting more input from real life developers to see what
they would have to say about what would be important or enticing, so. I think
there's a lot of good reasons to have a visionary statement and I think a lot of
work went into this when it was adopted or previously to our terms. I don't think
I'm ready to adopt it by any means. I think I need to really study a few more
of these new parts that don't sit well yet. I don't feel inclined to consider
the housing pool. I like the idea of former council member's suggestion of getting feedback
from his community or the development community. I've got a lot of comments, apologies in advance.
First of all, the pool was my idea and as I learned about what it could and couldn't
accomplish, I concur it is no longer appropriate and so if we're giving guidance for what to
back if we do do a further work session, I would be on board with dropping the idea of
the pool. However, I think it's really significant because I was around for the years and years
that they did town halls, they did the ULI tap panel, the connector render thing, there
were multiple public meetings where people are the conference room with the vision boards
and the sticky notes. I mean, this was meetings and meetings and meetings and meetings and
And hundreds of thousand dollars spent with consultants.
So because the people who are here tonight didn't witness it, it can feel rushed or whatever,
but some of you might remember, you know, we had really hot debates about Arinda Watch
and Save Arinda and no housing downtown ever, right, versus, well, allowing downtown can
facilitate makes projects more feasible.
And what happened was with the state arena numbers changing so fundamentally while this
process was going on, this was not a reaction to the arena laws, this was years in the making
before that happened.
And so it sort of became a making lemonade out of lemons that we were ready to meet our
housing numbers with this downtown plan.
But the state's wish for housing, housing, housing is really distinct from our having
this detailed city wide conversation with a ton of participation saying what do we want
our downtown to be?
Do we want to never change?
Are we rural or are we a cute little town with a BART station in it?
Who are we?
What do we want to be?
And so those objective design standards are significant.
The creek vision is significant, Connect Orinda is very significant because that was our vision
for what I'm sorry, I'm always looking this way.
That was our vision for what we want our public spaces and our civic spaces to do and how
do we want to bring our downtown forward in a way that we can't control the private parcels
but it was not a housing plan.
It was a downtown precise plan and it wasn't zoning, it encouraged zoning and at the time
it was more proactive than it would be now. What I saw when I saw that what was brought forward
tonight was something we've already adopted after years and years of work and they just updated it
for some legal changes and things that we've already accomplished. But to me it was a fairly
perfunctory update and a re-adoption I would wholeheartedly support without going back to square one
because it's not a zoning document and it's not a housing document. It's a continuation
of a strategic plan that was already in place. A few quick other points, can't someone just
come ask for zoning? That is always asked. That is the standard, like we don't need this thing,
people can just bring a project forward. And in the 40 years we've been a city, we haven't had
any market rate projects come forward. Maybe we'll get 23 ultra into way, and that got done
and ministerially because they were
afraid of our discretionary process.
So I would encourage us to, even if it's not zoning,
it's important, and it's an and with the private developer
conversations, private landowner conversations.
It's one more thing we can do.
And it's something people can look to for a shared consensus.
My last comment, two other comments.
The BART lot, to me that's a massive change
to our strategic vision because I think most citizens
have always imagined that someday the BART lot
would be redeveloped.
And we got a lot of criticism that the DPP
ignored the BART lot because didn't we know
it was gonna be housing?
We did not and it won't be.
So in our next strategic planning that we do,
kinda once every year or two,
we should add some real conversations
about the significance of that decision,
because that's new news.
And my last point is about EIRs, we
hear about how we have found that adding 1352 units would
be significant unavoidable impacts.
And realize that CEQA and approving projects,
that whole structure is designed for a project
that an applicant is bringing forward with the intent
to build that project.
And so the whole thing of finding the impacts
and making the applicant mitigate
their environmental impacts, or if it can't be done,
the responsible agency has to say, we understand
and we see overriding considerations.
A housing element is a very weird fit for an EIR
because it's not an applicant bringing forward 1,352 units.
It's a housing element.
And so I don't think there is any conflict with bringing
forward the housing element or even the DPP
as what we want to be in a direction, a consensus,
and a visual guide to where we're going.
So sorry to get on my soapbox, but we are at 8.30.
And so I'm going to ask for additional comments
and direction, and then we'll try
to get this meeting wrapped up.
And I really apologize for taking so long.
I just want to briefly say, Mayor, I appreciate that context
and I appreciate the passion and a lot of points made.
I do find a lot of them very persuasive.
I just think we need one more study session to explore this.
Oh yeah, I'm sorry if I didn't say that.
For sure we need to continue this.
I just thought it was pretty fully baked
and we need for sure to continue, so I apologize.
Anything else on this matter?
City Manager, do you feel you've gotten direction?
I think I got direction.
It sounds like we want to do some outreach
to the development community just
to get their feedback on what we have in terms
of a draft document.
And then we will be backed for a more robust study session
that gives the appropriate amount of time
for the conversation.
Really appreciate that.
With that, are there any matters initiated tonight?
Seeing none, I would like to initiate
that we convene to the reception.
We are adjourned.
Thank you all for your patience.