June 8, 2021 Joint Meeting of Mountain View City Council, Shoreline Regional Park Community and Capital Improvements Financing Authority

Video

Transcript

[00:00:27] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: Study session for June 8, 2021. I'm going to read the usual announcement as required. This meeting will be conducted in accordance with the state of California executive order N dash 29 dash 20. Dated March 17, 2020. All members of the city council are participating in this meeting by video conference, with no physical meeting location. Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting live, may do so at Mountain View. dotlegistar.com on YouTube at mountain view.gov slash YouTube and on Comcast channel 26. As noted on the meeting agenda, members of the public may provide all public comments during the public comment period for the item by signing up at mountain view.gov slash cc underscore speakers or by phone by dialing 669-9009128 and entering webinar ID 963-14849204. Any emails received by 430 p.m. Today we're received directly by the city council. All votes will be taken by roll call vote. So we'll move on to item 2, which is welcome, and the C clerk will take attendance.

[00:01:48] (archive recording) Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Ami Koga?

[00:01:50] (archive recording) Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Here,

[00:01:50] (archive recording) Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: council number Hicks,

[00:01:52] (archive recording) Councilmember Alison Hicks: here.

[00:01:52] (archive recording) Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Lemur,

[00:01:54] (archive recording) Councilmember Sally Lieber: here.

[00:01:55] (archive recording) Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Matachek,

[00:01:56] (archive recording) Councilmember Lisa Matichak: here,

[00:01:57] (archive recording) Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member, Sher Walter.

[00:01:59] (archive recording) Councilmember Pat Showalter: Here.

[00:02:00] (archive recording) Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Vice Mayor Ramirez.

[00:01:24] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[00:01:25] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: And can I?

[00:01:26] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Here.

[00:01:27] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Thank you.

[00:01:28] Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right. So move on to item three, which is our study session. The purpose of this study session is for the city council to discuss and provide input on key downtown precise plan issues. affecting areas A, G, and H, including historic preservation, development, character and design, and ground floor uses. After the staff presentation, the council will consider the following 3 questions in turn. Question one, does the city council support the historic preservation, staff recommendation to rely on existing preservation incentives and authority under Sequa and the city code? Question number two, does the city council support the development, character, and design staff recommendation, to update areas A, G, and H standards, and or guidelines, and include objective standards, such as FAR to clarify design expectations in area H, and question number three. Does a city council support the active ground floor uses staff recommendation to prohibit ground floor administrative office. And so joining us tonight, senior planner, Edgar Maravia, and principal planner Eric Anderson will present the update. Assistant city manager and community development director, Archie Shavastava, is available for any questions, as are the city consultants. Ruchir Glar and Rick Williams, from Van Meter Williams, Pollock, LLP, and Kimberly Butt, from Trainer HL. And after the council, how it goes through, the 3 questions, uh, staff and I will create a summary um, before moving on for clarity for all. All right, so we'll move on. Is staff here? Mr. Anderson? Are you taking it over? Is it you, Mr. Maravia?

[00:03:23] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Yes, I'll be taking them from here. Thank you, Mayor Kami. Let me get the presentation going. Okay, that should be.

[00:03:47] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes, we see it. Thank you.

[00:03:49] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Awesome, great. Thank you, Mary, for me. Mice mayor Ramirez and city council members, and good evening to the members of the public who are tuning in. My name is Ed's Pamela Villa. I'm a senior planner with the city of Mountain View. And today I'm joined by Eric Anderson, principal planner, Stephanie Williams, planning manager. And so an administrator. As well as Arti, Shivastava, assistant city manager and community development director. This item is a presentation about the study session for the downtown precise planet phase one. The downtown precise plan. This is, again, phase one of a proposed 2 phase approach. This is what was approved by way of the scoping agreement or scoping session, which was approved by city council in December of 2019. As part of that scope, it was very particular to 3 specific areas in downtown, within the downtown precise plan. Those 3 areas are area A, G, and H, which is the image you're looking at on your right hand side. You will note that these 3 areas are within close proximity to the Caltrain station, and they also happen to be the oldest areas of downtown. Additionally, as part of the very specific scope. Uh, staff was requested by city council to review 3 specific subjects. Those were historic preservation, development, design, and character, and ground for activation, which is the 3 subjects staff are looking for more information and input from city council, and for the historic preservation aspect of the presentation, that will be taken on by principal planner Anderson. So I'll go ahead and give him the format.

[00:05:44] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Thank you so much, Mr. Marvia. So council requested a study of whether downtown qualifies to be a historic district. Because the city code has no criteria for a local district. The state and national criteria were used instead. The survey did not find the downtown Mountain View meets the state or the national register criteria to be deemed an historic district. This is because there are few buildings remaining with the necessary integrity. We heard from the community, that there is interest in adopting a local district. So what is the process for that? To answer that, it's important to recognize that the downtown precise plan and the historic preservation ordinance have different roles? The downtown precise plan is focused on land uses and development standards, while the historic preservation ordinance is focused on preservation criteria and incentives. Ultimately, the adoption of a local district standards would have to be in the ordinance before the city can qualify a part of downtown as a local district. Fortunately, updates to the city ordinance are part of the next city work plan. So staff can study this along with other parts of the store preservation ordinance update, which could include updating the register and analyzing what citywide buildings qualify for the state or national registers. Next slide, please. Existing historic structures are projected through the historical ordinance that I talked about and sequa. Under Sequa, if a building is qualified, qualifies as a historic cultural resource, and an EIR and statement of overriding considerations must be certified by the city before the building can be demolished or otherwise modified in a way that affects its historic character. Historic ordinance, as I said, includes criteria and incentives to preserve local historic resources. Lastly, and beyond the age and integrity or other characteristics of individual historic buildings, downtown does have a special look and feel created by multiple architectural styles and a rhythm and fabric that comes from incremental changes to small buildings over time. This precise plan update will include new standards to preserve that historic fabric, and to ensure new and modified buildings are compatible with the look and character. So staff's current recommendation is to continue to use Sequa and the historic preservation ordinance to preserve individual qualifying buildings. The question is, does council agree? We can study local district criteria with future updates to the historic preservation ordinance. The EPC agreed with the staff recommendation, and several commissioners also expressed interest in providing more economic support to affected property owners. Uh, back to you, Mr. Marvia.

[00:08:38] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Thank you. Thank you, Principal Planner Anderson. I'll be segwaying in here into development, character, and design, which is one of our other subjects. Now, currently, the downtown precise line area A, G, and H, have existing design standards and design guidelines. However, staff is recommending that we update those standards as a principal planner Anderson highlighted in his section. You know, the downtown has multiple architectural styles and has a very particular feel in character, and an attempt to protect that character, even though we're not, uh, designated a historic district. We are recommending to update standards. And these standards would be an objective standards that would be essentially requirements. And we're looking at possibly, and of course, this is not all better yet, as we still have to work with the consultant to further develop more standards, but this would include the likes of upper force, step backs, fine grained facade rhythms, main entrances at the sidewalk that front the building as to be of a more activating nature and pedestrian friendly landscaping. Of, to mention, this does not encompass all our standards, uh, we're still developing them. Um, Additionally, staff is looking at updating the guidelines. And guidelines are more objective, and for that reason, they would only be enforced on the residential buildings, due to recent state legislation. We're not allowed to enforce guidelines on residential buildings. As part of these standards, we're also looking at floor area ratios as a way of massing control. If you're looking at your images here, you'll take a look at the far right image image, which is a one piece. You'll get to see more or less what a floor ratio massive control can look like, and in combination with other standards, such as setbacks. It could lead to buildings where you have 2 stories and then you require a step back. Once you go up to the 3rd story, it requires another step back and so forth. And this is, again, in keeping with the existing character, look and feel of the of our downtown. And as, Next up is to include more illustrations. We currently have a few illustrations in the downtown precise stuff, but we're looking to update those illustrations as to better convey the message as to what we would like to see by way of these standards, by way of these guidelines, by way of the massing controller and from doing planning for so many years. I can tell you, an image can be worth a 1000 words if you can point at it, point at it and show a developer, show a contractor or show a member of the public, what is expected and what is the vision for downtown. But that said, the question staff has is, does the city council support the development character and design, staff recommendation to update area A, GMH, standards, and or guidelines, and include objective standards, such as Florida racial, to clarify design, expectations in area H? When this question was asked at the May environmental planning commission meeting, the environmental planning commissions agreed with staff recommendation, they recommended that we look at more objective standards as to really keep with the fabric of the existing downtown. They were also excited about including more illustrations. So so long as those were done with a purpose and easy to read illustrations. Here we have ground floor activation. Currently, um, downtown Mountain View areas AGNA allow for, allow for admin and research and development office by way of a pro additional use permit, if they demonstrate to be of an activating and interesting nature. However, it is a staff experience that administrative offices and research in development offices rarely activate the cash frontage. This is in part due because adamant offices and research and development offices are your typical 9 to 5 jobs, right? You show up, you close the blinds and you get to work. They don't necessarily leave too much activation, um, and people aren't necessarily visiting those locations for any service. As such, keeping that in mind. Staff is recommending to disallow ground floor admin, research and development offices, fronting on Castro Street and on the side streets. Again, this would only be for ground floors. Another thing I would like to highlight is that oftentimes, admin, office uses, and research and development offices tend to have, for lack of better words, here, deeper pockets, and they often outbid other uses that could be of an activating nature. And with that said, that leads to staff's questions. Does the city council support the active ground floor use staff recommendation to prohibit ground floor administrative office. And if you're looking at the immature to your right hand side, that would be disallowing ground floor on the castro frontage and on the side street. So the area is highlighted in red, and the area is highlighted in blue. The requirements will remain as currently is. And when this question was asked at the environmental planning commission that took place in May, EPC recommended that we continue to allow adamant and research and development office. Mainly their thought was that we are in the midst of a pandemic, and we don't yet understand what those impacts can be. Another thing that was driving their comments was the fact that there has been a few vacancies in downtown and they felt that. If we disallow at better research and low mouth, it could lead to more vacancies within downtown and no uses to fill in those uses. I also want to highlight that 2 specific commissioners were in favor of, of disallowing ground 4 office and being that they were looking at the long-term vision of downtown mountain view. And then we're also looking at the historic nature of Castro Street and how it has historically been serving retail and restaurant like uses and they want to keep in line with that for the future of downtown London. Next step would be to continue working on the downtown precise plan, develop standards. Conduct a feasibility analysis, finalize the downtown precise 5 phase one, bring it all back to the EPC and get their comments and then bring it back to the city council for adoption. And here are the questions that were mentioned in the beginning by Mary commit and also found in the staff report, and we also highlighted each question in each of the subject slides. But they are here for references and I can always go back to them if you need it. And with that said, that concludes a staff presentation, I also want to highlight that in addition to the team members I highlighted earlier, we do have 3 consultants here. They have been helping us throughout this project. One of them is Kimberly Butt from Trendor HL. We have Rick Williams. From from Van Meter, William Pollock, and we also have Prochura, all of which are available for questions. Thank you.

[00:16:14] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you so much. Since this is a study session, we'll go to public comment first. Um, so if you would like to um, provide public comment, uh, please feel free to raise your hand in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone and we'll display a 2 minute timer um, on the screen. Great. All right. First up is Robert Cox.

[00:16:43] Robert Cox: Can you hear me?

[00:16:44] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:16:45] Robert Cox: Okay. Honorable council members, thank you for the opportunity to address you on this important issue. When I 1st came to my own, you 21 years ago, I fell in love with our city's historic buildings. My interest in them was one of the reasons I was motivated to serve as the vice chair of the old Mountain View Neighborhood Association these last 10 years and also as vice president of the Mountain View Historical Association. But while I enjoy serving as leaders of these 2 organizations, I've always felt there's a limit to what I could do to help or preserve our historic buildings being part of them because both of these organizations have a policy of not taking positions on development issues. That's why I became a charter member of Livable Mountain View, and I'm here to speak to you tonight on behalf of our organization. I will never forget, when we, the steering committee of Liverpool Mountain View, went to the historic commission in Sacramento to argue for Shay DJs and Diet House's eligibility on the state historic register. The commission unanimously agreed that those 2 buildings were eligible to register. And no small part, it was because of the work of our consulting attorney, who had not only a desire, but a passion, to see these buildings achieved their due recognition. And that's what I'd like to see in our city staff and their consultants, when they ask the question, which buildings in our historical reef, retail district are worthy of preservation. I don't think we're already doing everything we can and need to do is the right answer. So please, council member, step up with the same passion. as that and go beyond what we've done already to ensure that the treasurer of our historic buildings is preserved for this and future generations. Thank you for your consideration of my views, I yield my time.

[00:18:29] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Next speaker is Robert Holbrook.

[00:18:36] Robert Holbrook: Thank you. I'm Robert Colbrook. I live a little over a block away from Area H, and my wife and I walk there many times a week. I support the recommendation that staff has made to prohibit the use of administrative offices on the ground floor, as they've suggested. I believe that if this policy is faithfully maintained, it will increase the value of the affected area as a whole. Speaking for myself, administrative offices on the ground floor absolutely lower my interest in the downtown area. Well, the staff recommendation might be seen as tightening the provisional use zoning currently in place. I gather from the staff report that they would prefer not to grant this use at all. So this is formalizing a policy staff would like to implement anyhow. Page 20 of the staff report states, disallowing administrative office use on the ground floor of Castro Street, would better support staff and make it clear that Castro Street and the side streets are intended for active uses. I'd also like to call out 2 comments made by the EPC. One was the goal of preventing gamesmanship of property owners. I suspect that if you show a willingness to consider administrative offices, you might paradoxically increase vacancies as owners withhold properties from the market while applying for provisional use permits for administrative offices for their properties. And I don't doubt that once these uses are granted, they'll be sticky. It's unlikely that the space will go back the other way. Another EPC comment, um, suggested that the council consider extending the affected area to include avenue Evelyn Avenue east of um, Hope Street across from the transit center, and I would agree that this is also worth considering. Downtown Monview is a wonderful resource, which the city has cultivated for over 4 decades. I hope that the city will continue to make mountain view even more desirable. I believe staff's recommendation will help do this. Thank you.

[00:20:44] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Next speaker, Alex Nunez.

[00:20:52] Alex Nuñez: Hello. Hopefully I'm audible.

[00:20:55] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Hello,

[00:20:56] Alex Nuñez: uh, Mayor Kumei, Vice Mayor Ramirez and the rest of city council. Uh, yeah, I just want to build off of what both of the Roberts said as well. Uh, one of the best experiences, uh, being a Mountain View resident is getting to go to the downtown and feel that activating energy, the desire for, you know, a new experience that's actually available, uh, around that, you know, area H corridor. Uh, and to be honest, yeah, some of the most disappointing experiences. You know, if you can, if you can notice the absence of something, uh, you know, has really been walking through some of those areas where, uh, on the ground floor, there's some office space there with security guards, uh, patrolling the area, really just contradicting, uh, the, the experience that you can have, you know, just a 100 feet down the, down the road. Um, that that really has been one of the more uh, disappointing experiences as a Mountain Vee resident. Um, and so really when I'm looking through that staff report and the staff recommendation, uh, for some of this research and development and administrative office, uh, you know, kind of use, I, I could not agree more with, with limiting or, or just altogether eliminating, uh, how much of that use we, we have in the downtown, um, obviously, you know, we would love to have more vibrancy, a, a more livable area downtown. And so definitely, I hope that, you know, as you, you know, approach this topic and subject, uh, that that the council consider, uh, what is that more activating element that you'd like to bring to to the community. So, thank you very much. I look forward to seeing what you guys accomplish in this area and yep, hope everyone has a good rest of the afternoon.

[00:22:46] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you And next is Alexander Brown.

[00:22:54] Alexander Brown: Hey. Hey. Glad to be the 2nd Alex. Thank you for your time. I would like to request that the city requires the new pyramids to be either Mesoamerican or Mesopotamian themed. I also like to think that I could just wander around and find a new store, a cafe, or Chuck E. Cheese to visit. I think that'd be great. So I'm all about the ground floor being something useful to the people just wandering and not just businesses. Thank you for your consideration.

[00:23:21] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Next is Bruce England.

[00:23:27] Bruce England: Hi. Thank you. You hear me okay?

[00:23:30] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes, we do.

[00:23:31] Bruce England: Okay, thank you. Um, speaking for, um, Moundview Coalition for Sustainable Planning, and, um, We want to, uh, support the recommendation 3, which is, does city council support the active ground 4 use is, uh, to prohibit ground floor administrative office use as Longcaster Street and cross streets within one block. Thereof in Area H. Um, We also note that, um, In a lot of cases where the city plans, they could be more integrated, um, than we see today, the Axis MV is very good at pulling together various transportation related plans into one document. Um, that's the sort of thing we'd like to see more of, um, including here because as you know, there are a lot of individual plans related to this, the other areas of Castro Street, Moffatt Boulevard, the transit center, grade separation, uh, and so on. There's a lot that can and should be done through that area. including the streets program. And we look forward to seeing more on that from the city. Thank you.

[00:24:39] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Jerry Steach?

[00:24:49] Jerry Steach: Hello?

[00:24:50] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Hi.

[00:24:51] Jerry Steach: Okay, I'm unmute it now. Good evening. You hear me all right?

[00:24:53] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes, perfectly.

[00:24:54] Jerry Steach: Okay. Good evening, council members. Earlier today, I sent a letter to you. I'd like to read that perhaps as a refresher and perhaps for the edification of other citizens and staff that are listening to this. So. Um, after moving to Old Mountain View more than 30 years ago, I quickly developed a deep appreciation for the cities downtown. Notably, it's historically significant buildings that wisely have been preserved, and to this day provide character, a sense of place, and enduring tangible links to our city's heritage. These are distinctive, still well functioning structures that countless cities across the country, no doubt would envy. for their own downtowns. Excuse me. A written articles for the old Mountain View Neighborhood Association's newsletter, as well as for the Mountain View Historic Association's newsletter. On many downtown buildings that date back a century or more. Highlighting their various roles in the city's rich history. In the process, I've gained much greater understanding of them and come to realize how profoundly unfortunate we are to have among us these true architectural treasures. To both honor Mountain View's history and foster continued vibrancy and character of the downtown, these treasures absolutely deserve and must be granted the protection that can come, that can be insured by the city council affecting a thorough, lasting mandate to do so. Thank you for your time.

[00:26:20] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Paula, Oshawani.

[00:26:31] Hala Alshahwany: Hello, can you hear me?

[00:26:32] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:26:33] Hala Alshahwany: Okay, great. Uh, good evening, counsel. Um, I um, have lived in Mountain View for a long time. I moved here in 1984. And I loved living and raising my children here. But a few years ago, I got a chance to live in Hillsburg, a little city in Sonoma County, and I realized why I love their downtown so much. It was planned over a 100 years ago, and its main green square in the city center is surrounded by beautiful, well kept historic buildings. They were filled with public service shops like restaurants, bookstores, barbers, bakeries, etc. wine shops. Um, I came to understand that its attraction is due to the great planning that took place a long time ago. By foresight of those who established the city over a 100 years ago. And I believe it's all in the planning. When I moved back to Mountain View in 2017, I thought, why can't we have that here as well? We have a funky and beautiful downtown with historical, with historic buildings, and plenty of space to devote to public service shops and green canopy. I would like to ask you to direct city staff to preserve our downtown characteristics by obtaining historic district designation. Uh, at least for the age uh, historical uh, area. And in addition, please encourage city staff to establish programs to aid store owners, and preserving the historic aspects, details of these buildings. Their success will retain the attraction and the beauty of our downtown. Also, please support staff suggestion to keep the 1st floor in that district dedicated for public service type businesses and not for administrative office use. The 1st floors really belong to the public room, and it should occupy shops that serve it. Thank you so much.

[00:28:41] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Next speaker is Louise Katz.

[00:28:49] Louise Katz: Thank you, mayor and vice mayor and council members. Um, on behalf of Louisville Mountain View, we sent out a letter, um, with some of the critiques of the information that you received, um, with regard to these issues. So I won't repeat it. Um, I agree, obviously, with the prior speakers as to the need to not have offices on the 1st floor and to maintain our historic buildings. The question is always, how and when, because they are considered, they are in danger as we speak. And I also wanted to say with regards, with all due respect to the EPC, we're not going to fix Castro Street this way by putting by their vote to put in offices on the 1st floor. The staff was 100% correct that the deep pockets that block us rentals will bring will basically eliminate any availability for retail and restaurants. So Castro Street won't come back as a retail site because there won't be anything to come back to. We can't force owners to evict their offices. It's just never going to happen. So once it's gone, it will be gone. I think the other issue is historical protection. I believe we pointed out the problems with the report. that it clearly does not replace, it does not give us actual protection for irreplaceable buildings, and we urge you to err on the side of caution and work for the most the strongest, clearest, and comprehensive way to protect our historic buildings. As the staff report mentioned, There are, we need to know what can be protected and how and how fast we can do it. So again, we would very much like to focus on this issue and have consider our considerable expertise and resources of our city devoted to this issue. I can't think of anyone in Mountain View that would say that it's not important. Thank you.

[00:30:47] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Next is Sarah Livnot.

[00:30:56] Sarah Livnat: Hi, thank you. My name is Sarah McNat, I'm a resident of downtown Mountain for about 20 years. And I've been very involved in the community and we moved to downtown for the downtown. After driving all the way up and down the peninsula from San Jose to San Francisco, and chose Mountain View because of its vibrant downtown and only gotten better. And I would say that over the last few years, I've been really concerned about, um, particularly the office space, um, the Wells Fargo building that went up on the corner of Castro and Church, which is pretty much a dead zone, um, as well as the, um, I think it was the WhatsApp building, that, uh, is next to, um, kind of 11 block off of, uh, Castro. And so I would just ask, uh, for this council, uh, that this is this is, uh, this is kind of what I hold the council accountable for. I mean, there are many things in the city. But the downtown in particular is a real asset in a real gym, it is something that, um, I think, is very central to our, um, identity as mountain viewings. And so please preserve downtown Mountain View for the residents. And if you do that, then the commerce will come and the community will flourish. Thank you.

[00:32:17] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Next is Gina, Helen. Gina, are you there?

[00:32:32] Gina Thelen: Hi, can you hear me?

[00:32:34] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes, I hear you.

[00:32:35] Gina Thelen: Okay, great. Um, I'm also a longtime resident of downtown Mountain View, who moved here um, for the downtown, um, shortly after the library was built, and it started, um, becoming more of a place where you could go at night. Um, we turned down Palo Alto. We turned down Santa Clara and we wound up here. Um, one thing I would say uh, about offices wanting to move into this area is it's not because the office space here is so great. It's because the, uh, people in those offices want to come out on their lunch break and enjoy a downtown scene or after work a downtown scene or grab a coffee before they go. And if we start using the 1st floor and more for offices, those services that are bringing them in initially, are going to go away, and that's going to impact everyone. It'll impact the residents that are already here, and it'll also impact the office workers who can't are coming here. To take advantage of a scene, a sense of place, and a sense of liveliness, um, that will be really disrupted, uh, by having dead zones. And I feel it, um, when I go walking past scratch and I look up, um, I can see above there. There's a tech, uh, storage company. Um, that's there and I think, wow, I'm glad they're not on the 1st floor because I wouldn't want them replacing scratch or when I walked past Cascal, think. Oh, look at Cascal, except there's this LLP, something rather, Fenwick and West sign for a law office, and I think, okay, well, that's okay because they're on the top and they're not on the bottom. Um, so I think we need to keep that space adds public space and I would appreciate the council's help in doing that. Thank you.

[00:34:25] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. We have a phone number. It's 650 and the last 3 digits that I can see are 668. So I think you need to press star 9 on your phone to unmute. If you are 650 number with the last 3 digits of your phone number, 668.

[00:34:50] Lacy Rathbun: Hi. I think that's me.

[00:34:52] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Oh, great. Yay. Hi.

[00:34:54] Lacy Rathbun: Yeah. Thanks for taking the call. My name is Lacey Rathbun, and I've never spoken to counsel before, so all of the etiquette. I just want to thank you for showing up in this space and I'm caring and taking your time. Um, I moved here 21 years ago, having lived in Palo Alto in Santa Cruz, and really the draw for us was the diversity and the sort of funkiness of the downtown and the possibilities and what I've, I've noticed is that those, are slowly, um, disappearing and with the historic buildings, you, that you, you can't bring them back. So I'm really asking cancel to support what everyone else has said and really reiterating those shares to save our historic building. And um, really not even to consider the building. I mean, the businesses on the 1st floor. I've also lived in Europe, and uh, one of the beauties of those old cities that continue. Ah, that the businesses are above. And uh, the retails and restaurants and really, the culture, thrives from people being to, ground floor. Sorry, I have some kids coming in here. So, thank you, and again, just to really consider keeping what, claims mountain view and draws people now, and that is the historic building, the green canopy, which I also believe could be more developed and much more focused on, walkable downtown and an active public ground for. Thank you.

[00:36:51] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. We have another phone number. It's a 650 number, last 3 digits are 443. So I think just uh star star 9 on your phone. There you go. Hello. You're unmuted, 650, last 3 digits, 443.

[00:37:22] Daniel Shane: Yes, hi.

[00:37:23] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Hey.

[00:37:24] Daniel Shane: You can hear me.

[00:37:25] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Good.

[00:37:27] Daniel Shane: Good evening, city council members. My name is Daniel Shane. I've lived in Mountain View for the past 25 years. Uh, I live in a townhouse complex and within walking distance of the downtown area. And I just want to throw in my support, for to preclude administrative offices, in any other type service, um, businesses that are not for public use. I believe that uh the ground floor spaces should be preserved for public uses, entertainment, eateries, shops, things that make Mountain View what it is. Um, Mountain View, is really important at this time as well as other times, but especially during this time of the COVID pandemic, because a lot of people, obviously, as you know, feel isolated. And loss of community. And things like that, and Mountain View can be a source of salvation for, for the people of Mountain View. Um, I would hope that the city consultants have a, proper vision of what downtown Mountain View should be like. Uh, the presentation by Hala, Ashawani was excellent, and we have the same mindset as far as the vision for Mountain View. What they did in Sonoma and Santa Rosa, Heelsburg and so forth, um, what they're trying to do is what we should be trying to do in Mountain View. So, um, it's just important that they, uh,

[00:39:29] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Sorry, your time is up.

[00:39:31] Daniel Shane: Okay. Well, thank you very much and I appreciate the time. Bye.

[00:39:35] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Stadio?

[00:39:43] Mary Dateo: Hi, um, Mary Dario, and, um, um, for Greenspace's Mountain View, I guess I'd like to talk a little bit about the, um, uh, lack of any role landscaping guidelines in the precise plan. Um, I don't know if this is supposed to be discussed in this phase. It is not clear to me what phase it will be discussed in, but I do think it should be addressed. Um, and I'm asking, um, We're asking that the precise plan, landscaping guidelines be updated to incorporate guidelines such as those are in place in North Bay Shore or East Westman, which are much more robust. Another thing to address in the landscaping guidelines. Um, if a pedestrian mall is going to be created. The guidelines should call for removal of some of the pavement to be replaced with some permeable area, additional treat campy or drought tolerant plantings. Um, speaking strictly for myself, um, I support staff's recommendation 3 in order to have a lively downtown area. And um, Finally, I guess um, Wondering about integration. And, um, I've heard, uh, during other council discussions, um, concern about how the downtown area on Castro is not really integrated with the, um, Moffatt. And with the new train station and everything else, it should be, and I wonder if the precise plan should be expanded to include some of the area on Moffatt Street, um, to help, not just with style and everything, but also to help, um, develop, uh, sort of an integrated bike pedestrian circulation plan for the entire area. Thank you.

[00:41:37] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Judy Adderholt.

[00:41:48] Judy Atterholt: Hello, can you hear me?

[00:41:50] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:41:51] Judy Atterholt: Um, I just wanted to express my support for the historic designation for the Castro Street buildings and also say that I was kind of surprised at the recommendation to, um, uh, allow businesses rather than vacant buildings on the bottom floor because I think that's exactly the opposite. approach that's needed because when you get the non-active, um, uh, companies on the ground floors, it really does create these dead zones. I would invite everybody to go check out the Cora building on uh, the corner of um, Castro and Church Street. And I get depressed every time I have to walk by, they're, all you see is their cafeteria as you're walking from Castro down church. So that, that whole area is, is not vibrant at all, like a lot of Castro Street is with its various, um, active businesses on the ground floor. So I really would like to urge you to make that rule, that it has to be active businesses on the ground floor. I think that will serve the public and encourage more businesses to come in in a much better fashion. Um, Also, I just want to mention that I've lived in the old Mountain View neighborhood since 1994, my husband and I, have both lived here, and we really love the vibrant parts of Castro Street, but we've noticed there's a real contrast. So anything we can do to, uh, make even more of Castro Street vibrant and preserve what we already have. Thanks so much for your time. Thank you.

[00:43:49] Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right, I don't see any more hands, so this concludes public comment. We can bring it back to council. since it's a study session. Why don't we start with questions or comments? And I know that staff and our consultants are available. So do any council members have any questions or comments? Vice Mayor Ramirez.

[00:44:16] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. I only have one question. I'm a little surprised, um, that we haven't gotten a lot of, um, uh, I guess input from the business community and from downtown property owners. Can staff summarize, uh, in your stakeholder outreach, what, uh, the business community and property owners in downtown, uh, have said about your recommendations?

[00:44:45] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Yes, I can go ahead and highlight what we heard during the outreach aspect of it. Mainly, uh, a lot of the business owners and uh, a lot of the uh, developers, uh, per se, where, in agreement that, or not necessarily in agreement, but if office was to be disallowed. They were, They acknowledge that Castro Street would be the likely location, as that is one of the most viable retail locations where, you know, property owners actually get a request for retail types of uses. Um, but, you know, they definitely highlighted that they would not necessarily be in support of, completely disallowing admin and research, uh, development office uses as you get out of the core of downtown, uh, such as Castro Street.

[00:45:43] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, I take it, they didn't have any comments on the other, uh, recommendations then.

[00:45:52] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: In general, um, the questions that were asked by by staff and by the consultant that's helping us, uh, were very tailored to the specific group, right? We did outreach to the developers. We did outreach to business owners and we also did outreach to neighborhood associations. So, but we did highlight specifically some of the big broad comments for each group within each of the subjects in the staff report. But, you know, from the, let's say the business community. Um, a lot of the property owners were mainly highlighting, um, you know, what uses they were previously denied. So it really became a conversation about uses, which would be a better spoken about enduring phase 2 as this phase one was so specific and that was the information we relayed over to them.

[00:46:56] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Great. Thank you.

[00:46:59] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Council member show Walter.

[00:47:04] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, thank you. I have a question about what would be the process for developing a local historic district. How much work is that? And um, who decides?

[00:47:17] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Uh, well, we don't know exactly how much work it would be, um, but we are happy to include it in a, uh, uh, or study it in the the upcoming uh, updates to the uh, local historic preservation ordinance. Uh, we do expect that there would be some process of defining criteria, uh, defining, um, a process for nominating and approving a local historic district. Um, and then also what that means. So what does it mean to be a contributing building, what are the rights and obligations of those property owners, and what other incentives might apply within the district. So there's a lot to figure out there. Um, so, uh, and then ultimately we'd have to do that at the, at the ordinance level, but then we'd have to go through the process of actually applying those standards at the, um, location level. So that there's kind of, it is a 2 step process.

[00:48:18] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So is that on the schedule now to work on?

[00:48:23] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Uh, is certainly on the schedule to update the historic preservation ordinance. Uh, as we get into that, we can look into, um, you know, the, the additional details of that, um, you know, what goes into that.

[00:48:40] Councilmember Pat Showalter: All right, well, that's that was my question. And then, um, Do we want to go into, you know, continue with questions, I guess, see if anybody else has questions. I have a few comments too, but that would be later.

[00:48:52] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, yes, I think we'll do questions and then each council member can go through the 3 questions and staff and I will keep track and then we'll do a summary at the end. Is that, um,

[00:49:04] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Should I start with that, Ellen?

[00:49:07] Mayor Ellen Kamei: I think we're going to go through questions. There's 4 other hands raised. Is that okay?

[00:49:12] Councilmember Pat Showalter: All right, great.

[00:49:13] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Council member Lieber.

[00:49:15] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, mayor. Um, So, following on council member Showalter's questions about, um, the ordinance and what it would take to get there. I was, um, kind of surprised by the, the, the lack of a real, um, muscle or substance, um, behind what the, the consultant was giving us in terms of options on, uh, preservation of, um, historic buildings. So I would have a similar question of, um, and I don't expect a repeated, the same answer right now. But a similar question going forward. What would it take to get us to the point where we have something that actually protects the historic resources that we have? I know that we have the basis of, um, the work done in terms of identifying, uh, buildings. But, um, what I've seen in the recent years is, um, pretty rapid change, um, um, completely gutting, uh, historic buildings in our downtown. Uh, so that we may end up with, um, a shell on the outside and, uh, but the context lost on the inside. So I'm just very eager to know what steps, what does council need to do to get to that point? Thank you. Oh, and one other question, if I may, mayor. Um, Under what's being proposed. What would happen to the few, um, ground floor offices that are sort of, um, small independent businesses. I think there's, uh, architectural office, maybe a law office and, um, 2 real estate offices that have been a longtime presence in the downtown. And, um, So how would the change, um, uh, uh, affect those business locations?

[00:51:28] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Sure, I'll, because it's fresh in my mind. I'll respond to the 2nd one first. Um, so the, the proposed changes to the downtown precise plan would only affect administrative office, which also includes R&D offices. It would not include what the precise client defines as general offices. So those would continue to be allowed with the provisional use permit. The existing ones would not become non-conforming. Um, so you're talking about the architecture office, the lawyer's office, those are considered general offices. Uh, we do need to study, uh, language and policy about what to do with the, you know, several existing storefronts in the affected area that do have admin office in them today. And so we do need to, um, define the kind of non-conforming language that would allow those to continue, uh, but would, um, set some kind of obligation that it convert to a conforming use. For example, if a certain type of upgrade is required or something. You know, like we, we need to figure out that that threshold. Um, back to your 1st question. Um, You know, you brought up how do you get more protections for historic resources? And, you know, I'll reiterate what was in the staff board is that there already are protections for historic resources that are identified as such? either through the sequel process or through the historic preservation ordinance? Um, the, I think that the questions moving forward are, um, fully fleshing out which buildings qualify for some of those criteria, whether it be local state or national criteria, and that really should be done comprehensively at a citywide level, uh, through the, uh, historic, um, preservation ordinance update that we're proposed, uh, that is on the work plan. Um, and then, um, Did I answer, did I answer that 1st question? I wonder if you had any other parts of that 1st question you wanted to ask.

[00:53:49] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Well, I wonder, um, it's on the work plan and what does that mean in terms of time? About?

[00:53:57] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Uh, I believe we're scheduled to start working on it towards the end of this two-year cycle. Uh, so, you know, usually things like this usually take a year or 18 months or so to to actually complete. So probably completed within 3, 3.5 years.

[00:54:16] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay, thank you.

[00:54:22] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you, council member Hicks.

[00:54:25] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Actually, I apologize. I raised my hand to make comments because I thought people had, I saw pause and hand raising. So if other people have questions, I will wait to make comments.

[00:54:37] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. Counselor Mattachek?

[00:54:41] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Um, I sent in a ton of questions and thank you very much, Steph, for answering all those. I appreciate it. Um, and some of my other questions have been asked why my colleagues here tonight. So I think I'm down to 2 questions. And I was wondering when phase 2 is on the work plan to come to us. If you know that.

[00:55:07] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Uh, Mr. Marvia can confirm, but I think we are scheduled to uh, uh, finalize the precise plan edits uh, over the remainder of the calendar year and probably come back very early 2022.

[00:55:24] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. And, um, I appreciate the answer to the question about, um, What is a general office versus an admin office? I think there is quite a bit of confusion and I think some of the business owners downtown, um, are concerned that, uh, some businesses that might want to move there would not be allowed. And I kind of think of it as if somebody is, if an office serves the public, then it's allowed. Would that be a good way to describe it?

[00:56:01] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Um, I do think that that covers much of it. Um, the, the way it is posed in the, uh, it's kind of posed as a negative to that in the uh, precise plan. So basically an admin office is a business that is, uh, associated with the operations of a business, right? A space that is associated with the operations of a business, rather than provision of some kind of service directly. So, um, that's that's how it's uh, phrased in the precise plan. And so I think that, that's roughly along the lines of what you, uh, presume.

[00:56:49] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Thank you.

[00:56:54] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you, Council member Robby Koba.

[00:56:56] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I wanted to go back to start preservation. Um, I share the sentiment of my colleagues who've um, already asked questions about this and, um, I guess I just wanted to maybe go more specific, um, into the situation that we've um, experienced over the last few years. And, um, you know, I think the community, um, a lot, a large part of the community has um, spoken that they value historic preservation. So my question is, um, I guess my concern about just relying on existing preservation authority, um, in the local ordinance is that, um, through that, over the years, we, um, dealt with, I think it was 902 villa, the WhatsApp building, the house that was there that was left and became dilapidated to the point where, I, you know, I was one of the boating members, and we just felt, We couldn't allow it to continue to, you know, get blighted and so we allowed that. Um, but I, I don't, I'm not frankly, you know, looking back, um, I'm not really satisfied with what, um, took what, replaced it. Um, and then, of course, we had the Tide House Shay TJ issue. And then, um, you know, my concern looking into the future is I noticed the other day that the, the lock shop on Castro Street, um, I forget the, not a number, but that's, that building is up for sale. So my question very specifically is how do we avoid those types of situations that we've had, um, and yeah, avoid that from that happening to the lock shop? Um, and that's what I'm really looking for is, you know, what controls do we have so that we don't even have to go through that whole process because one of the issues that came up with Villa, the, um, JTJ, you know, project was, and the developers, you know, they say this. Well, we've worked so hard on this for so many years and so, you know, we should be able to do this. And I just don't even want to frankly get to that point. So my question is, how do we avoid those situations in the future?

[00:59:17] Assistant City Manager and Community Development Director Aarti Shrivastava: If I may just take a stab at it, um, uh, Council member, Harvey Koga, um, at staff level, we think that, number one, the ordinance has to be updated. Uh, because right now there's a, there's a sort of a voluntary component to it and council can tighten that up. Uh, we also need to, um, review the buildings, whether it's in the downtown or elsewhere, and update our historic register, so that these buildings, including, say, the tide house of JTJs and other buildings are on the register, um, because that gives them additional protection. Um, and then 3rd, we need to, if it's the district that we want to, um, look at, we need to adopt criteria, to identify local district, and then go and do one more pass, take one more pass at downtown to see if it identifies as a local district. Once all these are identified on the list of, on the register, then we have sort of the muscle behind sequa, as well as our ordinance, to, to then, um, you know, direct, um, development, um, on these sites. The council can choose to deny it because it would require a statement of overriding considerations for, you know, getting rid of a historic resource. Or it could provide incentives through the historic ordinance. So there are ways, but we think information is the best way to do it, and the best way to do it is, is to go and um, update the ordinance and update our register so all these property owners are informed ahead of time before they work for years, um, on a project. Um, because if they're not identified, then the historic review becomes part of the development review, and you can go quite far down the road before you know your historic resource. Essentially, the way to do it is through the historic ordinance.

[01:01:12] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I think another issue that has come up is just the ability to redevelop into, you know, uh, with a one story historic building, going to 4 story office and, um, you know, that's some I think it seems like, um, financially that's been incentive enough to go through the whole rigmarole, um, to, to do the redevelopment. So, um, so, and I know the staff reports suggested we don't allow or go into TDRs, but, um, yeah, are there other mechanisms to, I mean, I hate to say this word, but I'm going to say it, disincentivize, uh, redevelopment. Um, you know, because of, yeah, the, the, um, ability to up zone so much. And that to me seems to be in the precise plan is to what can be something it could be redeveloped into. So, is there anything we should be really looking at changing there?

[01:02:12] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Yeah, I think the way we're tackling the precise plan is through the development standards. Um, we can't effectively reduce um, density on residential parcels because of various state laws. But we are looking at doing a better job of shaping non-residential buildings through FAR controls. And we can still apply some setback and other requirements to residential parcels. But really, if there is a historic building, um, the council is well within its rights, um, to deny a project, if it means demolition or um, uh, really affecting that historic resource. That's number one. Um, and then that's the biggest disincentive. Um, and then you also have a system of incentives that we can, we can provide where, um, you know, they can get, for example, um, use, parking, you know, other, other, um, uh, concessions in order to keep that particular building viable. So I think it's basically a system of disincentives and incentives, with the ultimate authority with the council. Um, um, you know, about whether you can demolish a building. So we think that historic ordinance is the best way and then, um, that way you're not replacing the building at all. But I think the development standards help because whatever goes on around it is also going to affect the area. And so um, that's what we're proposing. Um, But we are limited, um, in our ability, especially on residential sites to down zone. Um, parcels.

[01:03:53] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Yeah, and I'll just add real quick that it is part of our scope to study the feasibility of the preservation measures and and um, trying to encourage people to, you know, read tenant, um, uh, historic buildings and things. So it is part of our scope to bring back some analysis of that in the next phase. Or not in when we come back to council, not in the next phase.

[01:04:17] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you and thank you for that clarification. I guess I was thinking about office development and rather than downsunning housing. I know we have, we can't do that, but it's really more the office development that seems to be the bigger incentive. Um, to demolish these historic buildings. Thank you.

[01:04:38] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So I think, Hands are raised again. So are we still in questions or do people want to start going into comments? Okay. So I see A head nodding, council member, Lieber, and Hicks, are the 2 of you wanting to make comments?

[01:04:54] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I have a question.

[01:04:55] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, so I'll ask my question, customer leave. Do you have a question?

[01:04:59] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Uh, I do have a question.

[01:05:01] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay.

[01:05:02] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Um, I'm just wondering 1st from staff, um, Thinking about, um, Staff mentioned that we would have a citywide approach. It seems like losing historic elements of the downtown has a greater impact than, as regardable as it is, losing single elements of the city overall. And so is there an important and compelling reason that we have to take it on a citywide basis? Or could we take an action to protect the historic elements of the downtown? Um, because they are such critical part of the civic fabric? Um, in advance of, say a 3 year process to go through the entire city.

[01:06:00] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: I think we can focus on the downtown. Definitely. But the ordinance would still have to be updated if we wanted to protect the downtown through a district approach. We would need to create the framework to identify a district 1st. Before we could go evaluate the downtown to see if it qualified. So either way, it would still require an update of the historic ordinance.

[01:06:25] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you.

[01:06:27] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So, I just had a quick question. Um, and that was about the the, the outreach and engagement piece. So I know on page 20 of the staff report, there's information about, you know, getting, getting different input. Do you mind sharing a little bit with council, how, like, which groups, um, was it also available online, just the level of engagement so we can also have a better understanding?

[01:06:58] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: So, so, emails were sent out, um, you know, inviting individuals to join the meetings. Um, they, the meetings were held and So, some of them were better attended than others. Um, you know, of course, these comments are only, you know, as good as as the individuals that show up, right? And most of, uh, the meetings had, um, anywhere from, I want to say, 7 to 15 individuals. Um, but, you know, as part uh, as we continue through phase one of the downtown precise plan. Uh, division is obviously once we, uh, hear all the comments from the city council members, uh, staff will reconvene and then do another push for outreach, uh, as we finalize the downtown precise part to get more comments. But, yeah, ultimately, it was, since, you know, we can't do it in person because of COVID, it was through Zoom, and we send out invitations to specifically to the neighborhood association with that we have on file, um, and to business owners, and as well as, as we invited the business association, and ask them to please, uh, spread the word and try to get as many people as we possibly could at the meetings.

[01:08:18] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Yeah, I'll just add the Chamber of Commerce. Um, uh, like Mr. Marvia said, the downtown business association, um, uh, property owners, um, development, uh, developers who are actively engaged in, um, projects downtown, um, neighborhood associations, uh, other interest groups, um, the, um, and so we, we had, uh, multiple uh, um, outreach meetings with oriented around each of those different uh, subject areas. And we also notice this meeting today as well. And in addition, we created a long range, uh, link, uh, in the planning website, uh, providing more information, uh, providing my information as well if people had more detailed questions, um, and how to sign up for my MV, uh, to get more information pertaining to this subject.

[01:09:21] Mayor Ellen Kamei: And did we do we also do postcards?

[01:09:26] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Yes, postcards were sent to all property owners and residents within uh, and uh, uh, tenants, you know, business tenants within 750 feet of various 18 H.

[01:09:40] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. All right. So I think, um, those are my questions and I think that we have council members patiently waiting to give their comments. So council member Hicks, I'll start with you.

[01:09:52] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. I wanted to start out by thanking staff for a comprehensive report. I agree with almost everything in it, and also members of the public for their comments, they added a few, I agree with pretty much everything the public said as well, um, and and there were a few things I had not yet thought of. Um, and also council members. I thought there are questions. I agree with the directions that the questions were going in. So I'm going to, and I'll start off by saying I'm, I'm actually really more excited than I've ever been before about the future of our downtown. I hear a lot, both emails from people and people I run into on the street saying they've really liked the, um, car free nature of our 1st 4 blocks and that, um, yes, we have some vacancies now, but they're really, uh, seeing that if we continue that, um, that they're looking forward to the future of our downtown as we possibly continue that. Um, and I, So I'm going to go backwards in terms of the question, starting with question three, whether we support the active ground floor uses and prohibiting administrative offices. For that one, my answer is an enthusiastic. Yes, I think that we have to do that in order to keep Castro Street, our public square. It's really the only one we have at this point. Um, and their economic incentives, as people have been saying, that could cause us to lose that unless we regulate it, um, to, uh, prohibit administrative offices. And I would say anything that's not open to the public. Um, We get a lot of talk about getting people out of their cars and promoting more active, what is it, getting around? And I think if we don't continue to regulate and have those active uses, people will not be able to, there'll be nowhere to walk to. Um, I know there's been some talk, well, the EPC talked about vacancies, that was one of the reasons that they made a different recommendation. But um, the city just hired a staff person with a great track record, uh, filling downtown vacancies in Campbell. So I feel confident that staff's recommendation is a solid one for that. Um, Then for question number two, whether we support staffs, um, development character and design recommendations. I also, um, strongly support those, uh, that for compatibility with our historic downtown, but I also like the couple of lines on making sure that we're, um, not creating fake historic buildings, that we're not doing Disney like replicas of, um, of, uh, some former downtown, but that we're saving our authentic places, um, and then making other buildings compatible. So I liked that direction very much. Um, I strongly support the setbacks. I think, um, council member Abbe Koga was talking about disincentivizing, um, building offices, and I think that that's, the setbacks are something that both, um, both, uh, create compatibility in any new construction, but at the same time, uh, disin, is this a word, disincentivize, um, yeah, just tall office build, tall glass office buildings being built, um, in our historic downtown. So I like that. I would even, I don't know exactly what the dimensions on the setbacks were, um, plus it might be nice to use the lower part of the setback as a balcony. Um, let's see. So I would look at how deep we can make those setbacks. Then for question number one, which it seems is the more difficult question on staff's recommendation to rely on only existing historic preservation incentives. For that one, I do disagree. I think that we've had problems in the past, most recently on Villa Street with, um, kind of a very difficult situation, both for the developers who'd gone through this long process, um, before they were told no, and also, and the owners and and members of the public who were kind of struggling through that process. I would like to get it right from the beginning. Um, and and I know members of the public then took those buildings to Sacramento where they had been originally, uh, in our original, our consultant had, uh, looked at those buildings and said they would not rate historic at the state or national level. When members of the public brought them to Sacramento, they waited at the national level. So, um, You know, that's concerning, and I did some head scratching and called our state historic preservation office to understand why that might have happened. And they told me that, um, that really our survey was done 15 years ago, that the nature of historic preservation has really changed since then, um, which is some of what what our staff has been speaking to when we were answering the questions. But now, um, People don't look at individual buildings and their architectural components, as much as they, they start out with a context statement that talks more about the community and the uh, different members of that community, debate, you know, different ethnic, racial, or religious groups, what their story is, how they contributed to the story, the development of the city. Um, and it was, I think, through some of those stories, um, that those 2 buildings rated nationally. So, um, and I would say, so I won't tell those stories, but, um, I think that that's the direction that we have to go in, I would like some, so basically I'm saying I would like to modernize our historic preservation toolkit. Um, and I think that will encompass both our historic preservation ordinance and the downtown precise plan and maybe some side tools as well. Um, such things people have been talking about, like, um, like, uh, uh, of revolving loan fund or grants to help uh, help owners of the buildings, um, rehabilitate the buildings and so forth. But that's what I would like. And as one possible direction to take thing to look at would be Redwood City, which is very similar to us in size and, you know, diverse in terms of income and ethnicities, has actually, I think, a very good updated preservation toolkit that includes a context statement and a lot of other tools. So that's, that's the sort of direction I would like to go um, in terms of, of um, historic preservation. Um, and I guess just in closing out, I liked what some of the other, some members of the public said in terms of, um, adding, uh, landscape, escaping requirements, permeable paving, you know, as we look at the nature of, of the changes in the street in the 1st 3 blocks. Thank you.

[01:17:48] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you, council member Mattachek.

[01:17:51] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you Um, this is a topic that is really important to me. And so I am glad that we are talking about this tonight. Um, I did watch the EPC meeting on this topic and um, I guess I'd sum it up by saying it was really interesting and I would encourage you all to watch it if you have the time. Um, I found that my thoughts were very much in alignment with Commissioner Yin. And I do want to give a shout out to her. I think she did a great job of asking a lot of questions and providing a lot of direction. And, um, I definitely, um, felt uh, that she was expressing my opinion as much as she was her own. Um, I am concerned about the future of our downtown area. Um, a large part of what makes the area attractive and generates the interest is the character in the 1st 3 blocks of Castro. And the cross streets as well. And I really want to make sure we preserve that character. I think the uh, email that Livable Mountain View sent us, um, really hit the nail on the head when they said we're at a turning point for the future of our historic downtown. I totally agree with that. Um, and well, I appreciate that, um, the area is called a historic district in the precise plan, um, we really do need to do the work to make that official. Because right now it's just a label and the precise plan that doesn't have anything behind it. Um, During the EPC meeting, there was quite a bit of discussion about, you know, do we really have anything to worry about? And I was kind of surprised that the uh, response was, well, because the parcels are fairly small and narrow, and because there are long term owners. We really didn't see much risk in um, things being redeveloped and things changing. And I disagree with that because I think we all know the example of 2 long-term owners who got together and did propose redevelopment that would have demolished 2 historic buildings. Um, and again, I appreciate the livable mountain view folks for, um, putting in the time and money and effort to take those 2 buildings forward, um, to the state and then at the national level, to have them designated as historic resources. And I so appreciate all the work they did to make that happen. Um, so, obviously, for question one, um, I would say I'm not supportive of just, uh, going with Sequa and the plans we have right now. I really do think we do need to do a lot more. So, um, again, I agree with Lovable Mountain View, and I think we need to um, engage with a consultant to do 2 things. And that's bring forth concrete proposals to enhance the city's ability to preserve buildings in area H, and that would include programs, um, as well as, um, financial assistance to help preserve the buildings as they are. I agree with the comment of we really don't want to have fake historic buildings. Um, there's nothing worse than that. Let's preserve the wonderful buildings that we have. Um, And, um, it would also be, um, proactively taking those buildings, um, to the state and national historic, um, boards and have them registered if they meet the criteria, so that it's really clear what is historic, um, in our downtown. And, and, you know, I have a lot of respect for the consultant that did the work with Livable Mountain View, and maybe we want to consider hiring that consultant to help us. Um, because clearly they, um, at least share my perspective about this is really important and we're going to put a lot of effort behind this. to make it happen. And I would like to update our historic preservation ordinance. And, um, As part of that, I do want to look at defining, and then deeming the area as a historic district. What I'm concerned about, as other council members have said is the timing of all of this. You know updating the historic preservation ordinance has been on the work plan. Uh, I think as long as I've been on council. And so um, it does keep on getting pushed out. And I would like to find a way to pull that in. Um, even if that means other projects get pushed out. And I think, you know, as a body, we can have that discussion and work with staff. Um, but I feel like it's, it's too long to wait um, to do that and have it done in the next um, three, 3.5 years. Um, The other thing I would like to make sure it happens sooner rather than later is phase 2 of the downtown precise plan, getting that updated. Um, it sounds like that um, is not pushed out as far. as the historic preservation ordinance, but, um, the sooner we do that, I think the better, um, because, you know, we really want to help our downtown businesses recover from COVID, um, and having more clarity, um, about on these 2 topics. I think will really help. Um, so the 2nd question is um, yes, I do agree with staff. Um, I think it's important to promote some of the guidelines to development standards, to have them have more meat to them. And include more illustrations. As we said, a picture is worth a 1000 words. I totally agree. And, um, I do agree that we should prohibit administrative offices on the ground floor, um, along Castro streets and across streets. So I do agree with staff recommendation there. Um, and As many have pointed out, we need to keep the downtown area vibrant. Um, I'm very hopeful about its recovery from COVID, and I want to do as much as we possibly can to preserve its character, and um, it's thriving activity and nature, and keep it the gym that it is. Thanks.

[01:24:42] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Council member show, Walter.

[01:24:46] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Thank you. Yeah, well, 1st off, just a couple comments. This is a little confusing, I think, because the downtown precise plan is really for long-term protection. And what we're focused on right now, um, because of COVID is how to keep the downtown as vibrant as possible. Um, you know, from the economic hit that it's taken from COVID. And also there's so much discussion in our community about how to transform the temporary closure to vehicles that we've had, which seems to be very, very popular. into a permanent one and how to do it right. And so, you know, in a sense, it's a little confusing to talk about these things at the same time, but, but they obviously fit together. Um, I think a lot of emphasis needs to be, um, uh, taken both short term and long term and how to fill up the vacant spaces. I mean, we've talked about a prohibition of administrative offices because, you know, they, um, are kind of a dead zone. I would agree with that at the same time. I don't think that's going far enough. I think we need to figure out how can we, um, we activate and have those vacant spaces filled up. And I'm hoping that our new vitality manager can help us a lot with that. But I think there we may have to have some incentives and maybe even some penalties. Like some of these vacancies have been there for 2 or 3 years. And, um, it's not at all. I mean, I don't know the specific stories, but um, I think that having a vacancy in downtown on the 1st floor, uh, for such a long time, begs the question of, are they really trying very hard? And, um, are there temporary uses that we could put those spaces too, like pop-ups or um, art galleries or, I don't know, that that maybe, um, somehow uh, our grants could help uh, support. So I, I kind of like all of those things to be considered with this. And of course, too, the other thing that's been mentioned really that, that, that, um, was, was really, uh, important, is that we need to integrate this with Moffatt, and and with the transit center, which are, you know, right, right next to it. And, um, uh, So, you know, those are some general comments. First, I would kind of concur with what people have said thus far. about question one. My feeling is that we need to move forward and identify the historic buildings in downtown as soon as possible. If we could do kind of a, you know, do that and somehow get some protection and then move on to the, um, you know, to the, uh, taking the, the longer look at the historic, um, reservation ordinance. I would even, I, I know when I was on the planning commission in the 90s, we were considering the preservation ordinance and we felt like it wasn't very good then. And uh, So I thought what uh, council member Hicks said about um, how the uh, historic preservation is modernized, a great deal was really interesting. Um, I'd like to learn a lot more about that. Um, Question two. Um, That seems like a good idea, yes. And then question three. Long term, yes, I think we should ban administrative offices, but I think we need to go much further than that. And we need to figure out ways to get these vacancies filled and maybe utilize temporarily. So thank you.

[01:28:32] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you, Council member Abbe Koba.

[01:28:35] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I need to share this, again, the sentiments of this who have spoken before me. Um, I think uh, council member Metachek, um, really summed up my thoughts, um, what quite well. And so I would say I agree with her comments about one historic preservation. Um, I don't think what we have is going far enough and we just do need to strengthen, um, our incentives um, on, um, preserving buildings. Uh, so I would like to see um, other program options, um, be uh, uh, recommended. And, um, whether we do it, uh, you know, with the, um, the citywide historic ordinance or not. I mean, I don't, I would leave that up to, Well, I leave it up to staff and still what's the best, um, you know, process, but I will say, um, I agree with other accounts numbers that, um, I get, I was disappointed to hear that it's going to be 3 or 3.5 years away. Um, frankly, um, I, we've been talking about this for at least since, well, I, I would say, um, my, you know, our neighbor in downtown, um, Suzette had mentioned, um, we had apparently made some commitment in 2013 to look at this and it never happened. It just disappeared. Um, so here we are 2021. And if it's going to take 3 more years, we're looking at over a decade from that point on, and others have mentioned, we've been talking about this from even before that. So, I would like to um, see how we can speed up the process to at least deal with these buildings, um, in our downtown area. Um, I think I'm excited. I'm excited like others. I share the excitement. I think we are at this, um, kind of a juncture, um, as we come out of COVID, um, and I think we're going to see a lot of, um, you know, opportunities. Um, But that, that concerns me too, because I don't want this, um, preserve, the historic preservation, um, issue not settled before these, um, you know, these things start moving again. So I would ask staff to look at how we can, um, expedite, uh, at least dealing with our downtown district and, and even looking at, um, designating the area as historic. Um, on 2, absolutely, I support, um, this, the rec- staff recommendation. I was, um, surprised about the FAR, lack of FAR, um, guidelines. Uh, so, um, I, I, I, I would, um, support, um, being more clear on what our expectations are. Um, so that's uh, well, that's too. And then three, I agree with um, the others. Uh, I do not support allowing administrative ground floor office, um, as another neighbor, that mentioned Judy Adderholt mentioned that we live here, um, where the Cora building is, and, um, that really just killed this corner, I will say. And I think a lot of people feel that way and I get, you know, resentful every time I go. I used to, well, when I went when it was open, I'd go by there and see the cafeteria. open and feel like, you know, that's not for the public and, um, and and I think, um, in terms of, like, I looked at the entire map of the downtown and the other half that we're not talking about actually allows for quite a bit and has quite a bit of office. And, and I think what we see. I mean, you see the, the, um, the results of that is that the quiet, the dead zones are the quieter areas are, in fact, where those office administrative offices are located. So, I don't think we need more of that downtown. I actually think we need more of, um, you know, public serving, um, office, ground floor office spaces. Um, and in terms of, um, what was mentioned in terms of the economic incentives to do off, uh, administrative office. Um, this kind of ties into the empty storefronts issue and, um, one of the property owners, downtown property owners had, um, I ran into one day and she, you know, said, said to me that, um, she used to get a lot of, um, folks inquiring about the open space, open uh, spaces, downtown spaces. Um, but that doesn't happen anymore. And, um, I also hadn't heard from others who were, you know, looking for space downtown that, um, the rents are extremely high. And so I think that reputation, and I told this property owner, I think the reputation is that it's just really cost prohibitive to be in downtown Mountain View anymore. And so I think that, you know, and the administrative offices are what's driving up the rents. So I think we're actually, yeah, we would really be hurting our downtown by allowing more of administrative offices to come into downtown and would, you know, really kind of kill our vibrancy. Um. So I, uh, yeah, I don't support that. Um, a little bit. Thank you.

[01:34:06] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you, council member labor.

[01:34:09] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. Um, well, obviously on question one. I'm eager to, um, you know, see us put the pedal to the metal and and really get this done. There are uh, a number of spaces that I think are in endangered. Uh, the former auto repair shop that's been the bead shop in the recent years and uh, the lock shop was, um, mentioned and there are a number of others. And, and I'm eager too, to see the interiors of the buildings, um, not be completely stripped, and I don't know what the, the answer to that is, um, Caps pizza was basically a semi-intact 1907-ish building. And then Eureka has kept some external elements of the building. Um, but the entire Um, interior was completely stripped. Um, and that's a loss of of historic context. Um, I really agree with council member Abbe Koga about, um, Areas, uh, D and E, um, just kind of being the dead zone, and I'd love to see. Um, how we could uh, pull up on the rudder in terms of those areas too. And we've talked a lot in the past, about making those more active parts of Castro Street. And there have been a couple restaurants that have ventured down there, but it's just too hard with um, the, the office use in the dead zone. Um, there. And then, um, uh, and and I would prioritize the downtown over the rest of the city, actually, because I think it has a greater impact, um, there, and I think we're, we do have endangered buildings there. Um, Question two, uh, yes, I think that's, uh, a good idea and, um, question three. Obviously, I think that we have to just bite the bullet. And, um, make sure that we, uh, have active uses, and I think as one of the speakers mentioned, Um, it is leading to empty, empty spaces in the downtown as folks, you know, try to play the waiting game, uh, to get an office use into there. And so I think that kind of clarity and um, communicating the expectations, uh, is is really important. And, um, We have had, uh, retail spaces, uh, like, um, uh, the appliance store that have gone to non-public uses, where, um, it has created a dead zone in the middle of blocks, and I think that if we don't do something that's going to accelerate. Um, so I'd like to see us pursue that as soon as possible.

[01:37:23] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. And then Council member Lieber, I'm sorry for question one, was that a yes or a no? Sorry, I'm trying to diligently keep track tonight.

[01:37:34] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Yeah, question question one. Um, is, uh, I, I don't think that our current reliance on existing. Incentives is enough in any way, shape, or form. I think that we need to do more and do it fast.

[01:37:56] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you, thank you. Appreciate that clarity. Vice mayor, miss.

[01:38:01] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor. I think we're finding that our council is in alignment tonight. So my answers are going to be substantially similar. Uh, so for question, one regarding the historic preservation. Um, yeah, I've been thinking about this for, for, uh, a little while. Uh, I live in the San Antonio shopping center area. Uh, and there, there's been a tremendous amount of redevelopment here, and I've lived here long enough to remember, you know, what was there before, the redevelopment, the old, uh, Safeway site and Sears, and, um, you know, across the street, the Marie Calendars. But what I'm finding is, I'm starting to forget what was in the areas that have been redeveloped within my lifetime. And I, I think, you know, our, our history is in jeopardy if we don't guard it diligently. And I really appreciate it. I have some back and forth with uh, with, um, with Mr. Cox from Livable Mountain View, and I really appreciated the, the thoughtful, uh, suggestions and and the research that has gone into what are the tools that exist. uh that we can take advantage of to preserve historic resources. And I think a lot of those things, um, it sounds like the full council is interested in exploring. And I think my answer to question one is substantially similar to council member Matachex, and that's, we have to do the work. Uh, we want the, I think the end goal, it sounds like, is to establish a, uh, sort of a historic, uh, center, uh, or district, rather, but we have to do the work in order to be able to, to justify it. And that's going to be done in the context of the, um, the historic preservation ordinance. So I, I, I, my answer is, that's how we get there. We have to do that work in order to be able to establish the district, but it sounds like a worthy objective if it helps us preserve, um, the historic resources in in the downtown area, but I also see value in, in doing so with the historic structures throughout the city. Um, there are a number of other recommendations in the livable Mountain View email. I hope that uh staff has an opportunity to evaluate them in the context of the other historic work citywide that we're doing. Uh, for question 2 uh, simpler answer. Yes. Uh question three. Um, I think similarly, I'm gonna, I'm gonna borrow from council member show Walter. I think the answer here is we need to find ways of activating vacant space. Uh, I live in. Oh, sorry, I live. I work in downtown San Jose, um, which is struggling with blight and vacancy. Um, I'm not interested in creating dead spaces that are occupied with administrative office, but I'm not interested in, in, you know, just having vacant space in its place where there could be a viable use. So, uh, yes, uh, I support the staff recommendation, but more importantly, I think we need to, uh, in the context of the economic vitality, uh, strategy, uh, figure out how do we attract active uses to fill the vacancies in downtown. Um, and I think, uh, Cher Cranston, uh, during the EPC meeting had some interesting ideas that he had gotten from, um, from San Francisco, where, where his businesses. Uh, so those are my answers, uh, and, uh, I think some of this we can do in the context of the downtown precise plan update, but I think much of it will come from the historic, uh, uh, ordinance, um, historic preservation ordinance work. The only other thing I would, um, add is, and this is, I think, more decidedly phase 2, where redevelopment does occur. I think we need to find ways of incentivizing housing over office space. And I think that's gonna be challenging. Fortunately, we don't have to figure it out tonight. Um, but I do, I do think that's, that's a conversation we should have in as part of phase 2. Thank you.

[01:42:29] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Okay. So, um, thanks to all my colleagues for all these, um, for, for clearly answering all 3 questions, I could keep track easily, and then the kind of robust comments. I really appreciated it, um, as well as as the public, um, and staff. Thanks so much. So I think what would be best is I'll answer the 3 questions and then I do have some comments on what I'd like to see moving forward. So, um, from what I can hear, it sounds like, well, I guess we're not into summary, but for myself, uh, question number one. Um, is, uh, no. I do believe that moving forward with the historic preservation ordinance makes the most sense. And, um, I'd love, I, echo the comments that were already made about prioritizing that and having that, if that runs in in tandem. Um, I think that would be really helpful to answer a lot of these questions and, you know, um, Part of the the feedback there too is that, um, you know, as we're talking about historical context, we have many different community groups, the Mountain View historical Association, for example, right? They're a great resource, and I would love to livable Mountain View clearly has done some work as well. I wonder if we can kind of leverage the community engagement there already to move forward with the ordinance and I think council member Hicks mentioned the city of Redwood City. Um, so perhaps it's not completely reinventing the wheel and that we do have some framework that, um, and some momentum here so that we don't need to continually, um, um, push it out because I do think it's been on at least the entirety that I've been on council as well. Um, for question um, 2 is yes. Um, and question 3 is, is also yes. Um, and just into into comments. So part of my, what I was asking about the community engagement element is, I do think that in Mountain View, we are blessed with neighborhood groups, we're also blessed with community groups. And some of the community groups like the Mountain View Historical Association is one that might have not have received an email and perhaps not doesn't have members that live within the postcard vicinity, the 750 feet. And I'd love to see some more robust and greater ways to engage from not only the neighborhood groups and the businesses, um, but also kind of the existing organizations within the city. At least that's one of the things I've noticed during the pandemic is people are much more engaged. We have Green Spaces Mountain View, which was versed out of the pandemic, right? So I do think that we need to be, um, having a holistic approach and whether that comes from staff or the consultant, that would be my my recommendation in my hope in that, you know, we get all the comments. on the forefront so that we don't need to kind of double back later, um, on that. And then, um, I did want to touch upon something that council member Mattachek mentioned, which is phase 2. And I, I do think moving forward with phase 2 and it streamlined fashion makes the most sense. Council member, Shelter brought up how we're trying to talk about the economic recovery and we're trying to talk about how we help our downtown businesses out of the pandemic. And I think the sooner we can move through phase two. The more we can kind of also talk about the recovery efforts from our existing businesses. Um, and and I know that there's interest there from, um, people who've done outreach to me from our business groups. So at the end of that would be helpful. Um, and I also wanted to say, um, one of the things we talked about in terms of historic preservation came up at a, uh, REI meeting, where we talked about trying to find ways to mark historical, historical places within Mountain View, whether that the Chinatown that used to exist within the downtown or the robust nursery businesses that used to be here. I'd love to see some incorporation, not only of the architecture, but also ways to play, you know, homage to what used to be there. So we can all remember as as the vice mayor was mentioning, there's things that have turned over in our lifetime and we're already starting to forget, right? Um, I'd also like to see that incorporating when we talk about historical preservation. Okay. So those are my que- answers to my questions and comments. Council member, show Walter.

[01:47:14] Councilmember Pat Showalter: There was one more thing before you get to the summary that I wanted to mention again in case it did get into it. And, um, uh, it was what Mary Adadio brought up. You know, the idea that we would want to add landscaping guidelines to this. I really think, um, that's that's very important and also, uh, uh, um, perhaps a real emphasis on adding more canopy on the side streets. We have beautiful trees on Castro. I'd certainly like to see more of them. But the side streets, not so much. So, um, just wanted to add that idea about landscaping and hope my colleagues um, would, you know, concur with that.

[01:47:51] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Council number Hicks.

[01:47:56] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So, as usually happens when I speak 1st, other council members say things that I want to agree with, but they don't know I agree with them unless I bring it up again later. So, but we might,

[01:48:10] Mayor Ellen Kamei: before you go on, council member hits, I might ask is what we might want to take shawl motions on them.

[01:48:15] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Sure, sure.

[01:48:16] Mayor Ellen Kamei: So, okay. So before, you know, before we go into all of that. I'd love to get a summary from staff and then go through some of the promotions and then maybe that's the way to best indicate our support for things that council members. That other people have said.

[01:48:34] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Sure, sure. I think we don't have to remember it all.

[01:48:37] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, so, um, Ms. Shabastoba. Do you, would you like to? Summarize,

[01:48:44] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: I could summarize, um, uh, there was remarkable, um, I would say, uh, agreement, um, between all uh, 7 council members. Essentially, the council on the historic question wanted to move sooner on protecting the downtown. Um, uh, the combination of, I guess, the historic ordinance, looking at downtown resources and the possibility of creating a district. Um, and then also bring to bear other um, economic vitality, um, and and look at financial incentives, um, along with that. So, I think we'll take that as direction and we'll work at a staff level to look at how quickly we can work on it, given our other priorities, and I'll communicate back to the city manager so we could report that out. Um, I'm question two. Um, uh, it was a unanimous. Yes, the council agrees with creating more objective standards, um, and FAR for office buildings, um, and, um, we'll wait for the straw motions for additional work. And question 3, it was also uh, unanimous, yes, there was a um, agreement with the staff recommendation to restrict admin offices in the areas that we had noted in the presentation. Um, there were some additional, um, or comments, which I think we can take as direction for phase 2 or phase one, as we may be able to apply it, um, or the economic vitality strategy in looking at, um, uh, you know, vacancies and how to how to reduce them, but not through admin office.

[01:50:30] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. So does that, I think that sounds like a, a summary of what I heard as well. And then, Mr. Best of it, for the things that require straw motion. So one of the things that came up was perhaps looking at some landscaping guidelines, um, as part of the phase one precise plan. Shall we do a strong motion on that?

[01:50:52] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Sure, we could do that and we'll find ways to, um, uh, incorporate some of these might, um, if they're in city streets, we might have to look at other ways of updating it, but I think, I think it's good direction and we can figure out where to place it, whether it's phase one, whether it's phase 2 or whether there's another, other city plan where we can look at it.

[01:51:14] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Customer matter check.

[01:51:16] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Now, I was under the impression that that was part of phase 2, um, when we previously discussed the phases. But, um, I guess if there's a chance to move it up okay, but, um, I want to make sure it's more than just areas H, A, and Just the 3 areas we're looking at. Now, I forgot the other letter. H and the H.

[01:51:37] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: A G H. Okay. Well, if it's part of...

[01:51:42] Mayor Ellen Kamei: would you like to answer that question? Is it already incorporated as part of phase 2? Have we have we gone?

[01:51:47] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Phase 2, we'll be looking a little bit deeper into the standards and we can respond more to it. Um, But to the extent that you would like it to apply for phase one. Um, some of these, I think, and Eric, you can, you can confirm this, but we, we may be restricted because the street planting is, is mostly done on city streets, and they, that may not be in the downtown precise plant. So.

[01:52:18] Principal Planner Eric Anderson: Yeah, so unlike other areas where we're planning more comprehensively, like to, you know, kind of scraping everything and starting over, like, like East Wisbon and North Bay Shore, we don't have the plan, the, um, the, uh, the street escape, the the street dimensions plant, you know, in the precise plants, right? We, we are relying on public works documents for defining the, um, you know, how the streets are designed. Um, that's not to say that we can't add landscaping standards or guidelines to private property. Um, I think you, uh, there's there's a little bit of a give and take when you have, um, in a, uh, you know, a downtown environment like Areas AG and H. You really do have the desire for buildings right up against the sidewalk, so there's a little bit of a, um, uh, you have to acknowledge that in your landscaping standards, and so landscaping tends to be a little bit more, um, uh, a little bit smaller, honestly, in these areas. But that is certainly something that we can study, uh, for more landscaping on private property in in the areas AG and H, uh, and come back with draft standards for that.

[01:53:46] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. Thank you. So do you need council direction on that and shall we? I heard quite a few people mention it, but just wanted to, I think we have the outliers. We have, we've answered questions one, 2, and 3 and I'm looking to figure out what are the, what are the things that need clarity in terms of direction from counsel? So.

[01:54:07] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: I think it'd be good if the council could just take a strong motion on the landscaping and streets gaming requirements and we could identify what we can do as part of phase one and then come back, um, you know, in phase 2 for the other for the other parcels.

[01:54:25] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Right. All right. I see the vice mayor's ready to vote. So, um, all those who are interested in having the landscaping and streetscaping, um, Guidelines for part of phase one to come back to us. Okay, that looks unanimous. Anything else staff needs clarity on?

[01:54:52] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: No, I think we have enough to go with, and as I said, we'll have to do the follow-up on the historic ordinance and the historic part to see how quickly we can move that forward, especially for the downtown.

[01:55:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. I was going to resummarize, but I see 2 hands. So I will go to council member Hicks and then counsel their amount of check.

[01:55:14] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So, I wanted to bring up one thing that council member Matic has said, which was hiring, um, uh, the, uh, the firm that Livable Mountain View had worked with, to work on the local historic district, and identification. It's, uh, I think it's preservation plus history and I think they worked with Bridget Malley. So I just wanted to resuggest that and see if anybody else were into going in that direction as well.

[01:55:50] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Council member about a check. Did you have something else or would, shall we take a straw motion on Council member Hicks comment?

[01:55:57] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So, I guess I just wanted clarity on the historic district if that also included looking at individual buildings. And potentially hiring this consultant to help us get those on the state or national register if they're historic. To me, they were slightly different things, and I'm interested in both.

[01:56:19] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. Ms. Shvastov,

[01:56:21] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: if I may, if I may confirm, um, um, yes, we understood that the council's interested in looking at individual buildings, um, and as for the, as for the, um, historic preservation consultant, we've already made note, and we'll also be reaching out to Redwood City and Sunnyvale to look at consultants and do an RFP. Um, so that we we could um, interview them and and select uh, a consultant. Obviously, we'll likely, um, We'll certainly update the council on that as well. So.

[01:56:55] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Counselor Hicks, Counselor, I checked. Does that kind of incorporate what you were hoping for?

[01:57:01] Unknown Speaker: Okay, I think so too. an RIP process makes sense.

[01:57:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, so I see nodding hence. Does Stephanie need anything else?

[01:57:10] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: No, I think we have everything we need. Thank you.

[01:57:13] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, great. So to summarize, it sounded like the answers were, um, no, yes, yes. Okay. And we will also be looking into landscape and streetscape, um, being guidelines as part of phase one, and staff will also be looking into both the individual buildings as well as the historic district, and we'll be reaching out to um, various cities on what they've worked on with their ordinance as well as putting together an RFP for a historic, um, preservation consulting. Okay. All right. Well, that's um, brings the study session to a close. Um, I think perhaps if For council members? You can hear me?

[01:58:06] Unknown Speaker: No, I can hear you.

[01:58:09] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Oh, my internet, it just says internet unstable. Sorry about that. So I was saying that the study session is, this concludes the study session, and if colleagues are interested, we could take a 10 minute break before the regular session, so we can reconvene at 710. And if City Clerk Glaser wouldn't mind putting that, um, on the timer for everyone, that would be much appreciated. All right, see everyone at 710.

[02:10:04] Mayor Ellen Kamei: So good evening, everyone. Welcome to the joint meeting at the city council, Regular, and the Shoreline, Regional Park, Community Special, and the city of Mountain View Capital Improvements Financing Authority Special, of June 8th, 2021. I'm going to read the usual announcement as required. This meeting will be conducted in accordance with the state of California executive order N dash 29 dash 20. Dated March 17, 2020. All members of the city council are participating in this meeting by video conference with no physical meaning location. Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting live may do so at Mountain View.legistar.com. On YouTube, at mountain view.gov slash YouTube, and on Comcast Channel 26. As noted on the meeting agenda, members of the public may provide oral public comments during the public comment period for the item by signing up at mountain view.gov slash CC underscore speakers or by phone by dialing 669-9009128 and entering webinar ID 963-14849204. Any emails received by 430 p.m. today. We're received directly by the city council. All votes will be taken by roll call vote. So, um, I'd like to move on to the pledge of allegiance, and I believe the vice mayor will be leading us tonight.

[02:11:39] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you for the honor, mayor. 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.

[02:11:55] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you very much. And now I'll move on to item two, the roll call. The city clerk will take attendance by roll call.

[02:12:04] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Once member, am I, Council member Hicks,

[02:12:08] Councilmember Alison Hicks: here,

[02:12:08] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Lieber.

[02:12:10] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Here.

[02:12:10] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member, Mattachek,

[02:12:12] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: here,

[02:12:13] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: council member, Shelter.

[02:12:17] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Here.

[02:12:18] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Vice Mayor Ramirez.

[02:12:20] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[02:12:20] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Mayor, can I? Thank you.

[02:12:23] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. And we'll move on to item number 3 presentations. Um, item 3.one is the LGBTQ Pride Month Proclamation. One week ago, on June 1st, I was joined by many of my city council colleagues to raise the rainbow flag and celebration of Pride Month. Former mayor and council member, Chris Clark, also joined us and was given the 2021 proclamation for his role in starting the tradition in Mountain View. Let's take a look at the video of the flag raising ceremony.

[02:13:06] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Hello and welcome to the annual flag raising of the Rainbow Flag over Mountain View Civic Center Plaza for Pride Month 2021. I am Mayor Ellen Kumay. We are raising the rainbow flag as a symbol of pride and a celebration of diversity and inclusion. We remember the June 1969 Stonewall uprising in New York City, a significant turning point for the gay rights movement. Through this flag raising, we are commemorating, supporting, and celebrating our LGPTQ plus community. We raise the rainbow flag over Mountain View City Hall as another demonstration of our community's ongoing commitment to our shared humanity. Our inclusivity, and our community for all. So I want to thank you. Our friends, our neighbors, and all of our families of Mountain View for always being welcoming, for always embracing diversity, and for celebrating Mountain View's pride. Now, let's raise the flag. Now, I'd like to present our Pride Month proclamation to former Mayor Clark. Mayor Clark, do you have any words you'd like to share with us?

[02:14:32] Chris Clark: I just want to thank you, Mayor, for your support of the LGBTQ plus community for continuing this tradition, and to my colleagues, my former colleagues now. I really appreciate all of your support and continuing the tradition now and in the future. Thank you so much, Mayor. We appreciate it.

[02:14:49] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you, Happy Pride. Great. Thanks so much. It was, as you can see, it was a very windy day, but we survived. Would any member of the council like to say a few words? All right. Um, seeing none. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone, and we'll display a 2 minute timer on the screen. Tim McKenzie.

[02:15:39] Tim McKenzie: Hi, uh, great uh, proclamation, uh, was excellent to see y'all in person too, together. Hopefully we'll all be able to join in some rooms in a little bit. Um, and just related to this uh, proclamation. And I know you all know earlier in the year, the city of Mountain View committed to putting period products in women's restrooms in the city. Um, trans men, also menstruate, non-binary people also menstruate. So it would be a great action to also extend to men's restrooms, all restrooms, providing free period products. It would be a great concrete piece of action to show direct support for the LGBTQ plus community and to be a leader for our neighbors in the area. Thanks.

[02:16:29] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. So that concludes public comment. Um, and I know council member Clark would be here with all of us, but he's currently traveling to see his family for the 1st time. So, um, glad that he could um, join us on June 1st. Um, So happy Pride. And I'll move to item four, which is the consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion, unless any member of the council wishes to remove an item for discussion. The reading of the full text, the resolutions and ordinances will be waived, unless the council member requests otherwise. A motion to approve the consent calendar should include reading the title of the ordinance and resolutions attached to items 4.2 and 4.3. And before we go forward on the consent calendar items, if there's any council member who wants to comment, the item doesn't need to be pulled to make a comment, you can just speak to that before we take the motion. Um, then I just wanted to say that. Council member, show Walter, do you have an announcement to make?

[02:17:36] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes, yes, I do. Um, I, on item number 4.15. The neighborhood grant award for Cooper Park neighborhood. I need to recuse myself because of my proximity to Cooper Park itself and also because of my involvement in the neighborhood association. And while I'm at it, I just make a couple more comments. I'll be voting no on item 4.2. Um, that's the uh, no smoking ordinance. Um, I think, as I mentioned before, I think it's unnecessary to ban the smoking and apartments, when landlords already have the right to prohibit it, and often do, and um, I just, I don't feel good about the inclusion of marijuana. Um, in this regulation as well. On item 4.4, the landfill disposal agreement and smart station MLU. I want to thank staff for all their work on this. They've been working on this for over 2 years, and one member, uh, Lori Topley, uh, made a, uh, a personal commitment not to retire until she had it done. So I like to thank her for that. And also, I know 4.7, the community shuttle hours expansion. This is really something to celebrate. We've had this community shuttle now. Five, 6 years and um, uh, it will just be so much more useful to our community with these expanded hours. So I wanted to comment on that. Thank you.

[02:19:02] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you, council member, Abe Koga.

[02:19:06] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, just a couple of comments. Um, I also wanted to, um, uh, express my, um, my delight in uh, item 4.7. I actually saw that on the VTA, um, agenda item, um, to approve the funding, and so I'm excited to see that this is moving forward and we'll be able to expand hours and hopefully be able to serve more, more of our uh, more of our population. So thank you, staff, for all the work on that. And then on for the other one, I just wanted to say, thank you and comment on this 4.13, the Grant Road and Sleeper Avenue intersection study. This has been a long time and coming. We've gone back and forth on this item, and sometimes it's just a matter of timing and technology catching up, I'd say, and I think that's what's happened here. So I'm glad to see that this is moving forward. Um, and hopefully this will be uh, resolution to this uh, ongoing debate that's occurred for many, many years. Thank you.

[02:20:11] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Would any other counselors like to make any comments? Okay, I just wanted to make a comment on item, um, 4.11, um, and just, um, fake destination home. They've been such a great partner. Um, with the city of Mountain View, as we've been trying to tackle, um, those who are unstably housed and they, um, you know, are very creative in in their approach to how they, they, they tackle the issue of homelessness and housing instability and really appreciate that they're partnering with us once more on this grant opportunity. It's really great. All right. So if there are no further comments, would any council member like to pull an item? All right. I'm also not seeing any. So does anyone have a emotion? Vice fair, Ramirez.

[02:21:02] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Oh, public comment. I'm happy to move the calendar, but do you want to take public comment first?

[02:21:06] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Sorry about that. I was getting excited. Uh, so we will turn it over for public comment. If any member of the public on the line would like to provide public comment. Please feel free to raise your hand in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone. We'll display a 2 minute timer. Shawnee Kleinhouse.

[02:21:29] Shani Kleinhaus: Good evening, America May, city council. This comment relates to item 4.9. Um, Shoreline Park is a critical resource for birds in our region, especially some of the sensitive, protected species that mess there, like the boring outs and the black skimmers and white tailed kites. And so Audubon always pays attention to projects that are proposed at Shoreline. Uh, we became aware of the uh, shoreline improvement project for the dog and the boat area, uh, recently and have expressed some concerns to stuff. Essentially, we were wondering why the project did not include the island that desperately needs protection from erosion. We had a meeting with stuff earlier today, and uh, they explained the timeline of addressing that issue that they're thinking of, and so we will be uh, working with them, hopefully to see that the island is protected from erosion, uh, and from the activity of boaters around the island that disrupt the birds, uh, that try to nest there. So I'm not asking to pull the item. I just wanted to give you an update. Uh, thank you and thank you for protecting all those wonderful birth there.

[02:22:53] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. But next speaker is Ray Branson.

[02:23:01] Ray Bramson: Good evening, Mayor. Vice mayor. City council members, Ray Brampson, Chief Operating Officer of Destination Home. On behalf of Destination Home. I want to thank this council and the city of Mountain View for your continued leadership in addressing our region's challenging homelessness crisis. several months ago. We began working closely with your very talented and committed staff to see how we could partner to better together with you to support the work of Mountain View and trying to help unhoused residents in your community. We're very fortunate today that you're considering accepting a 3 year $450,000 grant from destination home to achieve this work. We know local governments are stretched thin. And we know resources are scarce. I mean, that's why it's all that more encouraging when we see a city like Mountain View really stepping up and we want to honor that commitment to ending homelessness, which is the mission of destination home with this grant. So thank you again for your partnership. excited to see what we can accomplish in the next 3 years together. Thank you.

[02:24:03] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Next speaker is Andre Thomas.

[02:24:08] Andre Thomas: Good evening, council members. My name is Auntie Thomas, and I'm a resident and assistant chapter chief steward with SCLU local 521. I'm here again to implore you to amend the language within this ordinance to exclude controlled substances from item number 4.2. This ordinance was not crafted through a diversity, equity and inclusion wins, which are values that I believe that this council supported when crafting legislation. Not only does this ordinance appear on the personal liberties of members within the community, but it's also an affront, 2 renters in this community, as it sends a very clear message that only the affluent who can afford single unit properties may enjoy personal liberties without government oversight. It has already been established that most landlords in our community already have smoking prohibition language within their lease agreements, as landlords do not require an ordinance to enforce rules on their properties. What about the landlords that smoke on their properties? What about the landlords that do not wish to impede on tenant's legal right to smoke marijuana? Where are renters to go to enjoy their personal liberties, or to medicate by use of marijuana? Is it best for readers to enjoy personal liberties in front of a single unit property? These are all types of concerns students will have once they learn of this reward. So please reconsider passing this ordinance in its current form and amended to exclude controlled substances. Thank you very much.

[02:25:30] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Next speaker is Rosa. Ariano.

[02:25:38] Rosa Ariano: Um. Uh, Bueno, noche, , if we will end on Montemu, , y que sierra por favor, pedilas, [non-English speech not transcribed] Gracias. Muchas, gracias.

[02:26:08] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Um, so the, the, Those I was saying, she's lived in Mount Argy for 20 years and was asking us to extend the eviction moratorium for an additional 90 days. Alright, where's England?

[02:26:24] Bruce England: Thank you, mayor. You hear me okay? okay

[02:26:28] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[02:26:29] Bruce England: Good. Okay, now I got to get back to my points. So speaking for Mountain View coalition for sustainable planning. Uh, we would like to support uh, 410 on the safe parking program, 412 on uh, 1625 North Shoreline, accepting public improvements, and 413 on the uh, Grant Road Sleeper intersection. But also 411 for the destination home funding. We applaud ongoing efforts by the council and staff to prevent and homelessness and support the goals of the community plan. And we highlight the value of Mountain View's proactive approach to leverage outside private resources, to both address the needs of the most vulnerable and improve the quality of life for all residents, and indicate support, or we support, I should say, for the development of implementation details, that include innovative policy development, to address income inequality and other homelessness root causes, expansion of housing options, including supportive housing and deeply affordable housing, partnerships to expand rental assistance programs, increased involvement of lived experience, voices in cities, homelessness, strategy development, and finally, to encourage council's approval of the proposed destination home grant, which was the point of my commenting. Thank you very much.

[02:27:45] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Tim Mackenzie.

[02:27:50] Tim McKenzie: Hi, I I want to add my voice. Tim McKenzie, he him pronouns, Montelomer neighborhood, local gadfly, father and counsel from time to time. Um, I just want to add my voice to uh, those who are thanking you for extending safe parking and for uh, the grants to destination home, uh, fighting homeless, homelessness and providing stability in our community is excellent work. And I thank you for that. Um, I also want to support the uh, earlier speaker who spoke on uh, 4.2 prohibition of smoking. Um, I, I think there should at least be an exception for medical marijuana if a physician tells someone that the best uh, treatment for their ailment is to have marijuana. I don't think the city should be standing in the way of that. And I think that there could and should be an exception for medical marijuana, and the fact that other cities with similar ordinances have not done so themselves doesn't really seem like a great justification to me to not do so ourselves. We can chart a path forward. and be leaders. And I think that, again, there should at least be an exception for medical marijuana. Thank you.

[02:29:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Mary, video?

[02:29:10] Mary Dadio: Hi, uh, Mary Dadio, member of the uh, 2nd environmental sustainability task force several years ago, um, I'm really excited to see the shuttle hours expansion and um, I'd really like to thank staff for their work in pursuing and winning the grant to expand the social service and also for all the planning they've done to, um, to get this organized. The environmental sustainability task force did recommend expanding the community shuttle service in order to create more alternatives to driving. And these new shuttle hours, um, that are proposed is going to make the shuttle so much more usable for many more segments of the population, um, including for 1st and last mile trips for commuters. And so I'm hoping that council does approve this item. I know that Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Sustainable Planning also supports expansion of the shuttle system. Thank you.

[02:30:02] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Edith Bagella. Edith?

[02:30:20] Edith Ayala: Hola, see me, nombre, este, este dita yala, yo, tenco, venteno, yo, siquino, gustaria, por favor, porque todavia, economicamente, no estamos biento, de muento, no, a mucho trabajo, yo, realmente, nes el tamos, nes tencio, gracias.

[02:30:42] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Gracias. So, um, Edith is also a 20 year resident asking us to extend the eviction moratorium. She was saying that it's still difficult to to pay rent. And people are still finding it difficult to work. Um, and and find work. Megan Freeley.

[02:31:06] Megan Fraley: Hi, um, this is Megan Fraley, Mountain View Resident, um, ACLU member. Um, just wanted to speak on item 4.2. Um, something that hasn't happened in the past for this many years in terms of, uh, banning smoking indoors that seems and feels so easy and good on the surface. It just raises a lot of red flags to me around unintended consequences and not thinking this through thoroughly in terms of civil liberty issues that arise, as well as we've, you know, made so much progress in this country and decriminalizing drugs. And, um, my concern, especially since this targets renters and not even getting into that issue is, again, I wonder if there will be unintended consequences in terms of the not so great landlords and who is going to get targeted by actually enforcing this. So I think there's serious equity and civil liberty issues that just need to be thought through more. So even if the end result is, hey, you know, it's 10 times more likely that you will get cancer if you live nuts to somebody who is smoking inside, which sounds questionable, but even if that's true, like this really needs to be thought through. So, um, I would ask that it is removed from the consent calendar. We think more about the equity and inclusion that we say that we are committed to. Thank you.

[02:32:25] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Dora, Flores? Dora?

[02:32:34] Dora Flores: Uh... Um, we both of, like, you know, your want of view. If we're so local, like, Korea, that... que por favor, porque yo, estois in trabajo, um, y familia, los ape pudicado, muchissimo, uh, nostamos trabajando, yo no soy trabajando, y esposo, trabajando, yo, no, no, no, no, no. Puera una de una gran, ayura, que esten dera la moratorio. Ah, for mas tiempo. Mas gracias.

[02:33:17] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Um, so, Dora's a 21 year resident of Mountain View. She was asking us to extend the eviction moratorium. She said she currently is not working. Um, and hasn't been able to find work. Her husband works, but it would be a great help if we could extend the eviction moratorium. Alexander Brown.

[02:33:42] Alexander Brown: Hey, just like to echo the sentiments of many of the other speakers, both on extending the eviction moratorium. I think that now is not the time to, for example, never, there's never a time to force people out on their home, out of their homes, now, especially not good. There's a lot of rent debt. A lot of people still struggling. We're not back to a state where that's a reasonable thing. It's never a reasonable thing to do, where it's a justifiable, it's never justified. Anyway, but also, uh, 4.2, uh, again, when you include marijuana, which a lot of people use to treat medical conditions, but also which does not have the same secondhand negative impacts, along with tobacco, it becomes, uh, like a, a not great ordinance that should be reconsidered. Uh, I don't think that we need, we should be preventing people from getting treatment that can help them to eat when going through chemo, uh, alleviating suffering is good. If that suffering comes from secondhand tobacco smoke and you're causing a risk to people and children and pets. That's good. If you're doing it at the cost of keeping people from being able to eat while undergoing treatment for life-threatening cancers and other illnesses, then are you doing good? Thanks.

[02:35:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. All right, I don't see any more hands raised, so I'll bring it back to counsel. Um, for a motion. Nice mirror, miss.

[02:35:18] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor, and thank you for translating for the members of the public. All moves, the consent calendar, including item 4.2, adopt an ordinance of the city of Mountain View, amending chapter 21, article 2 of the Mountain View City code related to prohibition and regulation of smoking in certain places, and item 4.3, adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, adopting the 2020 urban water management plan and adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, adopting the water shortage contingency plan. Uh, noting uh, council member show alters, no vote on 4.2 and abstention from 4.15. Thank you.

[02:36:02] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Council member, Abbe Coba.

[02:36:05] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I'd like to 2nd the motion and I forgot earlier. I just wanted to add my thanks to destination home as well. It's always nice to be recognized. We don't get that very often. And so this really is very meaningful. Thank you.

[02:36:19] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So we have a vice, we have a vice mayor. We have a motion by Vice Mayor Ramirez, a 2nded by council member of a Coca, a city clerk blazer.

[02:36:30] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: We'll take a roll call vote. Ice Mayor Ramirez.

[02:36:33] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[02:36:34] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Ali Coca?

[02:36:35] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I

[02:36:36] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Hicks.

[02:36:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[02:36:38] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Counseling or leaper?

[02:36:40] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi,

[02:36:40] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Mattachek?

[02:36:42] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes,

[02:36:43] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Councilman Michelle Walter?

[02:36:45] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes, with my recusal and no vote on 4.2 stipulated.

[02:36:50] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: And Mayor Coming.

[02:36:51] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[02:36:52] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Mention case?

[02:36:53] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. So move on to item 5 oral communications. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter, not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to 3 minutes during this section. State law prohibits the council from acting on nonagenda items. With any member of the public on the line, like to provide comment on this item. If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or star 9 on your phone, and we will display a 3 minute timer on the screen. Okay. Chayito? Chaiito, are you there?

[02:37:50] Rosario Porto Carrero: Hola, estaba silencio, sorry.

[02:37:53] Mayor Ellen Kamei: No, steam. Sige.

[02:37:55] Rosario Porto Carrero: So, Rosario, porto Carrero, y buen esta, ciuda, benti, una, nosia. E la unico que esta de cida, los del consiglio, era que que se tonga la mano en corazón, y comprenda necesidades que stan pasan la rica, todos familias de stasuda. Y can pria la moratoria. Para, que se lobre un estabilida, economica, yo que nostres mes es más, se diabueno. In... Yeah, see, lobra esta tranquilida, que en esta ciuda. Esta ciudas, characteriza, porcentranquila, y hermosa, y me gustaria, que continue, siendo, si, muchisimas gracias.

[02:38:39] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Muchas gracias. Um, so we have a 21 year old resident in in Mountain View asking us to extend the um, uh, eviction moratorium for another uh, 3 months. Um, she was stating that Mountain View is a beautiful, wonderful place to to live and she enjoys it and hopefully we can, um, find it in our, in our hearts to extend the eviction moratorium. All right, um, Bruce Ian.

[02:39:11] Bruce England: Thank you, mayor. You hear me fine?

[02:39:13] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes, I do.

[02:39:14] Bruce England: Thanks. Yes, thank you and council members too. Bruce England, Wisman Station Drive with 2 comments from Mountain View Community Groups. Speaking for Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning or NBCSP, We believe that many will not be prepared to start paying red again when the current eviction moratorium expires. We strongly urge you to extend Moundview's moratorium for a month or more so that precarious renters have time to stabilize their situations. San Jose and the county are also looking at extending their moratorium. So our ask is for you to put this consideration on the council agenda for June 22nd, the last available meeting before your summer break. In our view, this would be to direct staff to bring back options for extending. A lot can change up to the 22nd. We just need to keep the option of having it on the agenda at that time. And then second, speaking for Moundview coalition for police reform and accountability, or NV Cepra, we note that the public safety advisory board or PCAB met for the 1st time last month. We urge council members to closely follow the work this advisory body is doing now that they've started meeting. Personally, I would like you to monitor all advisory body meetings for their valuable input, but what the PCAB is taking on now is particularly pressing at this point. At their kickoff meeting, in addition to members receiving information about the Brown Act and the advisory body's handbook, electing their chair and vice chair. They also started discussing what might go into their initial work plan. This development is expected to take place over their June and July meetings. Well, in time for your approval of their plan in September. Initial ideas for the plan offered by staff liaison Melvin Gaines, included considering the school resource officer, or SRO program, with direction from council to at least start working on this before the end of the year, when your own SRO, study session is expected to take place. Output from the human relations commission listening forms on police policies and practices in Mountain View, mental health crisis response options, and MVPD, pullover statistics. Also on the topic of advisory bodies. I suggest that you ask all the bodies for their input on what legislative bills to suggest for city support. I'm certain some of them will have several that fall within their areas of interest and expertise. Thanks for your attention.

[02:41:31] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Tom Myers.

[02:41:37] Tom Myers: Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. Uh, I'm actually going to be addressing the eviction moratorium later on in my comments under item 7.2, but right now I'm speaking from a personal uh, experience, and I, I would like to uh, uh, speak not as the executive director of CSA that is the son of 285-year-old residents of Mountain View, who live independently in their own home. And I am speaking to say thank you to the city's forestry team. My parents have a beloved tree in the yard of their home, a home they have lived in since the 1970s. Over the last 50 years, we have seen that tree grow and change, and to see generations of my family grow and change too. In fact, one of my sisters was married under that tree in 1988. Unfortunately, that tree has grown right into the harsh reflection of a house window and has taken to smoldering and catching on fire. Everything we have tried to do to cut the reflection just didn't work, and the Mountain View Fire Department had to be called on multiple occasions. My parents were worried for fire at their home, and that there's neighbors, so they called the city forestry team. Recognizing that they were talking with seniors, and we're dealing with a threat of fire, the city arbor, a city sent over an arborist, and was dispatched quickly, and a permit was issued in record time. So on behalf of 4 generations of my family, I'd like to say thank you to the forestry team for assisting my parents. We are all truly appreciative. Thank you.

[02:43:09] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Glad to hear your parents are safe. Uh, eat it, Ayala.

[02:43:22] Angelica Gabriel: Hola? It's Angelica Gabriel. Estoy, ablanda, quiel, every vida, quienna, ciuda, de montenvil, por vente, años, Estoy, ablanda, quiso, el, ponzillo, para, American, el, por favor, lamb, moratoria, uno, stress, messes, masks, porque, realidad, en mestro, trabajos, toda, via, no, estamos trabajando, como, antes, apenna, sempesamos, a trabajar, entoses, nuestros, nuestros, viles, toda, via, no, stan, cubriendo, no que ganamos. Entos desporesso le pidal consilio, que por favor, estiendan, tres mes mas la moratoria, por favor.

[02:44:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes. Gracias. So, um, this is an Angelica. She's lived in Mountain View for 20 years. She's asking us to extend the eviction moratorium for another 3 months. She was saying in reality, they um, she's working, but she's not able to work every day. And that's why, um, it, you know, it's reasonable to extend by another 3 months so that um, people can kind of get back to normal and get back to work. Hey, ED Keating.

[02:44:43] Edie Keating: Hello. I hope those. I hope this council will extend the city's eviction moratorium to at least August 31st, 2021. I do understand that the prohibition on evictions for non-payment of rent cannot continue forever. But I think a short term extension is called for. Just as prior eviction moratoriums have provided essential support to parts of the mountain view community. A return to normal is getting close, but has all of the local economy returned to normal. Has the travel and hotel industry returned to normal? Has the restaurant industry returned to normal? Which Mountain View residents are still seeking their next job as the economy reopens. No landlord has all of their tenants unable to pay rent. Landlords have faced a partial reduction in their income. But the reduction or full loss of income to some tenants is still so severe that they may not yet be able to pay full rent. Please extend the city's addiction moratorium for a few more months. Thank you.

[02:46:02] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Philip Cosby. Hi Philip. Philip, are you there? Says you're unmuted. Philip Cosby. Hmm. Okay, why don't we, we'll come back to Philip. How about Tim McKenzie?

[02:46:54] Tim MacKenzie: Well, um, I want to add my voice to everyone who has asked for an extension of the eviction moratorium. Um, We're still still, I mean, a lot of us are vaccinated in Santa Clara County. We are doing much better than many other places, but we still haven't achieved full vaccination. We're still in the public health crisis phase. Hopefully it's tapering down. Hopefully, we won't see variants that evade vaccines and things truly are returning to normal. But we are still in the public health phase. Never mind. The, the, economic phase, the impacts that to people's lives will extend much further into the future. And I think just, uh, I, I, other people have already asked and I'll just add my voice and say that we need to help support our, uh, the most vulnerable in our community. Um, I'd also like to echo the comments made about, uh, keeping an eye on, uh, on what's going on with peace app and uh, uh, trying to take action as city council, um, creation of PSAB does not tie your hand. In fact, PCAB itself has no authority to do anything. It is an advisory body, only it is in council's hands to take action related to public safety. Um, and just that it was about a year ago that, uh, we were staying together till 2 or 3 in the morning and there was a huge outcry from, from the public asking for reallocation of resources from the police department. I noticed that in absolute dollars this year, the budget has slightly increased, but as a percentage of the budget, The police department's budget has increased as a percentage percentage of the total. That's trending in the right direction. Um, and I think that, uh, I really would love to see you work together with PSAB, to really reenvision community safety, safety in how we keep each other safe, uh, because safety doesn't come from calling in people with guns. Safety doesn't come from building fences. Safety comes from each other, us. We are the we are the ones who keep each other safe, the community at large, and we protect each other. Also, from the environment with things like our shared quality when there are forest fires. And mutual aid and support and solidarity with each other is the true source of safety in thinking of ways that we can, uh, nourish our community and put their resources towards that, uh, rather than arm people with guns, uh, such as a current employee of the Mountain View Police Department, who has shot someone on the job when he was employed by Sunnyvale. Thanks a lot. Have great day.

[02:49:52] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. All right, we'll try Philip again, Philip Cosby. Oh, and he disappeared. How about Malia Pierce? There.

[02:50:06] Malia Pires: So good evening, Madam Mayor. Vice mayor, and the entire Mountain View City Council. My name is Malia Pirus, a 16, uh, you're happy resident of Mountain View, and the executive director of Reach Potential Movement, a nonprofit where we address academic food and housing insecurity here in North Santa Clara County. We serve over 500 families a week. And for 80% of those are 400 of those are Mountain View residents. And so I want to speak as a neighbor, uh, to my my friends in Mountain View, and also um, from a position of working with over 400 families a week in the city. And I'd like to ask that the city council, um, consider an extension of the eviction moratorium. And uh, for a minimum of 30 days, uh, Be so grateful if we can get a 90 day extension. I would really feel like the eviction moratorium date is looming and it's a ticking time bomb. We have 100s if not 1000s of family who owe back rent and I'm able to pay by June 30th. We know by looking at current data that approximately one% of payments have been made from the housing is key. Um, the state of California program to help with rent control, uh, back rent payments. Um, so we're working diligently to help families apply for rental support, but those payments haven't gotten to the hands of recipients, um, as well as working with, uh, grant, um, winners of the destinations, home grant, that problem's barely gotten underway, and there have been, to my knowledge, no rental support payments made for this recent round of grants, but again, we're working diligently to help families apply for these programs and to get the rental support they need to stay housed. What we know is that there are 100s of families that are living in dense housing that are on the verge of becoming homeless, without the moratorium extension. There could be a burden on the Mountain View Police Department to handle eviction notice enforcement. And again, so even a 30 day, 60 day or 90 day extension would help tremendously as rental support paperwork and payments are being processed. Thank you so much for your time.

[02:52:26] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Ellie Green.

[02:52:32] Ellie Greene: Hi, can you hear me?

[02:52:33] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[02:52:35] Ellie Greene: Hi, thank you so much, counsel, and thank you for allowing us to speak tonight. I like many others want to comment on 2 different topics. Um, the 1st, of course, being the eviction moratorium and urging you to maintain that further than the previously set deadline. I think we can all agree that we are nowhere out of the COVID crisis. We are still in a state of emergency, and there's no reason why we should be changing legislation and decisions that were made in order to help those when COVID started now, because we're not at a place as a society as a whole, where we can confidently say we are out of this, we are over this. You know everything's back to normal. Um, the 2nd thing I want to comment on, again, like many others, is urge in the council to follow, the work of the advisor, the police, um, sorry, public safety advisory boy. Um, piece up as it kind of comes together and as it starts its work over the next couple of months. I really want to point to the example of Los Alto City Council and how they followed their advisory board, listen to them, interacting with their community, and took note of what activists were calling for. I think that's a really great example of listening to the community and of successful activism and of successful cooperation, from the side of the city council and from the side of both members of the advisory board and members of the community to all kind of coming to a collective conclusion, specifically surrounding school resource officers. Oh, you know, at this same meeting a year ago, there were over 160 emails right into the record. I think we can all remember staying up till 3 AM. You know, urging the council to make a different choice around the police budget. And, you know, unfortunately, we haven't seen a lot of change on that. And I think with the formation of the advisory board, council, you specifically had the opportunity to take steps towards making the change that you have been called upon to make for over a year at this point. Um, and I'm really, really excited to see what you can do working with people that you have appointed and trusted to the best. I'm looking forward to seeing how you can empower members of your community, to act in the interests of everyone and really support what the community has been calling for asking for. Um, and hopefully we're not till 3 AM tonight. Thank you so much.

[02:54:54] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Gloria, Aguila. Gloria? Oh. Glouster? Sadeith Ortiz?

[02:55:12] Sadith Ortiz: Hi, good evening, mayor, vice mayor. I know all that are present right now. Um, be a resident, science, 2001. I love the city. They're very secure, but I also, uh, it's broken my heart because I have a lot to neighbors that get low income and they barely pay their rent when before pandemic has started. They have multiple jobs, but now, like you guys saying, Hopefully everything has gone little by little to normal. I know we cannot stand in as much as you cool. But at least one moment to months, it will be very helpful because there is a lot of kids, like they will be this, display from their house, and I think we have to touch our hearts too. They deserve to have a roof, especially after this transition, because they've been on house all the time, they'll be exposed, and like, be on the street, is very hard, because when I'm beginning, come, because I mean, Migan, I lived on the car, so I cannot imagine when they have a roof, go back to a car. So just consider those and I will be very healthy. Thank you.

[02:56:28] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Data, P.

[02:56:35] Dana Pede: Hi, good evening. Uh, 1st of all, I just want to really thank Mayor Kame for the public transparency that's happening at this public comment. I wasn't planning on speaking tonight, but I just have to say, I'm learning so much from my neighbors, and I really appreciate the full 3 minutes being afforded to everybody. I just feel like people have enough time to say what they think and provide insights and context for comments rather than trying to rush to get it all done and try to make a coherent thought happen in 90 seconds. Uh, so I just really want to thank you for really empowering residents and making sure that residents have a space to feel heard in these meetings and also for your translation work to make sure that every resident is heard and understood, uh, in tonight's meeting. So thank you so much for that, Mayor Kamei. And I also want to thank the city of Mountain View for really demonstrating in these past couple months, a commitment to standing up for the residents that are most vulnerable in the COVID crisis and, you know, because of the comments I've heard tonight, also echoing the support for prolonging the eviction moratorium. My understanding is that you need to take action tonight to ask for it to be on the upcoming city council agenda, to make sure that there's enough time to actually act on it before the moratorium is set to expire. So I really hope that you do that. I think Mountain View is really a leader in our community and in the surrounding communities at taking action on these sorts of things and supporting the residents who need our most support and protection in this way. And I really hope that you'll take this opportunity to maintain that reputation. So thanks so much for that. And I'll also echo as a member of MBCPra, that you continue to pay attention to the work of the public safety advisory board. Um, we'll keep reading out updates into the public comet section of item 5 if that's what it takes, but, um, I really hope that city council members are able to attend those meetings and deeply consider the work that's happening there. So thanks all so much and have a great night.

[02:58:17] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Miriam C.

[02:58:23] Miriam C: Hi, I wanted to echo support for extending the eviction moratorium. I've been really impressed by the stories I've heard. People come and share and, I mean, these are difficult stories, um, about struggling and it's honestly very generous to come and impressive to come and talk before the whole city, um, to ask for help. And I think we owe it to these residents who've been here, uh, community, uh, contributing to our community for decades to to extend that help and extend the moratorium. Um, so, so thank you to the mayor and the council and also thank you to the residents who've spoken up today. Thank you.

[02:59:00] Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right, Philip Cosby, let's try again. Hopefully this works.

[02:59:06] Philip Cosby: Right, thank you.

[02:59:07] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yay.

[02:59:08] Philip Cosby: for your patience. I'm asking that the council extend the current eviction more time at least through the end of August. I think there are 3 good reasons to do that. One is that while our businesses are opening, uh, jobs and hours available in the service sector are nowhere near the level pre-pandemic level and the level needed for people to actually pay full rent. Secondly, the city, the county, and the state of generously provided rent relief funds, but the county and state programs are just rolling out now, and at this point, they've only allocated one% of the funds available. Three more weeks will not be enough time to get this out. So, I'm recommending that we extend the moratorium to allow people to actually apply and get funded through those programs. And thirdly, within the state program, it'll be possible for the landlords to be made whole by 100%. And so having a couple more months of unpaid rent, should not be an economic burden to them in the long term. So I'm asking the council to extend the eviction moratorium as soon as possible. Thank you.

[03:00:33] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Sandra, Esparza.

[03:00:41] Sandra Esparza: Uh, yeah. Are you listen to me?

[03:00:44] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[03:00:45] Sandra Esparza: Okay, so good evening, uh, everyone, and please, uh, 1st I want to say thank you very much to the whole entire uh, city. Uh, everyone from the staff city, everyone, because you will do a tremendous job, help me with the rain, and I being, um, happy for, for you, uh, special, you mayor, that now you are in the, with the community, now I can see your effort translating are all in Spanish. Thank you very much. It makes um, really different uh, this uh, this time of this, members of the city hall. Thank you so much from the bottom of my heart and for all the families that like Malaya pirates were serving. Since COVID 2019 on March. So it's, it is, that's the reality what Malaya Pirates said it. The, uh, she serving 400 families a day, serving meals. So those families are not ready to pay rent. They are really, really in a bad situation. I just work mainly on one to one, helping as much as I can up to the day of today, and they really are having a lot of rain to pay. They were not paying 3 weeks. There is barely, barely started working few hours. By June 15 when everything is supposed to open. They will not getting all the money to pay the rent. Please, I ask him, please, and begging the whole city staff, including the tourney, to risk, to risk for our most vulnerable community. I know we have rules to follow less oflation, everything that it might be not possible. But my question is, police city council members, are you willing to raise for art, this community? Because this is our most valuable community. They need us. So we need you, please, to consider and open and extend in the moratorium at least 3 months or more. One more will be great, but 3 months will be very helpful. Uh, it takes time to do the application for those programs. Uh, the, uh, the HomeKit program or the one from the city company. It takes time. It takes hours and the and the money and don't go to the London right away. So please consider all this speeches for all the community, your community and try to help police city council members. Thank you very much and have a great night.

[03:03:37] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Next speaker as Alex Nunez.

[03:03:46] Alex Nuñez: Hi, uh, Mayor Kameh, Vice Mayor Ramirez and the rest of city council. Uh, I guess one of the benefits of speaking towards the end is you actually get to hear a lot of other people's perspectives on whatever item or point of discussion is is at hand. And one of the things that's really standing out to me is hearing how many people are are indicating that the work just simply isn't there for them. And I think a lot of things come to mind around that, which is, I mean, primarily it's, you know, why is this happening? And taking a step back from that, you know, I think, um, Mayor Abikoga, you know, mentioned, hey, like, it's it's nice to get, uh, you know, recognition for the leadership that the city is taking. And, and I just wanted to agree with that wholeheartedly because I think no one can deny that one of the signature policies that this, uh, not even this. The last city council passed right in, you know, the start and then the heat of, of COVID was this eviction moratorium. But the way that we did it was really unique and stronger and more focused, uh, than even the county or other cities, uh, eviction moratoriums. Really, we've delivered a model to the Bay Area at the very least on how these eviction moratoriums locally can be put together. Uh, and so I think now, you know, really it's the moment where we think about, you know, are we going to let this signature policy kind of pass and and win and play itself out to success or are we going to kind of drop it and not get the job done? and just let it fail? And one of the things that I know, everyone on this city council has is inability to think about issues in an interconnected way. And if you do look right now at, even just the news and you hear about all these supply chain issues and shortages, in the economy right now. Really, all of these things are are just interconnected because COVID is not just a public health issue, right? Vaccines and arms doesn't mean that COVID, the crisis is over. It just means that now COVID, the crisis is shifting towards the economic aspects of what we need to do to still finish the job and as, you know, you guys as legislators really materially achieve the objective of protecting the most vulnerable communities and populations in your city. And so, People are asking, you know, please, Please, uh, you know, extend this signature policy achievement from last year, and I think for so many reasons, it's, it's a slam dunk for everybody. Uh, so just, you know, I besiege for our leadership to finish that job. Uh, definitely well deserve praise and I hope that we continue to earn that praise as a city. Thanks.

[03:06:51] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Marina Juarez?

[03:07:01] Marina Juarez: Hola, buenas noches. Mi nombres, marina, Juarez, ibe vaquiem, mantenbio, yo, pedia, de favor, sipodia, estender la monatoria, ya que muchos to la bieno, entramos, a trabajar, yo, tenemos, de gudas, que estendira, portres, meses, na monatoria, gracias.

[03:07:23] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Gracias. Sorry about that. Um, so, uh, Marina was saying she lives here in Mountain View and she's asking us to extend the eviction moratorium. Um, she was echoing the sentiments that not everyone is working yet and to please extend it by 3 months. Alexander Brown.

[03:07:51] Alexander Brown: Hey, I realize now that my comments and last item about the moratorium, we're out of order. Whoops. But now that I'm in order, I'd like to say that I agree with what all the other wonderful and compassionate speakers have said. Please don't let the eviction moratorium lapse right as you go on vacation. Let's keep it going. Keep people protected. And unlike LA, I'd be fine with being up till three. I think it'd be fun. Let's set a record. Thanks.

[03:08:16] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Anna Marie Morales.

[03:08:22] Anna Marie Morales: Hi, um, thank you. Um, I'm actually calling in from the hospital. My mom's in the hospital right now. Um, I did want to start by saying thank you for having the eviction moratorium to start with. Um, I desperately hope that It will be extended by at least those 3 months. Everyone's had a really hard time especially with COVID. Last year, I lost my job because of COVID, I was in a serious car accident that left me disabled and unable to care for my elderly and disabled mother. This time, those extra couple months may seem like nothing to some people, but it's everything to people like me and everyone else I've heard. So I'm really hopeful that some kind of action will be taken. Um, I know I get emotional, but it's because this is incredibly scary. I lived in Mountain Mute forever. I don't want to leave. I don't want. I'm just really hopeful that counsel before their previous actions, but this last piece will really make everything more successful. It will give people time. I haven't even started as getting the application for help. I have so much on my plate, as do, you know, most people, but I, we need time and help to do this. So...

[03:10:06] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Um, and sorry to hear that you're in the hospital, but hope your mother gets better soon. All right. Um, that concludes, um, public comment. So I'll bring it back to council. Um, for item 6, which is new business, we'll start with uh, I am 6.one, the North Bay Shore circulation and feasibility study. The city's consultant and project manager, Jim Lightbody, from James Lightbody Consulting will present the staff report. Public works director. Don Cameron is also available for any questions. Hi, Mr. Lightbody. How are you?

[03:10:49] Jim Lightbody: Uh, Good evening and thank you. I'm going to share my screen to get the slides up. Hopefully this works okay.

[03:11:11] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yeah, there we go. Yep, perfect.

[03:11:16] Jim Lightbody: Okay, all good. Thank you. Um. No, it's not. Okay, okay. The uh, circulation study, North Bay Shore circulation study is uh, supporting the uh, precise plan, uh, in terms of developing strategies, to manage vehicle trips, and uh, uh, how to keep those trips below the uh, established gateway trip tap. Uh, it's also looking at the feasibility and need for additional uh, infrastructure, improvements to support uh, the development, the continue development, North Bay Shore. Uh, in today's report, tonight's report, we have uh, 5 elements of the study, including some specific recommendations that uh, we'll present for you. Uh, 1st of all, the, uh, uh, as we've been working on the study over the last year or 2 in conjunction with the uh, evolving plans for development in North Bay Shore, uh, we've done some traffic uh, simulations and analysis, and, well, this is not the final conclusions yet. We got more work to do, but we have uh determined that uh, without uh, some significant new and existing strategies. Uh, we're gonna potentially exceed the gateway capacity with the plan, uh, office and housing development. So what we've determined, uh, generally is that we need to make sure we, we fully implement, uh, the current strategies, which include reducing, uh, existing and approved trips, uh, to that 45% cycle occupant vehicle level, uh, introducing housing and, and, uh, significant amount of internalized trips as a result of that housing. And then fully build out and implement the walkable streets, uh, and bike facilities and other transportation improvements that are planned in North Bay Shore. In addition, though, uh, we we think we'll need probably stronger policies in a couple of areas, and uh, these are being considered also by Google as our understanding. Uh, those include uh, the potential for new office trips to be reduced even below the 45% level to, to possibly up to 35% single occupant vehicle, and will be exploring that further. Uh, secondly, uh, the implementation of a district parking program, uh, would be an important part in order to better manage the parking in North Bay Shore and provide additional, uh, tools to uh, deal with the uh, production of trips. And then finally, uh, we're also studying the potential for congestion pricing, which would be one more tool potentially to help uh, reach that vehicle trip tab. Uh, the 2nd element that we've been exploring, uh, is the uh, need for revising the original priority transportation projects that were identified in the uh, 2014 precise plan. Uh, we've looked at uh, the feasibility of some additional projects and other needs based on our traffic and other studies that we've done. And we're proposing a revised set of projects, which includes many of the projects that were in the original plan, but introduces uh, a few new projects. Uh, we've broken them up into 510 and 20 year time frames, uh, in terms of rough priorities, but the uh, individual projects are not prioritized, and there's some flexibility in this time frame as we, we see what the needs are. Uh, the 5 year projects are ones that are already in the plan and are underway in various ways. Uh, also, this, this list does ensure that the projects from the original 2014 plan uh, will be fully completed. So we're not dropping any of those ideas. We're just augmenting them and folding them into the overall plan. Uh, this is the, from your report, this is a list of those projects and uh, reference map for them. Uh, as I said, most of them are prior projects, uh, but we do have several new projects and in 3 general categories. The 1st is, uh, the extension of the shoreline, uh, bus lane, which right now, uh, would run to uh, the realigned Plymouth and Space Park intersection, and would leave a gap, uh, up to Charleston where uh, there will be the Transit Boulevard with dedicated lanes on Charleston. So, this project would close that gap by extending the bus lane uh up to Charleston. The 2nd category are uh, several interrelated projects at uh, the 101 ring store, uh, interchange, uh, and uh, provide a connection from that interchange directly to the landings, frontage road, and eventually down to Plymouth Avenue. Uh, that, that project, uh, in combination, uh, would provide a new east-west access into North Bay Shore. Uh, which in particular would help to relieve demand, uh, that our analysis shows would, uh, would be fairly heavy on the transit court and make the, that work better for transit. Uh, it also, this, these, uh, project dog ringstorf also would make it uh, better and reduce some of the conflicts for bikes and pads on the ringstorf, uh, interchange and the connection up rainstorf into North Bay Shore. And then the 3rd category includes several projects, which would uh, uh, provide additional facilities and connections for bicycles in particular and pedestrians. Uh, these projects in total, and looking at them, and you're in construction, which means some of these are estimated out of, uh, 10 to 20 year time frame, but the total project right now, total cost, we've estimated about $487000000 for all these projects. Uh, 140000000 programs, so there's a remaining need for 347 million. We've, uh, we are proposing, uh, roughly that, uh, using impact fees and community benefits would uh, would cover part of that, and then there'd be a remaining need from the shoreline community fund. Uh, next category, uh, we've also had, uh, one of our consultants do a thorough review of the, uh, North Bay Shore, bike and pedestrian element, uh, looking at, uh, the existing and plan facilities as well as the, uh, potential demand in the future with, uh, with housing and the need to serve, uh, to provide a higher, uh, mode share in in those categories. Uh, the, the consultant uh, generally concluded that the overall plan in North Bay Shore is a good one and would uh, support the, the vision uh, that's established in North Bay Shore. Uh, they did have a few relatively modest recommendations that would enhance and refine the plans. So we're looking for your support on those. Uh, 3rd category. We've been looking at is uh, the gateway trip cap, uh, policies and how those are, are, uh, defined and and, uh, uh, monitored. Uh, the gateway trip tap is really the key to uh, reaching the goals uh, that we have in North Bay Shore and to manage the overall circulation trip demand. Uh, one recommendation we have today after looking at this, we think that the best way to measure uh, both compliance and demand that the uh, uh, at the gateways is to focus just on the peak direction. So that would be inbound uh, trips in the morning, outbound trips in the afternoon peak periods. Uh, and at the same time, we're going to further analyze, uh, how we should measure the, the compliance with the uh, trip cap, uh, uh, ultimately, uh, looking at whether it should be over the peak hour, the peak period, whether we should combine uh, separate gateways or treat them individually. uh those types of things. So those are going to be subject to further development, further uh study as we go forward in the in the project. Uh, The next category, final category. Uh, we've also, as you recall, earlier this year, or last year, we, we, uh, brought on a consultant to specifically look at the feasibility of uh, congestion pricing, which is indicated as a potential option, uh, potential ID in the, in the precise plan to better manage the gateway vehicle capacity. That study is underway. We've had stakeholder interviews, develop some goals, and and defined the technology options. Uh, but we don't yet have uh, any specific options uh, to be reviewed. So that'll, that work will occur over the next few months, and we expect to bring back a uh, preliminary recommendation to the council in the fall of uh, of this year. Uh, this just shows the conceptually the idea of the congestion pricing study and the 3 gateways that would be, uh, managed most likely with some kind of accordon pricing approach. Uh, so those are, that's quick overview of the, of the report. Uh, we're asking for specific approval for revisions to the priority transportation program, the new list of projects, uh, the, the changes to the best, uh, bike and pedestrian elements in the plan, and that initial piece of the vehicle trip cat policy. Uh, thank you, but take questions.

[03:21:10] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Um, so, does any member of council have any comments or questions? Great. And I think if you don't mind, Mr. Lightbody, we'll, um, we can stop the screen share so we can all see each other and ask you questions.

[03:21:30] James Lightbody: Yep.

[03:21:31] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Awesome. Great. Council member hicks.

[03:21:36] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I have 2 questions. One is a little more detail on the congestion, uh, the, um, congestion pricing, like, I, I know that it's important to have some, uh, some equity elements of that, and I know that those are both in terms of who you charge, and also where the money goes, but I'd like to know if there's been a little thought behind that, or if that's as, far as you've gotten, or if there's some thought as to, like, what the money, in particular, what the money would go towards and how you would decide who to charge lower prices.

[03:22:17] James Lightbody: Yeah, the consultant team is working on that right now. That's kind of where we are in the study. We've heard from uh, uh, 30 or 40 different stakeholders, stakeholders that have given us different perspectives from uh, restaurant owners and residents, uh, and employers and so we're factoring all that in. We've heard lots of different thoughts about the issue of who should be charged and who should be exempted. Uh, we're going to put that together. There won't be one single, initially it won't be one single proposal. We'll have multiple options that will be evaluating and try to see what the best balance is between, uh, meeting the equity, uh, goals and and making it effective.

[03:22:59] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Do you have, uh, a model program that we could or 2 that you're looking at that we, you know, I'd like to see how, how you figure out, who gets the lower price and also, are, do you have any initial ideas on what the money collected would go towards?

[03:23:18] James Lightbody: Uh, There's not, you know, in this country, there aren't too many models, but uh, our consultant team is also working in San Francisco, Seattle, uh, New York, uh, several places that are that are considering congestion pricing. So we're kind of learning from each other in that regard. Uh, and they're definitely other places have, have, addressed the equity issue by, uh, uh, focusing the revenue that comes from the pricing onto specific, uh, elements. Uh, we've yet to be determined, but, you know, for example, it could be some kind of uh, transit subsidies or other things that would benefit, uh, uh, folks. Uh. So those are all yet to be developed and you'll, you'll see a menu of ideas when we come back later this year.

[03:24:07] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, well, I'd love to hear them as soon as possible. I have trouble figuring out how viable a solution it is when I when I, um, unless I see a working model. And then my 2nd question is, um, I'm wondering, I want a little more explanation of why the Charleston Bridge is needed with, Isn't there one close by at Cretendon? Can you tell me a little more about that?

[03:24:32] James Lightbody: Yes, the, the, If you recall, uh, one of the elements that was, uh, requested in this study, uh, from the prior, uh, precise plan was to explore the idea of a potential transit and pedestrian bicycle bridge across Stevens Creek, uh, possibly at Charleston, and that was explored, and the council discussed that uh, last year. Uh, the direction we got from council was, uh, to not further explore the idea of a transit bridge, but left the idea of a potential pet bike bridge, uh, in the mix. So we've kept it in the plan. Uh, it, it's not the highest priority. We understand that the, the, Google, you know, is planning to use the Crittenden Bridge quite a bit, and there, uh, there's a potential for a bridge down towards, uh, 101. also.

[03:25:22] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you.

[03:25:25] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Bye, Smara miss.

[03:25:29] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor. Um, so a quick follow up to uh, the Charleston Bridge. Uh, thank you for asking the question, uh, council member Hicks. I did want to clarify that too. So, uh, it sounds like the direction is responsive to the previous council study session. Um, but I will I also wanted to clarify. It looks like, uh, the scope of the, uh, Charleston Transit Boulevard project, um, sort of concludes at, uh, uh, at Shoreline. So, are there any transit facilities proposed for, uh, for, uh, Charleston going towards Stevens Creek. Trail or, uh,

[03:26:19] James Lightbody: no transit facilities are proposed there. No, not at this time.

[03:26:26] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thanks for the, the clarification, and then, um, I was also hoping you can help better define the scope of the Stevens Creek Trail connections project. Um, it was a little, um, hard to parse in the staff reports. Just confirm just one connection to the retention basin trail or does it include mixed bowl?

[03:26:55] James Lightbody: Yeah, so I can clarify that there, the, the precise plan, actually, uh, showed, uh, 3 additional connections from, uh, the, uh, Green Loop uh, in the North Bay Shore to the trail, um, one at the Shorebird, one at Charleston, and one at the uh, Detention Basin Trail. Uh, we understand from discussions we've had with Google that they would be including the connections with Shore Bird in Charleston as part of their development plan. So, we've only included the, the additional one at the, the retention base in, in our list.

[03:27:33] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. And then, um, it's, I'm sure it's highly preliminary, when do you expect the council will have an opportunity to, uh, provide some, input on the scope of that project, or, or do you have something fleshed out right now?

[03:27:53] James Lightbody: Are the trail connection project? I'm sorry

[03:27:56] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[03:27:58] James Lightbody: Yeah, all of these, but what you see in the attachment to the council report on most of the 10 and 20 year projects as we've listed them. That's about the extent of the project definitions that we have to date. So as they would be uh, included in capital improvement programs, then additional development would occur and so forth. So we've got general idea, but not very specifics at this point.

[03:28:27] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, and it's, it, it, based on that response, it sounds like it might be a little premature to provide definition since, if it won't be going into the CIP schedule for a number of years, a future council be able to modify the definition pretty freely, regardless of the input we provide right now. That fair to say?

[03:28:49] James Lightbody: Yes.

[03:28:51] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay Great. Thank you very much. That all.

[03:28:54] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you, council member Abby Koga.

[03:28:58] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, I asked the question about uh, congestion pricing uh, pilot program. I learned about, um, the program, a program, the pilot program, or a pilot program, being worked on by San Francisco, I believe LA, and I was in a briefing with them, and, um, mentioned we were looking at congestion pricing, and they were seeing very open to, uh, including us, and my interest in that was, if I remember correctly, I believe we need legislation to be able to do congestion pricing. Um, so, uh, I think the answer was that we're not planning to be a part of that, but, uh, I guess I, you know, like to get, understand, um, yeah, what the plan is if we're not going to, um, be a part of that because, uh, take time to get legislation, I think.

[03:29:50] James Lightbody: Right. We understand there's some steps there. When I would say we're not failing to, we haven't yet discussed that with them. I, it, there may be some advantages to do that. We haven't uh, we haven't explored that yet. Um, and we may be able to do that. This is strictly a feasibility study at this time to determine whether it makes sense to go forward and take the next step. Some of these other projects are a little bit farther along, so they've already gone through that step and they're now more into the implementation phase.

[03:30:21] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, if we, can, will we, or I guess later on tonight, can we discuss the timing of these projects, um, if we need to maybe shift things around?

[03:30:37] James Lightbody: Yeah, this is, yeah, done.

[03:30:40] Public Works Director Don Cameron: Yes, thank you. Don Cameron, public works director. Yes, absolutely. We can discuss the timing of the projects, as Mr. Lightbody said. These were general groupings of the projects based upon what we're already working on and have staff capacity for, but as you look out longer term. Things can be adjusted. Some of the projects that shown in the 20 year projects are very complex, difficult projects require additional funding beyond what the city could provide. They affect Caltrans facilities. So, in some of those cases, it might be more realistic to assume it would take 15 or 20 years to achieve them, but we can definitely talk about if some, you know, priority shifting is desired.

[03:31:26] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. 2nd question about the bridges of the across Stevens Creek. So, um, I know we talked about the Charleston and Crittenden, um, and then I, I can't remember what, what, what, someone else might be able to help me, was it, one is definitely our allocation, but the La Venita bike head bridge came up and during one of those project discussions and we hadn't, I don't recall us actually talking about that bridge and approving it anywhere before. Um, I guess my impression was, you know, we do one, maybe two, but not three. So, um, when, I think we, I think as a council, we probably need to make that decision at some point. Um, So, is that the plan? I guess this would be the question.

[03:32:18] Public Works Director Don Cameron: Oh, a couple things. One, the bike pad bridge over Stevens Creek that was being proposed, a little bit south, a lot of Anita, definitely north of 101. is something that Google has been looking into and has been proposing that they would be prepared to design and construct. Assuming, uh, what the city would be interested in taking over the bridge once it's done. You know, we can get the valley water approval. And the key thing, though, is that it must land and go through the federal property on the other side. So Google's been making those arrangements to ensure that it's a bridge that can connect through eventually to a public street on the east side of Stevens Creek and at that point. Uh, will probably come in with a more formal application to the city if they still would like to build the bridge. And at that point, we would bring it to council for your consideration with the city, agree, um, to support the bridge, take on, take over the bridge, take ownership of it once it's built. Um, be the lead agency for Sequa. These are the key considerations. So, um, it that one bridge where, again, we're waiting until Google is ready to take the next step with it and formally propose it to the city. Um, the idea of living in, on the plan, the possibility of a bike, Pet Bridge, at Charleston, which is correct, that we have the one at Crittiten. If the other one at Lavinita goes through would be a 3rd one. It goes to that for a bike, particularly for bicycle travel, permability and connectivity is very important and you do want frequent connections. Uh, we weren't suggesting it's something to pursue immediately. It's why it was shown in the 20 year project to just keep it on the list in case in you know, future years. Um, the demand grows to the extent that it would be useful to have another bike pet bridge. Across the creek.

[03:34:21] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And then my final question, um, to follow up to a written question about the funding and the split between our, the impact fees, um, the shoreline fund, including bonding and community benefits. So, um, as I think I've said this many times, when we did the North Basture precise plan, the intent really was for the redevelopments to pay for these improvements because they really primarily benefit, um, the redevelopment projects. Um, so I was very, I guess, disappointed to see what the split is right now at 87% falling on the city. I know that you mentioned, or the answer was that in future projects that should be lower. But I guess my question is, um, are we also intending to be reimbursed for, um, basically fronting the funds to get some of these projects going because, yeah, I mean, I'm, I think, we, I know, counselor, Medachek may remember this too, from EPC, but I'm the one who was on, on this council who was there doing this precise plan, and, and that was really the intent was that these projects would pay for, um, the redevelopments would pay for the projects, not the taxpayers or um, going into debt. Will we get reimbursed?

[03:35:42] Public Works Director Don Cameron: Thank you. So when the council adopted the impact fee and considered the nexus study, the council specifically made a decision, one, to not go with the highest possible fee that could have been charged, and to assume that there would be other funding sources for these transportation projects, not both community benefits as well as shoreline fund. Actually, when when the impact fee was adopted, the shoreline fund was considered to also be used to fund these transportation projects. So when we talk about the high percentage of shoreline funds that have gone towards the existing commitments, um, what we have what we have to realize is that the full list of projects eligible, but the impact fee far exceeds what the impact fee will generate. So what's basically happened is we frontloaded some of these key projects with shoreline fun because the impact fees were not coming in yet. But as the impact fees start to come in more more fully over these next few years. We'll be able to do some of these future projects depending more upon the impact fees and less on the shoreline fund. But overall, what you're seeing here is based upon an impact fee that was not set at the highest possible rate a few years ago. And the original assumptions that the impact fees alone would not pay for these transportation projects.

[03:37:15] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. So, um, since we are looking at adding new projects, um, I'm wondering if we should actually revisit that, um, and do we look at a, I don't know if we have to do a new Nexus study, but this is costing a lot more than I think, you know, originally, and I wasn't on the council at the time when this impact fee was set, but it's costing way more, I think, than originally expected. So in light of that, should be, we'd be revisiting this impact fee issue. Or are we looking at our other, I know we're looking for grant funding, but it doesn't look like we're getting a lot, lot in that area too.

[03:37:57] Public Works Director Don Cameron: Well, if that is, if that is council's direction, we could look at, uh, we look redoing the nexus study because you are correct. In order to adjust the fees, we would have to do a new nexus study. That will take a little bit of time and then, you know, we bring it back to you for your consideration. You know, and part of what you may want to consider is the fact, you know, who is paying for these impact fees right now. It is just the business commercial developments. Residential development is not as exempt from the impact fees. I does increase the cost of development. And um, any development, it's already been approved or gets approved between now and the new nexus study, you know, will have the current impact fee. So it's a forward looking fee at this point. You.

[03:38:54] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, thank you, Council member Mattachek.

[03:38:57] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you Um, just a few questions. Um, the bridge at um, Charleston. Um, is proposed to be 20 feet wide. How wide is the bridge at Crittenden? Or how wide is the proposed bridge over 101 for bikes and pens.

[03:39:23] Public Works Director Don Cameron: I can tell you that the bridge we're designing over 101 for bikes and pads is, um, I want to say it is 20 feet wide because I'm working out the memory. We're going to have a 2 way cycle track and then a separated pedestrian area. That is one of the widest bike pad bridge is ever built. I mean, it's, it's almost 2 traffic lanes wide. And that's because of the sheer number of bicyclists that we expect to have used that bridge when it's built. I don't have the exact dimensions for the bike bed bridge over Critten, but I will say that, yeah, typically bike bed bridges, you know, are going to be more of the 12 foot wide, 15 foot wide, you know. Because it's, again, designed primarily to serve bikes and pads and, And they usually share the space, although wider bridges could be done so that you could have separated space. Yeah, I think Critton, it may be a little bit wider than that, but it's, I don't believe it's up to 20 feet. I'd be 15 or 16.

[03:40:30] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So um, what was the thinking then behind this one being 20 feet?

[03:40:37] Jim Lightbody: Uh, I think that was just the, you know, conceptual plan there to allow similar to the uh, the one Don was mentioning to provide both bikes and pets uh, and separate traveler. lanes and that's what we've heard from the bike community.

[03:40:55] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Um. I'm going to clarify a question I sent in, um, while staff did answer it. I just want to make entirely clear, I understand. Um, and that's the question about the peak period for, uh, the trip cap. Um, and the monitoring of it. And, you know, from my perspective, I would use the words that it is a floating, um, peak, meaning one time when we measure it, it might be 7 to 10, The next time we measure it, it might be 8 to 11. But it's a floating 3 hour period. is what's being proposed.

[03:41:37] Jim Lightbody: That's correct.

[03:41:38] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Right? Okay. Um. And then let's see. You know, I guess I share some of the, um, thoughts that Council member of Big Hoga shared. And I'm wondering, Yeah, when we 1st did the precise plan for this area. And the models that we did for traffic, and the improvements, therefore, that needed to be done for vehicles as well as pedestrians and bicyclists. Um, I feel like what is so substantially changed that now we need so many more major changes. Is that we have a different model? We have different assumptions. Um, kind of what what's driving this substantial change?

[03:42:36] Jim Lightbody: Well, I could mention a couple of things. Uh, we have, uh, as we've monitored traffic over the years, the traffic volumes have gone up from what we originally, uh, estimated that may be due to, uh, you know, higher densities of employees or other trips that are being, that are being taken into North Bay Shore. So our baseline traffic has been growing. Uh, we, we haven't yet, uh, come close to achieving the 45% SOV rate, uh, as we've monitored, so we've got work to do in that front. Uh, another consideration is that, well, the addition of housing does uh, overall, uh, provide benefits in terms of traffic flow in North Bay Shore. There are additional housing trips that, uh, that will be, uh, you know, in the peak hour that we have to account for. So it's a combination of things. Uh, the, for the most part, we're not adding much additional infrastructure above what was, uh, was in the original plan.

[03:43:46] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Well, I don't recall the change to the ring store, um, intersection being in that original plan. That's all more recent, isn't it? From the...

[03:43:56] Jim Lightbody: That's an addition, but there was a concept in the original plan to look at some kind of an undercrossing under 101 to provide additional gateway access. So, this is kind of a substitute for that original project.

[03:44:14] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Um. Since it for now. Thank you.

[03:44:23] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. All right, any other questions from council members? All right, seeing none. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in zoo or press star 9 on your phone. And we'll display a 2 minute timer on the screen. And we have a phone number, 650, last 3 digits, 301.

[03:44:54] Tom Harrington: Good evening, Marion, council members and staff. My name is Tom Harrington and I share the Mountain View Transportation Management Association MV Go. MV go applause the staff and council for their work on the North Bay Shore circulation feasibility study. MVGo has already submitted a letter supporting the shoreline reversible bus lanes from Plymouth and Space Park to Charleston. Additionally, MB Go supports all of the infrastructure improvements suggested an attachments, one, 2, and 3 to the staff report. The staff's recommendation around changes to the trip cap are also strongly endorsed by Invigo, specifically, the change of definition to a one way measurement. The return to a 3 hour peak period and combining the shoreline and ringstorp gateways to measure capacity. For congestion pricing, MV Go believes, careful consideration should be made, to ascertaining what the new normal is for North Bay Shore as part of this study. We believe with the uncertainty of the hybrid workplace, and the continued concern for safety on public transit, we will experience temporary changes in transit behavior and single occupant driving. Thank you.

[03:46:12] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. James Cuzamel.

[03:46:18] James Kuzmal: Good evening, James Kuzmal speaking in my personal capacity. I just wanted to say I appreciate your stats report and study has generally been outstanding on this, and I really look forward to what we can do with our opportunity to really reshape the North Bay Shore area in the coming years. Um, And along those lines, uh, just at a high level, I want to sort of remind counselor, because of the unique opportunity, we can, we really should be able to set our goals really high for this. And I really appreciate seeing that 45% single occupants vehicle number be pumped down to 35% or ideally even lower given the scale of opportunity and change that we could see here. Um, and along the same zines, as I feel, that's worth reminding everyone that has increased density in the area, that doesn't have to mean more VMT, increased density means that we can more sustainably support public transit and buses, means we can more sustainably provide walk more neighborhoods, and biking and all that. And one last specific thing when to call out was there's a single line in the staff report about, uh, strategies to prove this about providing parking maximums in the area. And I think that's a strategy that deserves substantially more attention, um, for reducing uh, card trips in the area. Because, uh, it costs the city essentially nothing to do, and it frees up substantial money from various developers that will could go to either funding public transit, funding by production facilities or just reducing rents rather than pouring a bunch of concrete for 10s of 1000s of dollars a spot. And at the same time, of course, if there's finite parking in the North Bay shore area, that directly limits the number of people who will be driving there, and encourages people, and as many studies have shown more wide, would then result in substantially higher walking biking and transit mode shares. Thank you.

[03:48:17] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Gita, Dev.

[03:48:25] Gita Dev: Good evening, Mayor Kame and council members and staff. My name is Gita Dev, and I'm here on behalf of the Sierra Club. I'm a Prieta chapter. I want to really command council and staff for the transportation of circulation, um, elements that they take so seriously and realistically. Uh, this is something that we have commended to many other cities. as a way of controlling some of the problems that they seem to be having. And I really appreciate what this staff is doing. Um, I do want to talk about the Crittenden. I mean, the Charleston Bridge. It was not my impression from the last council where this was discussed, that they approved any bridge at Charleston. Um, my own uh, recollection of it was that there would be no bridge at Charleston. But there was going to be consideration of the possibility of a bridge at La Venida, which will be tremendously useful for bike commuters who were coming along. Stevens Creek Trail. So, uh, that is something that, um, I feel is really was not in council's uh, direction. And I feel it's not needed. We believe that bicycle access is very important, but that 2 connections across Stevens Creek will be quite adequate for the volume of bicyclists that's anticipated. At this point, putting more bridges across the creek, has a tremendous impact on the natural native species that are trying to grow in that creek. And every time we add pedestrian proximity, we reduce the amount of nature in the Greek. So that is really important. The other item I would just mention is that the connection from the retention basin trail should be a much smaller trail because that is a trail that is against a wetlands, and again, interruption of nature, so it should be treated as a much more minor trail. Thank you.

[03:50:34] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Alexander Brown.

[03:50:44] Alexander Brown: Babe, good evening. As one of the few people who currently live up in North Bay Shore, I appreciate how much thought is going into the planning to make it a better place. I'd like to echo James Sentiments about using the new volume of people with the additional housing up here to take advantage of the network effects. Be able to say we have enough people to support a grocery store and other businesses that we can walk to, but also, especially public transit, I would love to have a connection that would get us from here down to Caltrain on a regular basis, uh, which the bus service currently does not. I also like to thank Jim for reaching out to the Santiagovella Neighbors Association and put it being considerate of the community up here. I think that there are a lot of people who could not afford to continue driving if congestion pricing did not exempt them given how often we have to cross into and out of this district. Yeah, ultimately, thank you for putting thought on this and I hope you make good decisions that help everyone. Thanks.

[03:51:55] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Tim McKenzie.

[03:52:00] Tim McKenzie: I just want to add my voice to the people who spoke earlier and say that, uh, taking advantage of this to grow out public transit would be awesome and excellent. We should, uh, encourage public transit and have much better systems than we do, um, and Mountain View can lead the way in it. So, yeah, thank you. And I'm looking forward to seeing Bayshore develop more. Thanks.

[03:52:24] Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right, so that concludes public comment. So I will bring this item back for council deliberation and action. And I think to clarify, and I'll turn to Miss Cameron to make sure it sounds like there's 3 different areas that we're looking for feedback. One of them is the priority of the transportation improvement list. The other is the bike and pedestrian elements. And then lastly, thoughts on the vehicle trip cap. Does that sound right, Miss Cameron? Do I get those?

[03:52:55] Public Works Director Don Cameron: That's correct. It's the, um, Table one in your report, which is the north base, your priority transportation improvements recommended list and, you know, does council support this? Do they want changes made to it? Uh, item 2 is the list of by compared pedestrian, by, um, element improvements that were listed in the report. And then specifically for the trip cap policy, uh, council support for focusing on the peak direction only for the upcoming monitoring reports. Uh, and then for the other trip cap compliance items that are discussed here, we would just continue to analyze them as part of the circulation study and bring those back to you for further recommendation when we bring back the circulation study.

[03:53:45] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. So perhaps, um, colleagues, we can, we can try to touch on each of those three, um, when providing, um, our, our comments, and again, I'll try to keep track on a table of everyone, and I'm sure Miss Cameron and Mr. Lightbody will also help me try to keep track, and we'll summarize at the end and make sure that we captured it correctly. All right, does anyone like to start Vice Mayor Ramirez?

[03:54:12] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. Just to clarify, I'm a little confused. Are we treating this like a study session or, um, you you want a motion?

[03:54:23] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yeah, I mean, I just, I was just trying to, the recommendation are the 3 different items. So if people feel comfortable, we can do that. I just wasn't sure. So.

[03:54:33] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Okay, that's fair. I, um. I don't see anybody else's hand up, so I'm happy to move the staff recommendation. Uh, but I did want to make one change if that's okay, and that's. to elevate, um, the congestion pricing, implementation project from a 10 year project to a 5 year project. Uh, and uh, with that, um, assuming it's feasible, uh, and assuming we're able to implement it successfully, and it achieves the goal of, uh, metering the, the trips into and out of the gateway areas that we periodically revisit this list and determine the need of the capital improvements in the out ears. Personally, what I'm hoping will happen is that that tool proves effective, and it will render, um, some of the additional projects that are proposed further out, um, unnecessary, and particularly those that, um, uh, just increased capacity. I think our goal is to limit and reduce the number of vehicle trips totally. So, um, increasing capacity feels a little an antithetical to that goal. So, um, the, the one change would be make the capital, sorry, the congestion pricing, project a 5 year project. Uh, I agree with members of the council and the public who uh, want to ensure that there's uh, an equitable implementation, and I'm optimistic we can achieve that since we're designing the program from scratch, and we retain the ability through, uh, conditions of approval uh, to implement TDM measures that could include, um, equitable, uh, programs. that ensure that there isn't a disproportionate impact of congestion pricing on low income people. Um, so, uh, that's the motion. Thank you.

[03:56:42] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Council member Sher Walter.

[03:56:46] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well, uh, I have a few comments and now I'm happy to, um, uh, 2nd emotion. Um, I think the idea of moving the uh, congested pricing study up is really a good one. And I'm also interested in the idea of kind of coordinating or taking a comprehensive look at how parking pricing and congestion pricing might be 2 ways to, um, uh, to get where we're going. Um, and would, you know, wood parking um, pricing be uh, be part of the congestion pricing. Will you look at those together? Mr. Whitebody or Miss Cameron?

[03:57:36] Public Works Director Don Cameron: I was going to say, uh, we, that is an element of the study to look at, uh, parking. Uh, it is a little bit more complicated because there's so much free parking out there today that's kind of scattered around, but it is something that, uh, we are looking at and it is on the menu of ideas as part of this, yes.

[03:57:59] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay. Um. So, I, I'd like to 2nd the, the motion and and make some comments. I mean, I think what we really want to do out here is, um, we want to figure out how to get the 45% uh, single occupancy vehicle rate and the new compu- community development that we want. You know, that the housing and the office, the whole new community out in North Bay Shore. And um, We need to remember that that's really the goal is is how to get that 45% um, single occupancy vehicle. Uh, rate. But that's not really the only goal. That's sort of our mountain view goal. We also have a regional goal. And our regional goal is um, to uh, reduce the um, greenhouse gas emissions. And we want, and and with, and with the North Bay Shore, we're doing that not just for our community, but really on a regional level. So, um, you know, what we can do to reduce, um, uh, vehicle miles travel is is just so, you know, such a big deal. I mean, it's really, it's really great to see all these things being considered and put into, you know, potentially put into place because they'll, they will have the impact of reducing or they should. And that's a desire of reducing vehicle miles travel, which will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which is good for all of us. The region and us locally. Um, The other thing I wanted to comment on is, I was really glad to see that the B-Pack was involved in evaluating this. You know, I think it was a great use of these local experts we have that, that, um, you know, concentrate on bicycle and pedestrian things and, and, um, That's, you know, that's very important that we, you know, we take advantage of their expertise and and so I hope that that's part of the project to continue with that. And, um, And, um, Then I, I, um, I, another thing that, uh, I, I have thought about, when we think of this as not just a Mountain View progress, but a regional project, is how do we connect with our neighbors, um, that are also on the other side of one and one, i.e. you know, Mafia Field? And I think that, you know, in thinking about how to regionally reduce vehicle miles travel, um, those connections between um, Moffat Field and the North Bay Shore become much more important. And so I, I think that they're really, um, I'm glad to see them here. And I think that there are very important components to this, that, that we, you know, we want to take seriously and, and we'll need to reevaluate as time goes on to see if they need to be strengthened or, you know, or perhaps are enough. But I mean, they'll need to be reevaluated because, because the real goal is is to, um, reduce the vehicle miles travel. And of course, we want to do it for this community, but we want to do it for the region as a whole too. So I wanted to mention that and um, and thank the staff for, I, what I think is, is really top notch work. So anyway, that's my long 2nd.

[04:01:12] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. We have a motion by the vice mayor, 2nded by council member show welter. And I think as part of the motion vice mayor, you would ask to, um, move it up to to 5 years, is that right? To get that? Okay, great. Council member Mattachek.

[04:01:31] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So, um, I guess I'm concerned that it seems like we are doing things that are going to increase the amount of vehicle traffic at a time when I think we're trying to reduce it. Um, and so that really concerns me, you know, the North Bay Shore area was supposed to be car light. And so I, I'm not sure I, I do want to do things that increase the ability for more cars to go in and out of North Bay Shore. So, um, I agree with moving the congestion pricing up to the 5 year project. Um, I have a concern about the, um, let's see, I guess it's number 20, which is the big bed bridge, oh, at Charleston. I'm not sure I'd had that on the list, but if it's gonna stay there, I'd want to reduce it to something less than 20 feet, like maybe 12 feet. Um, because we don't foresee that as a transit bridge in the future. And so I would like to limit the width. I was wondering if the make of the motion would consider modifying that.

[04:02:52] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, I, I appreciate where you're coming from. I think the challenge with the project that's in the 20 year list is when we start defining it, none of us will probably be there. Um, so I don't have a problem suggesting that we try to keep the, the impact of the bridge minimal and that might include reducing the width, but, um, I, I guess I, I would include that with, with limited assurance that that's ultimately what the project will be since a future council ultimately will define it. Is that is that a fair characterization?

[04:03:38] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Not sure. Um, I guess I'd like something a little bit more certain. Um, and, you know, the way you describe this, and, You know, we revisit these from time to time. I guess I'd say then I'd want this to say, like, preliminary, um, or draft or something other than this is the list that we revisit from time to time. To me, it's not a, a, a firm list. It's a tentative list. And that, you know, would be revisited from time to time. Is that what you were suggesting?

[04:04:16] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, yes. But I'll, I want to check in with staff on that. Um. Do you, with staff comfortable with considering this list, preliminary or draft, or do you need some additional certainty?

[04:04:37] Public Works Director Don Cameron: At some point, we would need the list to be not called a draft list, or tentative list, if we're going to be building our capital improvement program, or out of it. Um, however, what we can do, which was suggested by the vice mayor, is at a notation that this list is to be revisited, say, every 5 years, and to look at current conditions and new projections, determine whether changes should be made to it, projects dropped, that type of thing. And that would indicate that it's supposed to be a living document that is going to be looked at every few years and be updated as needed.

[04:05:24] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, um, I also have uh, concerns about combining the, um, compliance with the trip cap by combining shoreline and ring store. Now, I feel like one of the purposes of having individual trip caps at the 3 gateways. Um, is so that, uh, traffic is, in some ways, motivated to move to a different, um, gateway, if there is too much traffic at one gateway, because it backs up then into the rest of the city. And so I think having individual caps and monitoring helps people see that, you know, you need to spread the trips out among the different gateways and combining it kind of defeats that purpose. So I actually think it should be left as is. I was wondering if that, um, could be a friendly amendment to the emotion. So I'm just going to be trying different things here. Okay.

[04:06:35] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, that's, that's, that's why the, the good people of Mountain View elect us. Um, and this, in this, item, I'm, I'm gonna go with the staff recommendations. Uh, staff was very helpful in the briefing and explaining the rationale. I asked a lot about that. Um, and I'm fairly comfortable with where they landed. I will say I do support, although, uh, this wasn't necessarily a question, but the widening the access streets, the, uh, the width of the pedestrian, um, area on the access streets from 5 to 6 feet, I think that makes for a better um, pedestrian experience. And um, I appreciated putting the cycle tracks on just one side of the street instead of both. I think that's another improvement. Um... Thanks.

[04:07:31] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you, council member Abi Koga.

[04:07:37] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, I had similar comments to Council member Medicheck. Um, I, you know, I support the, uh, projects on the whole, but, um, the priority it was up to shift, uh, modes of transportation. So anything that makes it easier for auto trip traffic to come into the area. Um, I, I, in the past, I've, um, I think I've opposed them and I continue to, um, you know, expressed my concerns that really wasn't the intent. Um, that was why we put the 45% SOV drip cap in the 1st place. The fact that it hasn't been met, is, you know, concerning to me. Um, I think it's interesting that on one hand, we're talking about ways to make it easier to drive into Shoreline, the North Bay Shore area. And then on the other hand, we're saying, maybe we need to lower the SOV rate to 35%, which I actually support. I think the lower the better, because the whole intent with this area was to try to, um, reduce auto traffic. And I think about, uh, former council member, Laura Messias, and way back when when she suggested we just have no cars in this area, and that was, uh, you know, pretty extreme, but more and more, I, I think that, um, now 10, 15 years later, it makes more sense to, um, even consider something like that. So, um, those are my concerns, but I understand that this list, uh, as long as this list is a, a living document that can be revised, um, I think that is really key, uh, I asked the question about what about the landings, redevelopment project. We've heard that it might not happen. Um, and some of these projects are tied to that specific development. And so if it doesn't happen, then these projects, these transportation improvements may not need to happen too. So as long as we have a way to check in. Um, I don't know, 5 years, I understand these projects take a long time. I would prefer maybe 3 years just because, um, there's been, you know, talk about a lot of these projects like one off, but we haven't really seen this comprehensive list um, in a while. And so, um, just to be able to continue to have a holistic view would be, um, I think, extremely helpful. But, um, but this, again, this will probably be beyond my time on the council. So, um, you know, I can leave it up to the to the future folks to decide on the timing of this. Um, I would prefer to, I, I was going to start just for the 20 year projects, um, the item 20 and 21, um, coupling it and saying either or, either or, um, Um, if it sounds like lavinitas being studied now, if that's feasible, then we eliminate 20, um, and then if it's not feasible, we can consider 20. um,

[04:10:44] Public Works Director Don Cameron: If I may clarify. 21 is not the bike pad, bridge across Stevens Creek. We do not have that on this list because Google has been proposing to design and construct it and pay for it. This is actually the concept of the bike pet bridge over 101 at Shoreline. Uh, the idea that was brought forward to council about having it, having it, yeah, a segment cross over a lot of it, shoreline at law, Venita.

[04:11:17] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. So then I guess that'd be 20 with an, we would put an asterisk saying, if La Venita, the La Venita crossing, is not feasible to, we would revisit this item. Would you mind that, um, minor change, vice mayor?

[04:11:37] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, What is staff's perspective on that? Do you feel there's value in keeping both projects under consideration?

[04:11:53] Public Works Director Don Cameron: You know, I, I, From staff's perspective, we're very interested in counsel's direction on this. And if in general, counsel is feeling like 2 bike bridges, across Stevens Creek, north of 101 is where you want to focus. The concept of adding the asterisk that says, you know, similar to what, Council member Abicoga was suggesting, could work. It kind of shows the intent of, you know, this is possible, but if the other bike pit, which does go in, maybe this one's not needed and can continue to be reconsidered when we revisit the list, um, every few years, as was discussed. So again, if, if, if council is, is, this kids council is feeling like 2 bike bed, which is what we should plan for, then that's what we'll put on the list at this point.

[04:12:52] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: That was, that would be my intent. I, I, we, have not talked about three. We've talked about 2 max, so I just don't think we need to be going adding another one at this point in time. So, yeah, that would be my request to add that asterisk. Vice mayor, if you would be willing.

[04:13:16] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, I, I'm, I'm inclined to go with the staff recommendation for now. Um, and I think, you know, a lot, a lot of this deal is fairly speculative to me. 20 years is a long way away and I don't even think it's going to be 20 years. A lot of these projects, I think, are, are going to be even years out from, from, what they're projected to be just given the challenge of environmental review and finding funding. Um, I think I'm, I'm fairly content leaving it up to a future counsel to pull it off the list, especially if we find that the other strategies are working and it's not really necessary.

[04:14:01] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, thanks. Um, and then my comments uh, definitely support, um, moving congestion pricing up. Um, I'd like to, uh, encourage that we pursue, um, joining in on the pilot program at San Francisco and LA are looking at, um, just to speed up the process, um, given the legislative, um, hurdles that we need to, um, get over. And then, um, I agree with councilman, show alter in terms of parking pricing. That's something that I've been asking for for quite a while. I know vice mayor has as well. Um, I know there's some challenges because of the free parking issue, but, um, I was, um, thinking that could at least could we start looking at, uh, requiring pricing, parking pricing on, and city-owned lands, to lands that we can, the city controls, um, since I think we would have more jurisdiction. So even if we were to go into a lease agreement with uh, uh, uh, lease see. Uh, we would look at requiring um, whatever parking that they offer to be, um, priced. Thank you. So I don't know if that needs to be added or if it's already included, I wasn't really clear on where we were with parking.

[04:15:21] Public Works Director Don Cameron: Um, as previously mentioned by Mr. Lightbody, we'll be, we'll be looking at the use of pay parking as one of the tools in the toolkit. It does not need to be added as a project here in priority transportation improvements.

[04:15:39] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Council member Hicks.

[04:15:45] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So, I, just because this is top of mind right now, I, I agree with the parking pricing, whether or not it has to be added to the, to the list or to the, uh, motion. I, um, agree with a lot of council, what a lot of council members are saying that I was hoping for. This seems like a very, if, except for the, uh, the bike pedestrian improvements and the congestion pricing, it was a little more auto oriented than I had hoped for. Um, particular everywhere, but particularly in this area. Um, So, uh, yeah, I'm glad to hear that the the list of capital improvement projects is a living document, but I would really like to do everything we can to, Um, I don't, I don't want to just build more and more freeway entrances to North Bay Shore. I think that kind of goes against what we were working for. Um, when I talk to staff, They mentioned, So I would also like to get the, um, bring down the SOV target. Um, as is mentioned, a 35%. I realize there are other employers that that's done mostly through entitlements, TDM plans and entitlements. And so we don't always have the opportunity to do that and that there were previous agreements made. I guess with into it in Microsoft at 45 and 55%, which is, in my opinion, really unfortunate. Um, And I'm hoping that we're hiring a new TDM analyst. I'm hoping that we can actually work with them to, uh, to reduce those maybe through, uh, you know, maybe those companies have, um, have, uh, like 20, 30 carbon emission goals and maybe they would, through some other means, agree to reduce those because I think those are unfortunately large SOV rates. So I'm hoping through means like that, we can, we can, We won't have to do all of these capital improvement projects. And I'm hoping they are living, you know, it's a living list that, um, we don't need, we don't need to use. I like the idea. I, the idea of moving the, uh, congestion management up earlier, um, I, I also like the idea of for number 20, the, the, uh, bike pad bridge to reduce the width. I understand that council can look at it later and do anything, labor councils can do anything they want, but why don't we do what we want now? Um, and I also like the idea of the if or with the, um, with the, um, 2 bike pedestrian connections. Um, so, um, I guess that's, I guess that's all of my comments next.

[04:18:51] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So, um, I just want to make sure that I'm clear on, on the motion now that I think there's been a couple different, um, attempts to to include different things. And so, Vice Mayor. Do you mind, um, kind of clarifying where things are with the 2nd from council members show welter? Before we hear?

[04:19:15] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I'm happy to. So it's the staff recommendation, um, but, uh, the congestion pricing implementation project is moved up to a 5 year project, and, uh, there will be periodic check-ins with the council, um, to determine whether projects that are in the outer years are necessary, depending on the feasibility and success of the congestion pricing. Um, so, uh, If there, if, if there's, uh, inability to eliminate some of the capital improvements, um, then they can fall off the list because we, we will have achieved. Um, our trip cap goals with congestion pricing and and some of the other 5 year projects. Oh, and then this is a document.

[04:20:11] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Custom member show Walter.

[04:20:15] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I just wanted to confirm with staff. Um, it's my understanding that if you have, um, a project on a list like this in a, in a official document, then you can use that in a grant application to apply for funds, and that can be very valuable in in getting them. And that's one of the reasons why we want to leave, um, these things on the list, even if it's a living document, because if it does turn out that we want it, and a potential finding source comes by, then it puts us in a better position to to get the grant. Is that correct?

[04:20:53] Public Works Director Don Cameron: Um, yes, thank you so much for mentioning that, Council member Cheryl Walter. It's one of the reasons staff was not comfortable with calling this a draft list or a tentative list. is it, we need adopted lists like this when funding opportunities come back up and we want to apply for it. Revising the list every few years is not a problem, which is why it's fine to call it a living document. But it would be formal action taken by the council, 3 years, 4 years, whatever, you know, time period seems appropriate. to actually revise and change the list as we go.

[04:21:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, thank you.

[04:21:35] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Okay, any other further clarifications before we go forward? All right. Um, I'm, I'm comfortable with this direction, and so I think there's a motion in a 2nd and been discussion, so I'm just going to call question. So, um, City Clerk Glaser, if you could do a roll call vote, please.

[04:21:54] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Nice name, Ramirez.

[04:21:56] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[04:21:57] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member, Michelle Walter.

[04:21:58] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes,

[04:21:59] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: council member Abbe Koga.

[04:22:02] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I,

[04:22:02] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council number Hicks?

[04:22:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes,

[04:22:05] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Lieber.

[04:22:07] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[04:22:07] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Ranachek?

[04:22:09] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: No.

[04:22:10] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: And Mayor Kmei.

[04:22:13] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[04:22:14] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Motion case?

[04:22:15] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. All right, so, well, that closes, um, I am 6, so we'll move to item 7, which is our public hearing. Uh, this is item 7.1. one, the renewal of the downtown parking maintenance and operation assessment district for fiscal year 202122. Business development specialist Tiffany Chu will introduce the item. Economic vitality manager, John Lang, an assistant city manager, community development director. RT Shvastova are available for questions. So we'll turn it over to Ms. Chu.

[04:22:53] Business Development Specialist Tiffany Chu: Good evening, mayor and city council. Tonight we are holding the 2nd public hearing regarding the annual renewal of the downtown parking maintenance and operations assessment district for fiscal year 202122. The district supports the overall maintenance and operations of the downtown public parking system. Tonight, city council will be asked to adopt a motion, waiving the reading of the engineer's statement and adopt a resolution approving the engineer's report and authorizing delivery of the assessments to the county of Santa Clara. This concludes staff's presentation. Thank you.

[04:23:33] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Does any member council have any comments or questions? All right. So seeing none, I'll bring the item back for a motion to waive the reading of the statement of the engineer of record. And then before I do it, let's see. So just a, a process question. So I'll do the public comment after this portion.

[04:24:03] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Correct. First, you will want to ask to adopt the motion waiving the reading of the statement into your record.

[04:24:10] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. So, um, see, see, Clark laser, you could do the roll call.

[04:24:18] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Did we have a motion in a 2nd?

[04:24:21] Mayor Ellen Kamei: So, That's the clarity that I'm asking for. So, The way that it's written for me. Said that I need to waive the reading and then it goes right into a roll call vote. So that's what I have in front of me. If the process is different, I'd love for the clarification of this item, please.

[04:24:47] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yeah, what would be appropriate is a motion in a 2nd to waive the reading of the statement of engineer of record and then a roll call vote.

[04:24:57] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Council member Hicks.

[04:25:01] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I motioned to waive the reading.

[04:25:04] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you, Counselor Rabi Koga.

[04:25:06] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Second.

[04:25:07] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. All right, so we have a motion by council member, Hicks, 2nded by council member, Abe Koga, city clerk glazer. Council member Hicks?

[04:25:17] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:25:18] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Abby Coca.

[04:25:19] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi,

[04:25:20] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Councilman Lieber.

[04:25:21] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Uh,

[04:25:22] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Counselor Romanachek?

[04:25:24] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes,

[04:25:24] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: council member Shel Walter?

[04:25:26] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes,

[04:25:27] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Vice Mayor Ramirez.

[04:25:29] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[04:25:30] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: May or May.

[04:25:32] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes,

[04:25:32] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: no, she carries.

[04:25:35] Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right. So I'll bring this back and I'll now ask the city clerk glazer to read the city clerk statement.

[04:25:45] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Notices have been posted, published and mailed as required by the Mountain View city code for this public hearing, affidavit and certificates for posting, publishing, and mailing on file with the city clerk's office. A copy of the engineer's report for the assessment district, which the public works director has caused to be prepared, was filed in my office on May 11, 2021, and has been available for public inspection. The report consists of the 202122 parking maintenance and operation assessment district budget, including an itemized listing of direct costs and expenses. The assessment role computed in accordance with benefits, and a description of the assessment formula and the assessment rules. I'll alternate back over to you there.

[04:26:35] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Right, and I will now read the mayor's statement. This is the time and place set for the public hearing on the adoption of the annual engineers report for the downtown parking maintenance and operation assessment district for fiscal year 202122. All written protests to be computed in the protest percentage should have been filed with the city clerk by 6.30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 8, 2021. The council may consider all protests, including oral protests, presented at this hearing in arriving at its determination relating to this assessment district. Protests or endorsements, and may be made by any person interested. The only written protest filed by the owners of the property may be considered in determining the percentage of protests. It will now be in order for the hearing to be declared open. You are asked to clearly identify yourself, your property assessment number, assessment parcel number, or property address. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone, and we'll display a 2 minute timer. All right, I'm not seeing any public comment on the line. City clerk, do you have anybody on your end? All right, so I'll bring the item back for council deliberation and action. And note that a motion to approve the recommendation should include reading the title of the resolution attached to the report. Does any member, would any member like to make a motion? Council member Abikoga.

[04:28:19] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I'd like to adopt a resident, make a motion to adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View approving the engineer's report for the downtown parking maintenance and operation assessment district for fiscal year 2021 and 2022 and authorizing its delivery to Santa Clara County.

[04:28:41] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Castle member Hicks?

[04:28:43] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I'll 2nd that.

[04:28:44] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. So you have a motion by council member Abbe Koga, seconded by council member Hicks. And so we'll do a roll call vote.

[04:28:55] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Abi Kaka?

[04:28:56] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I

[04:28:57] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Hicks.

[04:28:58] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:28:59] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Lieber? Council member Mattachek?

[04:29:02] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes,

[04:29:03] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member, Shelter.

[04:29:05] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes,

[04:29:05] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Spice Man Ramirez.

[04:29:07] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[04:29:08] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Mayor can I?

[04:29:47] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[04:29:48] (archive recording) Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Motion carries?

[04:29:50] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right. So do I need to city or city attorney, do I need to close the hearing or is it remaining open since we have item 7.2?

[04:30:01] (archive recording) City Attorney Krishan Chopra: No, you can, this item is concluded. You can move on to item 7.2.

[04:30:06] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right. So I think before we move on to item 7.2, um, any member of council, do we want to take a break or would we like to keep going before we talk about the budget? Okay, so can you just raise your, Can you just raise your hand if you'd like a 10 minute break? All right. So I see 4 hands that are not my own. Okay, so we'll be back in 10 minutes. So let's take a break till 940 and we'll put up the, um, Um, item, please, that will be back at 940.

[04:33:47] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: For fiscal year 2021, 22 recommended budget. City manager, Kimber McCarthy, and finance and administrative services director, Jesse Takahashi will present the staff report.

[04:34:02] (archive recording) City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Thank you mayor. Jesse, if you wouldn't mind sharing the PowerPoint. Can you get it to switch it to the intro slide? Thank you. So good evening, mayor and council members. So tonight, before you is the city's recommended budget for fiscal year 2021. As the mayor mentioned, joining me in this presentation is Jesse Takahashi, our finance and administrative services director.

[04:40:46] Mayor Ellen Kamei: I'm so sorry, city manager. Maybe we can ask Jesse to go to full screen. I'm only seeing.

[04:40:54] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Oh, I see that, yes.

[04:41:06] Finance and Administrative Services Director Jesse Takahashi: Apologize. I thought I was on the full screen. Let's see if I can change that. You should be on full screen.

[04:41:28] Mayor Ellen Kamei: It's not on full screen. No, we, we see kind of, one side and then the other side and we see, kind of, there we go. Okay. Perfect. Yes, yes, yes. All right.

[04:41:45] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: All right. Apologies. It wouldn't be a normal moving without some sort of zoom hiccup. Thank you, Jesse. So, as we've talked about for many, many months, and as we've even discussed this evening, we are certainly in an unprecedented time. Um, that we have really dealt with, a lot of challenges over this past year and a half, not only here in Mountain View, but nationally, and things have certainly impacted us fiscally in Mountain View, and um, tonight, we're here to talk about where we're at with our budget, and also talk a little bit about how the city has pivoted so quickly to respond and recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, and just show how we've adapted to changes on this routine basis daily basis. while attempting to serve our community at the highest standard. So next side, please. This next slide, we're going to talk a little bit about the budget development process and the community engagement timeline. So what you see here really is just that the process started in November when staff committed to coming before council on a quarterly basis to give council in the public with a quarterly budget update, just because there was so much uncertainty that's happened over these last many months over the last fiscal year, there was so many things that it changed. We wanted to come back to council and needed to come back every quarter because things changed so quickly. So what you see here really is that we did touch points with council and with the community almost monthly, um, not only with the budget process, but also with the strategic planning envisioning process. Tonight, as I mentioned, you will have the opportunity to discuss the recommended budget, and your formal adoption of the budget will come on June 22nd. Next slide. As far as the COVID background. So much has changed since our last update to council, which was just a couple months ago in April. As we all know, things are progressing in a much more positive manner now. Our county is now in the yellow tier, for the blueprint, for the state, excuse me, the blueprint, the state's blueprint. Um, and we are expected to actually move out of this whole blueprint system on June 15th when the governor has announced that we will reopen the entire economy. What you see here is a chart on the unemployment rate and how it's ebbed and flowed over the last many years. What's really particularly interesting is that as of March 2021, the unemployment rate in Mountain View is now at 3.5%. In California, it's an 8.3%. So locally, it does appear that the economy is on a much more positive trajectory than it is statewide and certainly even nationwide. So, We do still continue to respond to the community needs. Many of the programs that we've talked about, the relief programs, all of the efforts that council has implemented over these last many months are continuing into the next budget cycle. And we are expecting to be able to continue even more programs with our American Rescue Act funding, which I'll talk about in a couple more slides. You can move to the next line. Um, this slide in the next slide really just highlight some of those efforts that I talked about. that, uh, really a robust response for the most vulnerable community members, also to our small business community. You see here, just a few of the efforts we've made over this last year. If you also look at the staff report or the transmittal letter to the budget, you'll see over 40 items, 40 major projects and initiatives that that we've done or efforts related to our COVID response. Um, so as you can see, we've done everything from the rent relief program, which I think most everyone knows about, um, to our life moves, home key sites, our safe parking lots, providing micro loans and grants to small businesses, launching a, with our chamber, that really highlights our online businesses next slide Jesse. Uh, we also have engaged in a lot of efforts to help the community for having the 1st mass vaccination site here in Mountain View, the county's 1st site, um, homebound vaccination program where our fire department staff is going to, uh, people's homes, seniors, and the most vulnerable members of our community, providing vaccines, continuing really great, um, community efforts that bring folks together, including the mayor's resiliency around table. Our library, grab and go program. These are just some of the efforts that we've done over the last fiscal year, many of which will continue into this next budget cycle and next year. Next slide. So as I mentioned, part of what we've done over these last several months with the budget process is also bring council, the strategic planning and visioning process. So you started this process in February, your retreat, with touch points every month. And tonight you're being asked to confirm the final vision statement. And the final strategic priorities. And again, formal adoption of this is on the June 22nd council agenda. Next line. So what you have in front of you is a chart of what council previously recommended or the American Rescue Plan Act funds. So the city is expected to receive approximately $15.70000 and direct federal funding over 2 years. So this 1st distribution, which is around 7.800000 is expected to receive later this month. And then we're going to get the 2nd payment a year later. We do have until December of 2024 to spend these funds. So any of the remaining funding will be assessed in relation to our continued fiscal situation or other anticipated needs, which does include current labor negotiations. So the slide you have in front of you shows um, the preliminary recommended utilization of that 1st distribution of funds. And I do want to note that the Treasury Department is expected to make additional changes to their what they're calling their interim rules, for the guidelines of how this funding could be spent. So it is possible that not all the recommended uses will fit really nice and neat within the eligibility parameters. However, the city can apply, an ARPA provision which allows us to use funding or for general revenue loss. So essentially what that means is it gives us broad authority to spend these funds for that purpose, which would then allow other one time general fund monies to be freed up so that all of these recommendations that council put forward can be compliant with the eligible uses and can continue. So staff's recommendation tonight is, um, to continue this list that you all provided, um, I believe it was last month. And we will find way to incorporate that into the budget. And I did want to mention that the basic income program will be assessed and it's currently actually being assessed by staff and will come back to council early this fall. Um, likely in September, uh, for council to provide feedback and comments on moving that item forward. Next slide. So another part of, um, what we did this year with the budget development process that originated from the race equity and inclusion subcommittee is to look at the budget through what's called an equity lens. And so as part of that effort, we committed as a city to evaluate whether any new budget editions or proposals or changes, uh, would be assessed by looking at these 2 questions that you see on your screen. So whether that change or the recommendation benefited communities of color and or low income residents, or whether burdened communities of color or low income residents. So what you'll find in the recommended budget is that all of the limited period, which is also one time items, so all of the limited period and ongoing items do benefit communities of color and low income residents. And I also want to mention that building on this commitment to equity, um, you will see that within the budget, a new full-time human services manager position has been recommended to replace a vacant police officer position within the budget. So this position will serve in my office and the city manager's office and really is intended to supplement the leadership that we've already shown, that we've heard about, that people have talked about tonight. Um, leadership on efforts related to homelessness, mental health, um, our basic income program and other ongoing efforts that are underway. Um, this person will also really focus on continuing these strong partnerships, that we forge not only with nonprofits, but also with other local government agencies, which include the county. And as you all know, the county is the primary provider of social service and safety net programs within, um, the county and we do work closely with them on our efforts. So at this point, I'd like to turn it back over to Jesse to talk more details about our revenue and expenses and how the budget is made up.

[04:51:30] Finance and Administrative Services Director Jesse Takahashi: Thank you, Ms. McCarthy, again, Jesse Takahashi, finance an administrative services director. I'm going to go over a little bit more of the numbers with the uh, city funds and also with the focus on the general operating fund um, for the fiscal 22 budget. So the 1st slide you see here, uh, recommended revenues for all funds are, um, presented at $3770000 for fiscal 22 and uh, the general operating fund budget is comprised of 152000000 uh, of that or about 40%, uh, of that total. On the expenditure side, These are recommended at $415.6 million, for all funds, and the general fund portion of that is $150.6 million. You'll notice that the expenditures are greater than the revenues, as some expenditures such as capital projects are funded from existing fund balances, which makes them larger than the revenue site. Looking at the general operating fund budget, uh, this is showing uh, here sort of in tabular form that uh, there is a operating balance for fiscal 22 of uh, a -4.2 million dollars. However, with the use of one-time limited period funds, um, called the excess, uh, education revenue augmentation fund contribution that we are recommending to use of 5.8 million, we would end with a balance of $160000000 um, for next fiscal year. Now this next slide is the uh, chart of just the general operating revenue fund. Again, revenues of $152.2 million, and you can see here that property tax is the largest component of that at $66.100000 or just over 43% of the total pi. Use of money and property is the 2nd largest source at about 15% or $23 million. Um, the city does own land, uh, and leases it to various corporate and other businesses around the city and receives lease revenues from this, making it somewhat unique, uh, from other cities. This revenue source has helped the city over the years before the pandemic and throughout the pandemic. as it lessens our dependence on more vulnerable economic-based taxes, such as sales and hotel taxes. And then lastly, sales tax is estimated about 19% of the general operating fund revenues, and it is our 3rd largest source. on the expenditure side for the general operating fund. We have $154.6 million, of which police and fire services represent almost half of the budget. And this is driven by the fact that they are required to be staffed around the clock 24 by 7 and are available to all residents, employees, visitors in the city without fees or without a dedicated revenue source. And as you can see, um, the remaining uh, functions of how the city uh, general operating fund dollars are being uh, spent. In summary, the uh, general operating fund uh, is kind of break it down into these categories, non-discretionary and limited period costs. Um, the detail of this is, uh, the complete detail listing is in the recommended, of the recommended changes, can be found in the budget document starting on page 7 dash 7. Um, so you can see nondiscretionary costs, which are essentially things that the city doesn't have a whole lot of, uh, say over, um, whether they need to be spent or typically for things is utility, repair, uh, utilities, repairs, things that um, are necessary to maintain service levels, the discretionary costs or things that we do have a little bit more control over, uh, when and how they are spent. Uh, and then limited period costs are uh, we call one time costs because they're only funded for one year only and not considered to be ongoing from year to year. So again, the details of those can be found in the budget on beginning of page 7 seven. Looking ahead to our general operating fund 5 year forecast. The forecast is kind of a mixed bag, as you can see. The forecast was prepared, assuming that the earliest recovery period would begin the summer for certain revenue categories like sales and hotel and other local taxes. However, other revenue categories are not expected to recover for, you know, 2 to 3 years. And, um, as noted, the fiscal year 22 uh, category will meet, um, uh, the excess E-RAF contribution in order to maintain uh, a positive balance for the year. And then the next 2 years, you'll see in red, are forecasted, um, at deficits, one, uh, of 4600000 uh, and 23 and 1500000 in fiscal 24 before finally, uh, recovering and turning positive again in the later 2 uh, fiscal years. As a reminder, the forecast is just a snapshot of um, in time and could change considerably, depending upon conditions in the economy. And so continued prudence in our budgeting practices will allow the city to maintain good fiscal health over this period of time. The city also has several other major funds, uh, which I would just touch on in summary development services fund, uh, which uh, incorporates centrally the building and planning services, um, development, uh, shoreline golf links in the restaurant, Michael's, uh, and then the Shoreline Regional Park community. Um, the details of these funds can be found also on the document, beginning on page one dash 28. Um, essentially operating revenues and expenditures are uh, more or less balanced, um, somewhat where you see expenditures uh, exceeding uh, the revenues, for example, development services, they're being funded by existing fund balances. Uh, and the shoreline uh, is expected to uh, project uh, small surplus and we'll be able to hopefully um, do a transfer back to the general operating fund at the end of the year. Um, and then on the shoreline park, uh, the property taxes, uh, are, um, expected to grow, um, next year and, um, again, exceed expenditures. Uh, of $33.9 million. And then there are also 13 almost $13.59 in capital, um, projects, um, in budget for next year. With respect to the utility, uh, rates. So, do primarily to supplier cost increase, utility rates for our 3 utilities are going to be recommended for increases as follows. And, um, the 1st is the water fund. We're recommending a one% increase for the average cost of water, uh, meter rates and recycled water, uh, which would uh, equate to for the average single family an increase of about $one.26 per month. Wastewater is being recommended for a 6% overall rate increase, um, and that will equate to a $2.65 per month increase for the average, uh, single family house, old, uh, and then, uh, solid waste or the garbage is being recommended for a 4% uh, overall increase or a $one.45 per month, um, for a, uh, 32 gallon cart. Um, I would just point out that um, on June 22nd, a public hearing will be conducted um, prior to the adoption of these rates. So there will be another opportunity for council to discuss these rate increases. I wanted to just mention a brief summary of the capital projects, um, that council has previously considered. There are 26 discretion, nondiscretionary and 17 discretionary projects, um, totaling uh, 59 uh, $480000 uh, and that will be coming for adopt, back for adoption on the 22nd as well. And then we have our next steps for the June 22nd meeting. uh, which include the utility rate hearing, uh, consideration of the GAM appropriation limit, adopting CIP as well as the strategic roadmap. And then lastly, we have the recommendations, and I would just mention that, although the final budget won't be adopted until the 22nd. Um, there are some items uh, on for tonight, as noted in the staff report, um, and on these 2 slides, and that would, uh, will conclude a staff presentation, and uh, we would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[05:01:42] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. So does any member of the council have any comments or questions? Okay, and uh, oh, council member, show Walter.

[05:02:00] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, um, I, uh, was wondering about number seven, the further new gatekeeper requests, uh, to 2023. Um, Could I we hear a little bit about that?

[05:02:14] Finance and Administrative Services Director Jesse Takahashi: Sure, um, I would deferring the tour, our uh, community development director and our city manager regarding that request to uh, for deferral. I don't know if she's on.

[05:02:30] Assistant City Manager and Community Development Director Aarti Shrivastava: This is um, RT Shravastava. Um, I'm the assistant city manager community development director. Um, Council, this is um, a request from staff to defer new gatekeeper requests, um, primarily because, um, as we noted before, with the adoption of the council strategic plan as well as uh, various state mandated projects, um, our staff time would be pretty much booked up, um, and in fact, we'd be hard pressed to finish out the entire strategic plan within the 2 year period. Um, adding gatekeeper projects would um, would just um, add to that workload and we would find it hard to manage um, the workload as as adopted today. And that's the reason why we're recommending deferral for another year.

[05:03:26] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um, okay, uh. I suppose if something were to come to our attention that needed special consideration, we would be able to, um, Look at it on an emergency basis for that kind of thing.

[05:03:46] Assistant City Manager and Community Development Director Aarti Shrivastava: Um, the gatekeeper projects are focused on private development projects. I imagine there might be applicants who might want to bring projects to the council's attention. Our request is to hold that back till the 20, um, 2023, but council could always choose to change their mind about it.

[05:04:07] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay. Thank you.

[05:04:09] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you, council member Hicks.

[05:04:12] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So my 1st question is, you said questions or comments, would you, I guess I'll phrase this as a question because it seems like it's the question period. First, can you put the 1st set of recommendations back up on the screen? Is that possible?

[05:04:32] Finance and Administrative Services Director Jesse Takahashi: Yes, it is possible. I can get this one now.

[05:04:49] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Gosh, I can, if it's hard, I can do it without it being, uh, My, I just have a question. I guess this is a question to counsel, so it may be more of a comment, but one of the recommendations was, uh, and you can get that up and maybe tell me I'm quoting it a little wrong. But that, uh, council travel allowance be restored. And I'm in the amount of, let's see, I think $18,100.4000 addition for the mayor. I'm just wondering whether the, you know, learning from one of the things I learned from the pandemic is we don't really have to, and also from increasing threats of global warming that we don't have to do air travel, maybe quite as much as we had to in the past. So, My question is, Whether people would be willing to reduce that, that particular budget amount, which, um, one, you might say that's symbolic. It's, um, not a large amount, but it seems like the kind of leadership we should be showing in terms of, um, sustainability.

[05:06:08] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Council member Hicks, if I may speak to that. Um, so the reason why staff recommended this is because there, we do know that, um, there are um, many conferences that are actually planned to be in person um, over this next fiscal year, in particular, the NLC conferences that are held in the late fall. And then also, I believe it's February of 2022, um, the DC conference where, uh, we have had uh, more council members attend that. So it was reduced during COVID. So this just brings it back up to the same level that it was at pre-COVID. Um, if that helps shed any um, context to that.

[05:06:51] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah, that, I mean, that's what I thought, but I, I, and putting out my personal viewpoint that we should be cutting back on air travel for council.

[05:07:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Council member show, Walter, did you have another question? I see your hand.

[05:07:11] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Sorry, that was a mistake.

[05:07:13] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, no problem. Do any other council members have any questions? Okay. So, um, perhaps, Mr. Takashi, we can um, stop the screen share and I'll um, bring this item to public comment. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide public comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone. We'll display a 2 minute timer on the screen. Bruce England.

[05:07:45] Bruce England: Thank you mayor. Uh, this is brief. But, um, and I don't mean to upend the Apple cart when I say this, but seeing the amount of money that's going into public safety is distressing. It's basically 50% of the operating budget. We're told, in the community, often that we have a safe city, and we don't have to worry about our safety, really, and that our modern buildings are equipped to prevent and mitigate fires. So I wonder about that, but also in light of the needs in public works and community development and community services, they can really use the extra funding. So, again, this is late in the game for me to bring it up. I don't mean to suggest that you change anything, but I just want to make that observation. Thank you.

[05:08:33] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Tim McKenzie?

[05:08:37] Tim MacKenzie: Well, thanks for a presentation staff. It was great. I really liked seeing that there was a decision to hire city staff. Uh instead of a new police officer. That seems like a great step in the right direction. I want to echo a little bit what Bruce just brought up about the breakdown of public safety. Um, one. 2% is going into community development. Um, and I'd, I'd hopes, uh, council could take maybe, uh, Maslow's hierarchy of knee viewpoint of safety, where physiological needs need to be addressed before, uh, safety needs, like if you, if you don't have shelter or a meal, then you don't really care about whether you live in a safe place, but, as Bruce just mentioned, we do live in a safe place, and we don't really need to have a large armed law enforcement, uh, presence as we do. Um, I, I also, I, um, I appreciate this suggestion from council member Hicks about uh, thinking about cutting back. I think things are starting to come back in person, but I think that we've seen through the pandemic that there's a lot more capability for virtual, and I think moving forward. We may try to have some hybrid things, and there will probably be bumps in the road as we work out how exactly to make in person and hybrid zoom sort of work together, but, you know, we're in the heart of Silicon Valley. I think it's completely reasonable to think about leading the way, um, and could try to help with, uh, greenhouse gas emissions, which is a huge threat to our safety, a long-term slow threat that, uh, we should be thinking about and worrying about. But thanks for the present presentation staff, and I really like seeing the decision to hire more staff instead of armed law enforcement agents.

[05:10:32] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Tom Myers.

[05:10:39] Tom Myers: Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm Tom Myers, executive director at Community Services Agency. I'd like to say I support the budget proposal as presented and appreciate the fact that the ARPA funds. are being used with an eye on the vulnerable communities that CSA serves, and that using funds for mental health like CHAC, or for innovative approaches like the solidarity fund or universal basic income, are all to be commended. But the economic fallout from the pandemic has lasted far too long, and I believe no matter how much money the city puts out into the community, what is lacking is time. And because at the end of the month, the eviction moratorium will end. Late last week, I asked the CSA staff to crunch the numbers and give me their best, most accurate estimate of the effects of the coming end of the moratorium, by looking at our lists of those who have received multiple months of rent and those who are requesting additional months. of rent from city and other sources. Uh, we're estimating that as many as 1000 to 1200 households in our service area may be at risk of eviction. Bear in mind that this is an estimate of households, which includes families with children, couples, singles, seniors and so forth, and cuts across all demographic groups. But this does not include external data like employment and et cetera. Also, bear in mind that I am only presenting data and not the official policy of CSA. The CSA board of directors will take up this issue in the coming weeks. In the meantime, we all need to be aware of what lies ahead in the very near future. Thank you very much.

[05:12:25] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Here, can I ask a question of Mr. Meyer? Myers.

[05:12:30] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Sure. Let's see if he's still, still there?

[05:12:35] Tom Myers: Yes, I am.

[05:12:36] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Myers, for your comments and data. I appreciate you being here. Um, as you, I think you've been here with us most of the evening, you've heard about the eviction moratorium deadline. Um, I wanted to just, uh, I guess, ask you, or confirm, um, with our rent relief program that we have that you've been so, um, wonderfully administering for the city, um, is there, uh, will you be prioritizing, um, and anyone who is, um, in danger of being evicted or sur- I don't, I don't know the whole process, but, um, but yes, would they be prioritized in terms of um, providing financial assistance?

[05:13:26] Tom Myers: Absolutely. When the, when we have operated outside of the eviction moratorium, when we didn't have eviction moratoriums in the past, and as you know, CSA did rent relief, uh, and has done rent relief since the beginning, uh, of our agency back in the 1950s. It was one of the 1st programs that actually was developed. Uh, we've always uh, prioritized people who came in the door uh, an emergency uh, basis. What we called it at the time was triaging. Uh, and uh, we would triage so that if someone came in with a, uh, a 3 day notice, for example, uh, that the person would would be worked on immediately, as where as someone who was facing, uh, uh, a rental crisis a month down the road, uh, would would do it uh, differently. Now, during the eviction moratorium, because everyone was free of being evicted, what we did was we tried to treat everyone exactly fairly and as they came in the door. Uh, but, uh, but yeah, if the eviction moratorium passes, uh, and uh, or if it, I should say if it ends, uh, we will likely have to go back to uh, uh, treating emergency cases differently, then we would treat a case where the crisis is, you know, weeks down the road.

[05:14:48] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And then the other question is, um, uh, there's the county rent relief program and, um, thank you for, um, sharing with me that you are already, um, helping through your case workers, um, helping folks to apply for those. But I think, um, I wanted to, I guess, ask you in terms of, um, the tears or, I think you had mentioned that, um, once a client has exhausted the, our mountain view, rent relief program, Then they, um, you, then they apply for the county or state. Is that correct? Or as soon as they walk in the door, your door and do they get assistance right away in applying for those other funds.

[05:15:37] Tom Myers: Well, with rent relief, and that's the difference between direct financial assistance, that goes directly to the client and rent relief is that rent relief is never instantaneous. It's a very complicated process and, uh, uh, I think that the city staff, uh, and it's always the funder that sets the rules on rent relief. The city staff at mountain view should be commended for making it one of the most flexible rent relief programs I've ever seen. Uh, but, uh, uh, but to go back to what you were saying is that we, uh, we have all of the different buckets, and it's not just the state, it's not just the county. We have buckets of rent relief from United Way and from all these other sources. And so depending on how the client walks in the door and presents themselves, uh, we can grab uh, money from a different bucket. For instance, some people came to CSA with, uh, a crisis, uh, a rent crisis that was not COVID related. And one of the things about the city's program was it needed to be a COVID related crisis. Uh, and so we had to go to different buckets of money, uh, for that. So does that answer your question?

[05:16:47] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, I guess that is, uh, asking specifically about the COVID rent relief programs at the county in the state. I think it's, is it called home is key? Is, is that the state program? And I don't know, the program is called, but, um, can an individual or family apply for our cities funds and then also apply for the county and the state funds?

[05:17:15] Tom Myers: Yes, and and what that, what that is, is, uh, if if the city funds are for specifically, uh, for 3 months, uh, the destination home funds, which are the county funds that I think you're referring to, uh, those have different sets of requirements. And then the state funds are different as well. Most of those funders don't want to duplicate funding, so no one's going to get their April rep paid twice, for example. So there is there is a double check that needs to happen with all of that. Uh, but uh, uh, that, uh, that, that, there are different levels and some, sometimes groups like destination home, for example, is really trying to make theirs uh, flexible for a longer term. Whereas the Mountain View rent relief funded 3 months of rent, they're trying to make theirs for a much longer term. I do want to point out, and I think this was brought up that, uh, you know, the state funds, you got to remember that start, you know, well, if you go all the way back to when we 1st worked with the city and and we started the city funds, CSA started cutting checks before we even had money from the from the city, uh, we got that off the ground within a matter of weeks and so forth. How many months now, have we been waiting for the state funds to kick in and start, and, you know, we've had one% payout on those? Uh, I think that uh, we should not take the, the speed that we were able to do with the city funds for granted when it comes to those other sources of funding. If only one% of the state funds have paid out so far. Uh, that, that says to me that our biggest crisis is time. It's not necessarily money. It's time.

[05:19:01] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you so much.

[05:19:03] Tom Myers: Absolutely. Thank you.

[05:19:06] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thanks. So we'll go back to public comment, Alexander Brown.

[05:19:16] Alexander Brown: Hey. can you hear me?

[05:19:18] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yeah,

[05:19:19] Alexander Brown: first, I'd like to employ you to listen to Tom Myers, the work done by CSA track and all our community groups, that is worth way more than we spend on any of it in support, giving the time to do the work by extending the Vix moratorium. Uh, I also think the program's like rent relief, the solidarity fund, and the basic income pilot are fantastic investments that show great leadership in working support all the people living in the city. I can make more comments about specific items, but public comment doesn't mean much at this point. I would like to point out the value of the city owning and operating properties, not only to provide revenue that can be used to fund other city programs, but it means that we, the people, get to decide what our priorities for land use are, and that means we can do things like the Lot 12 project to create housing that we desperately need for those who have been excluded by the commodified housing market. Also, that's just that's a lot of money. Thanks.

[05:20:08] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Edie kitty.

[05:20:21] Edie Keating: There we go. I want to speak in support of the flexibility and the trust. That is built into the Mountain View solidarity fund. I moved by the responsibility of renters I've heard of, who borrowed to make their red payments. But now, uh, when they are still needing relief, needing relief, they don't owe any money to their landlord. So a program that is only paying landlords doesn't help them. But a more flexible program like the Mountain View Solidarity Fund could help them. So I just feel like the, that program in particular shows a lot of trust in all aspects of our community and is, the ultimate way to fill gaps and should be supported. Thank you.

[05:21:16] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So that concludes public comment. So I'll bring the item back for council deliberation and action. And note that the final consideration and approval of the recommended budget will take place at Council's June 22nd meeting. So does anyone have any comments or emotion? Dice Mayor Ramirez.

[05:21:46] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor, and I'm sorry for taking up a lot of space this evening. Um, but I'll go ahead and move the staff recommendations. Um, reading through the budget. I'm deeply impressed with the city, the community and staff, who have prepared, I think, and provided input on one of the most progressive budgets that I think the city of Mountain View has ever seen, probably any city, uh, in the in the county. Um, I think the ARPA funds are very wisely distributed, um, you know, focusing primarily on COVID response and relief. Um, I really appreciate, uh, the city manager's leadership and, um, helping us find a way to respond, uh, intelligently and quickly to the homeless crisis we're dealing with and the creation of, of new staff positions to help us, uh, respond. I think is, is, uh, it's, just timely and and very well thought out. Um, there are some compromises. You know, I'm not terribly thrilled with deferring the gatekeeper consideration. We've done it for many, many years, but, um, I understand that we have, um, major priorities that we want to address and we just can't spread ourselves too thin. So I'm comfortable with that recommendation. Um, you know, does it have everything I want? No, but I think it's born out of compromise and hard work from this, from this council and from, from staff in the community. So, very proud to, to uh, support it, um, and uh, looking forward to, uh, the, the good work that we're gonna do over the next couple of years. Thank you.

[05:23:31] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Council member, Matt, check.

[05:23:34] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I will 2nd the motion.

[05:23:37] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. So we have a motion by Vice Mayor Ramirez, 2nded by council member Madachek, council member Abbe Koga.

[05:23:45] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, I just want to uh, express my thanks to staff. Um, this is always quite a major effort to get the budget together. Um, it's, as you've seen by the schedule many, many months. Um, we don't, if folks are wondering why we don't have a lot of comments. It's because we've looked at this in parts and together, as a whole, many times, at the council level too. Um, I, I, it, it creates a, it's a budget as a whole. So maybe not everything is exactly the way we all want it, but, um, I think it's a very progressive budget. I appreciate, um, our, uh, our response to COVID and using the funds, the rescue funds, um, to serve to help the, those in need. Um, I will say, you know, I'm always uncomfortable. I've been trained, I guess, to look at, well, even the long term, uh, the structural deficit we see in next year and the year after is of concern to me. I will note, um, but unlike the last recession that I was, um, I was here for in 2009. Um, I think this is a different type of recession. Um, this is really COVID related and seeing how we are rebounded, um, especially notable is our unemployment rate being so at 3.5%. Um, I think this is a different kind of uh, economic downturn. Um, so I'm going to, um, have faith that the economy is gonna, um, rebound more quickly than the last time and, um, you can go with this. But also just in the back of my mind, knowing that if it doesn't rebound, we may have to make some more difficult decisions down the road. But thank you again to staff. Thank you for doing the budget workshop. I hope those the public who participate in that, um, had was able to get a better insight into a very complicated budget. Ours is probably more complicated than most cities. Um, but, uh, it's, uh, it's, uh, I think a well put together budget and I'm very proud of our, our city's, um, financial, um, uh, discipline. Um, I will say with the gatekeeper. I do support this. I really look to staff to tell us what their workload is and what they need. That was why we deferred it back. I can't remember when we did, but we gave them the option to differ. And frankly, you know, philosophically. We have completed the general plan update, all of our precise plans that maybe won. Um, so there really shouldn't be any gatekeepers is how I look at it. Um, we have up zone, the city, most of the city where we said we would. allow redevelopment. So frankly, unless there's tiny projects here and there, um, we shouldn't be seeing major, um, redevelopments in, um, other locations that are not, um, in a precise plan. And so I don't really see the the the news of the need for a gatekeeper. And that was the intent of all of this. So I will support the request to defer. Thank you.

[05:27:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Council member show Walter.

[05:27:08] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, um, in addition to what uh, um, everybody else has said, I wanted to comment on the strategic roadmap. Um, that was a different process than we've done before, um, to essentially do the goal setting for the council. And I'm really happy with uh, 6 priorities that, that, um, we, that have been settled on. And I think that the, you know, the mission statement, the vision statement is, you know, will will serve us well. Um, I did want to check in, however, with the staff to make sure that the list of projects that's listed on the 3rd page of this, it's not really shown in any priority order. Is it? They're just lists that are that relate to the topic. Is that correct? Okay. Because we had never talked about priority, and I thought, if that was implied, we're not quite there yet. But anyway, no, I, um, I really commend, um, the staff for getting this all, uh, sort of summarized and, um, together because it, it, uh, we started out, um, particularly with the descriptions for the vision and, um, the, the descriptions of these, um, uh, categories. We had a really wide ranging conversation. So bringing it all down and uh, into uh, uh, you know, a very, um, clear statement is, is, uh, is to be admired. Thank you.

[05:28:46] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Um, let's see, so we had a motion by the vice mayor, 2nded by Counselor Ramatachek, I believe. I just want to echo my thanks to staff. For me, I'd just like to touch on the community outreach. The, I think the initial slide that showed the timeline of everything that we've done this year, especially in a virtual environment. Um, you know, I really want to applaud staff for the extra lift there. And I think that's why, um, you know, council's putting forward the staff recommendation. So I really wanted to say thank you for that. I also want to thank staff for, um, you know, implementing the, um, equity-based budgeting, and I think, you know, we'll continue to see iterations of that as the budget process continues each year, um, but also want to thank staff for that and pivoting budgets or statements of, of, of, you know, values, and I think we've really risen to the occasion. So just want to wholeheartedly think staff. So we'll turn to city clerk glaze there for the real call vote.

[05:29:51] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Nice meal Ramirez.

[05:29:53] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[05:29:54] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Counselor Mamatachek?

[05:29:56] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes,

[05:29:56] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: council member Abby Koga.

[05:29:58] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi.

[05:29:58] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Hicks.

[05:30:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[05:30:01] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Lieber?

[05:30:02] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[05:30:03] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member, show Walter.

[05:30:05] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes.

[05:30:06] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: And Mayor May.

[05:30:07] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[05:30:08] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Mission Cares?

[05:30:09] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. So, um, that concludes the um, public hearing portion of our meeting, so we'll move on to item 8 council staff and committee reports. Vice Mayor Ramirez.

[05:30:23] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, my first, I do have some comments, but I want to move to continue the meeting past 10 PM.

[05:30:31] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Counselor, I'm at a check.

[05:30:34] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Oh, sorry, I was getting in line, but I'll 2nd time.

[05:30:37] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, thank you. Yes, I think we need to move to continue past 10 PM. Um, and do we need a roll call vote on the city attorney? Yes.

[05:30:46] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, great. City clerk laser.

[05:30:49] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Iceman Ramirez.

[05:30:51] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[05:30:51] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Countsman Romatachek?

[05:30:53] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[05:30:54] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Abbe Koga.

[05:30:55] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I

[05:30:56] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: council member Hicks.

[05:30:57] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[05:30:58] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Lieber?

[05:30:59] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Bye.

[05:31:00] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Council member Shelter?

[05:31:01] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes.

[05:31:02] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: America May?

[05:31:03] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[05:31:04] Interim City Clerk Silvia Vonderlinden: Motion carries?

[05:31:05] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. All right. Nice mayor, back to you, and then we'll go to Council member Madachek.

[05:31:11] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor. We got a lot of public interest tonight in the addiction moratorium, and I think probably most compelling was the, uh, the data that Tom Myers provided about the estimated number of, uh, households who, um, would be jeopardized. Uh, should the eviction moratorium not continue. Uh, so I did want to see if there was interest, interest from the council and directing staff to bring back, uh, in urgency ordinance to extend the eviction protections for a limited period of time in a form recommended by the city attorney. And I think we all recognize that the eviction moratorium will have to expire. Um, and probably sooner rather than later. But I agree very strongly with Mr. Myers that, um, we have a lot of great programming, a lot of funding, that's, um, you know, going to be deployed soon, but we need the time to transfer it to the agencies that we're partnering with, and then additional time still to make sure that those agencies are able to, uh, uh, get the money in the hands of the households who, who, who will need it most. So, um, I'm, uh, confident um, that, uh, city staffs and the, uh, city attorney's office will be able to bring back some, some recommendations for us. Um, but I think it's, it's prudent that we explore this now. Hopefully the state does something. I know the county provided some preliminary direction earlier today, but I just want to make sure that we give our staff the opportunity to evaluate our options. Thank you.

[05:32:56] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. So, um, we have a proposal from the vice mayor, and I think for this city attorney choker. We just need a straw motion, so just a visual hand of, if people are interested.

[05:33:09] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yes, just a show of majority support from the council.

[05:33:13] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. So those who are interested in, um, looking into an eviction moratorium, per the city attorney office. Okay. All right, that will,

[05:33:25] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I kind of had a question about it.

[05:33:26] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Oh, sure. Yes, of course I'm set.

[05:33:28] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I'm just wondering.

[05:33:29] Mayor Ellen Kamei: People have physical hands and zoom hands up. So, yeah. I'd like to take the motion on the floor from the vice mayor 1st. Counsel my my check. ahead.

[05:33:39] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, um, I was just wondering, I don't mean to put the city attorney on the spot here, but, um, if you had any comments you wanted to share on this.

[05:33:48] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Thank you, Council member Mattachek. This is a complex issue and we've been monitoring it closely, uh, as you all know, uh, there, there probably is opportunity for clarification to members of the public. The city actually doesn't have an eviction moratorium ordinance in place now, it would be adopting a new ordinance because the state preempted most cities and counties in California. So, uh, it would, it would be the, the city adopting a new ordinance, and we've been following the situation with the county very closely. They met earlier today, and they directed, um, the board of supervisors directed their staff to bring back options for an extension on the 6th June 22nd board meeting as well. And their direction was, of course, dependent on whether the state extends or not. And also there was considerable uncertainty, how accounting ordinance would be structured. And the long and short of it is, county staff and county council needs more time to develop their recommendation. And, uh, they're also determining whether a county ordinance would apply to just the unincorporated areas or all the cities in California. So tonight, um, if directed by a majority of council, our office could take a similar approach and bring back options with the understanding that our office still needs to analyze aspects of any ordinance, such as, uh, the findings, which are the most important part of any urgency ordinance, and it's the basis upon which the regulation rests. So we would have to very carefully look at how to, how to draft those findings in a focused way, to support the ordinance. And in my preliminary review, we could, it makes most sense to just, for example, model the ordinance after the expiring state law to provide continuity for tenants and landlords, uh, and it could be structured to expire, for example, when the local emergency is lifted or for a limited duration. We haven't had time to analyze that fully. And then, uh, Finally, uh, since the ordinance would be presented for council on June 22nd for consideration, which is before the state's expiration date, and we have a history of the state really waiting till the last minute sometimes, we would draft safety language in the ordinance that the city ordinance either wouldn't take effect, or it would expire if the state or county adopted intervening regulations would cover the city. city. So we have a lot of thinking to do. I think it is, it is possible, but, again, with the caveat that the findings upon which the ordinance is based need to be carefully considered and drafted. And then finally, although tonight's direction requires just a majority of counsel, an urgency ordinance, as you know, requires 5 votes. So that's just something to keep in your mind as if direction is given tonight. The actual ordinance adoption will require uh, 5 votes. Thank you

[05:37:29] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. So, Council member, Labor Councilmer, Shelter, did you have questions?

[05:37:35] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Um, my only question was relative to the city attorney's comments. So what we would be able to get back on the 22nd would be options or something that could actually be enacted?

[05:37:51] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: It would be a, a proposed ordinance with, uh, possibly with options, when I mean options would be, uh, the duration of the ordinance and the structure of it, but it wouldn't be, uh, if Council Tonight directs, uh, an ordinance, then it would be an ordinance with, uh, potential options within the ordinance.

[05:38:16] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay, so we would have something that we could, um, utilize on the on the 22nd.

[05:38:23] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yes, yes. I'm sorry if that was confusing. It would, uh, I was, I'm still reacting to the county's meeting this morning where, uh, Supervisor Submitian made the motion to bring, bring back options. So it would be an ordinance with potential, uh, options within within the ordinance.

[05:38:45] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay, great. And, you know, my concern is just on, on the issue of whether or not uh, county action would cover only the unincorporated areas. I want to make sure that we have the full ability to protect our our folks in Mountain View.

[05:39:03] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yes, and that's certainly something we would look at. I've actually was in touch with county council staff. after the board meeting, and, you know, it's something we would, we would look at. We, we would be very careful as opposed to just, um, hoping we're covered by the county, we would make sure that Mountain View residents and tenants and landlords would be covered by, by our ordinance.

[05:39:33] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. A customer show alter, did you also have a question on this item?

[05:39:38] Councilmember Pat Showalter: No, uh, I I wanted to make a comment after the item.

[05:39:42] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. All right, great. So I'm gonna just lower your hand and I just want to take a, a vote on the vice mayor's motion. So, um, all those, um, in favor of looking into the options for potential eviction moratorium. All right, that looks unanimous. Vice mayor, did you have more that you wanted to report for item 8?

[05:40:09] Vice Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Um, so next action.

[05:40:12] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay, great. And next actually was Counselor Armada check, she had had her hand up prior. So I'll go back to you, Counselor Matachek, and then Council commercial alter, I'll go to you.

[05:40:20] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks. I just said a couple things. Um, I participated in the board meeting of the Silicon Valley Regional Interrockability Authority. Um, it was a fairly short meeting. So nothing to report there. And, um, we had a meeting of the council policy and procedure committee, as well as a meeting of the council transportation committee. Both of them, lots of topics that will be coming to council. Good meeting. Um, and then the last thing is, I don't know if folks are aware of this, but the San Francisco Community Airport Round Table to address airplane noise is considering um, opening up the ability for um, new members. And um, this is uh, quite a change for that round table. And, um, I personally think it would be a good idea for us to explore, um, membership in that round table for many reasons. Um, they're a really good round table that, um, has a lot of uh, topics that educate you on different aspects of airplane noise, new technology that could potentially address it. Um, They also do discuss some flight paths that, um, come close to Mountain View. And if things change, they could, you know, have a negative impact on Mountain View. Um, some already do. And, um, you know, they're at the beginning stages of looking at this, but I think it would be good if we expressed our interest in potentially being a member of that round table. In addition to our membership in the Santa Clara Santa Cruz. Uh, round table. Um, The good thing about their round table is, um, the vast majority of the fees are paid for by, um, the airport and the county of San Francisco. So membership is very cost effective. Um, it's, um, if I read the material, right? $1,500. So, um, at this point, I'm just asking if there's council support to, um, as staff to investigate this, keep on top of it and let us know when it opens up, and also to send a letter of interest to the round table saying that, you know, we're potentially interested. It's not a commitment. It's just, we're potentially interested in this, just so they know, uh, not to forget us.

[05:42:52] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. So shall we just do a raising of of hands, um, to, to, if we're in agreement? Does that work? Okay, great. It looks unanimous. Thank you.

[05:43:05] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: That's it.

[05:43:06] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thanks, Counselor, I'm not a check, Counselor, Show Walter.

[05:43:09] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, um, I'm really glad that uh, we've directed the, the city attorney to work on an eviction moratorium ordinance, but I think that another thing we should do along these lines is some advocacy to the state. Um, I think it would be valuable for us to write uh, letters to um, our assemblymen and senator and the governor, maybe the same letter. Uh, stating, um, our desire to have a moratorium and how important it is to our community members. So I wondered if there was interest in preparing that kind of a letter.

[05:43:47] Mayor Ellen Kamei: So why don't I, um, why don't I give staff the opportunity to answer that council member, show Walter? I'm not sure if they had been thinking about that as well. So, um, city manager McCarthy or city attorney Chopra. there anything you'd want to share on this item?

[05:44:03] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yes, I want to give the city manager opportunity to respond. Also, I do know that there was a, uh, letter by Redwood City, um, into, to that effect, and I, I do think that we, we already have the capacity in the, uh, to, to send such a letter. But I want to, uh, defer to the city manager of, if she has more information on that.

[05:44:30] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Thank you, mayor. And, uh, city attorney, uh, you hit the nail on the head. I think we can absolutely send a letter, it aligns with, um, council's priorities in the action that you just took a few minutes ago. So, I think we can certainly send a letter to the state advocating for extension of the moratorium.

[05:44:48] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Okay. Do you need anything more from council? Tonight, do you need a?

[05:44:53] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I think, okay, I think we've made it clear.

[05:44:55] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. All right, customer sheltered. Did you have anything else?

[05:44:58] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, just 4 more mundane. I, uh, I attended the recycled water committee meeting, um, that's joint with uh, Santa Clara Valley water district and the city of Palo Alto in East Palo Alto. And um, we're continuing to work on um, an advanced purification plant um, that will be built basically at the site of uh, the Palo Alto treatment plant. And in addition to that, the Santa Clara Valley water district is considering building another water purification plant, uh, at the old site of the Los Altos wastewater treatment plant, which is kind of at the intersection of terminal in San Antonio Road. So anyway, I'll keep you posted about that, but the, but the, the real message is that, um, uh, you know, as climate change progressive, it's recognized that we need um, drought proof water supplies. And so there is, there are really, um, uh, You know, we're taking good steps to improve that. And this, in particular, this advanced recycled water, um, uh, treatment plant will uh, upgrade the quality of our recycled water dramatically in a couple of years. So, um, it will be a much better, um, quality product that, um, uh, will be good for, you know, uh, irrigating all sorts of trees, including redwoods and citrus and um, for pretty much any other uses. Then I also, uh, yesterday, um, attended the NoFA meeting, and we learned about a charities housing project on the corner of Shoreline in Montecito, um, and recommended funding it. So it will come to our next meeting for approval. Thank you.

[05:46:49] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Council member Leaver?

[05:46:52] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you so much, Mayor. Um, as uh, council members may know, I I serve on the governing board of the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority. And, um, through that venue, um, we are hoping to promote, um, an emerging package in the state, uh, Senate and will be a trailer bill. Uh, it appears will have money for climate, uh, adaptation, uh, for funding for the SFB restoration, and for coastal restoration, uh, as well through the coastal conservancy. Um, I'd also like to ask that we adopt a position of support on, um, Kevin Mons, uh, AB 897 that um, provides for uh, regional planning for uh, climate adaptation. Um, and then, um, I can forward these requests to uh, staff for our next meeting. Um, but I'd also like to ask that we adopt a position of support on Kevin McCarty's AB 1466 that would, um, uh, deal with the issue of racially restrictive um, covenants on housing. And this is an issue that impacts, um, much of the housing and mountain view that was, um, built during the 1940s. Um, and then lastly, I'd like to ask that, uh, our next meeting that we, um, consider uh, endorsing the uh, seamless transit uh, principles and their project uh, in the Bay Area. And I know that this is something that, um, council member Abbe Kogo's familiar with, uh, through the city's association, and the other venues that, uh, she's a part of. So again, I can forward these requests to staff.

[05:48:56] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So let me just check in with city manager McCarthy. Does it, does it work for council member labor to send you these various items and you can share with council?

[05:49:09] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, mayor does. Council member, Libert, can you repeat the name of the or the number of the bill? You referenced what? Well, I didn't catch all of the AB. All of it? On the budget trailer bill?

[05:49:23] Councilmember Sally Lieber: There isn't a bill number yet. Um, and then Kevin Mullins, AB 897. And Kevin McCarty's AB 1466.

[05:49:38] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Thank you. Yes, staff can look into this. Thank you. Thank you.

[05:49:41] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Reliever. Counselor Robbie Coba.

[05:49:48] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, just wanted to report that I tended the last VTA board meeting last Thursday and, um, it was quite an emotional meeting as we, um, paid tribute to the the lives that, uh, we lost in the tragedy, uh, tragedy a couple of weeks ago. Um, and we also, in honor of them, um, truncated our meeting, but one item that, um, well, there were 2 items, we, the, the board, uh, approved the contract with the new general manager, Caroline Gunneau, who will be starting July 12th, and, um, also, uh, approved the biannual budget, uh, for the 2022, 2324. Um, also wanted to mention this, um, the air district, uh, that I serve on, and I bring this up because I actually received quite a few emails on this Ida, um, issue and a lot of them came from, um, our, our, our community. Um, we are, um, undergoing, uh, review, we had a hearing on a rule. It's rule 65, uh, which would, um, limit the emissions, pollution, and miss PM emissions out of the catalytic, can't say catalytic cracker units. Um, and uh, after gosh, I think we had 5.5 hours of public comment and over 180 folks commenting. It was an 8 hour meeting. We actually ended up having to table the decision, um, still looking for a date, um, for the decision, uh, to continue the item. It probably will be some time in July, but I did get a lot of emails from our residents in Mountain View as well. So I just wanted to um, update folks on where we are with that item. And then also, um, I believe it's AB 1346 by assembly member Berman. Um, the, uh, the banning of gas powered, um, equipment, like leaf, well, blowers, uh, that did, um, move out of the assembly, and it's on to the Senate now. I can't remember if we did a support on a position we did as part of our, maybe as part of the sustainability action plan, but, um, yes, so I just wanted to, uh, let folks know that that's moving along. So hopefully it'll be successful. Thanks.

[05:52:21] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Any other items for item 8? All right. Okay, so, um, I just have 21 is we had our, um, since our last meeting, we had our track, um, monthly JPA meeting. Um, after holding um, check held 4 weeks of mental health awareness events with the last one on the 26th. And then last Tuesday we had our CTC meeting. All right. So, um, that concludes item 8 and we move on to closed session. Um, And city attorney Chopra will make remarks and then the council will welcome public comment on the items listed for closed session. City attorney Chopra.

[05:53:09] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Thank you, Mayor. This is a closed session announcement for tonight. The city council will meet on 2 items in closed session. The 1st is item 10. Conference with labor negotiators, government code section 54957.6 Agency designated representatives, city of Mountain View Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg, Human Resources Director, Sue Rush, and Charles Sakai, Sloan, Sakai, Young, and Long, LLP. Employee Organizations, Service Employees International Union, SCIU, Local 521, the Eagles Association, the Police Officers Association, POA, the International Association of Firefighters, IAFF Local 1965. Unrepresented fire managers, unrepresented police managers, unrepresented department heads and council appointees, unrepresented confidential employees, and unrepresented hourly employees. And the council will also meet on item 10.2 conference with legal council, formally initiated litigation, government code section 54956.9, name of the case, Mario Edgardo Melendez versus City of Mountain View at all. United States District Court, Northern District of California, case number 521 CV 02651 BLF. That is the close session announcement.

[05:54:40] Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So at this time, we'll take public comment on both of those items. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide public comment on either of these 2 items? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star button on your phone, and we'll display the um 2 minute timer. Tim Mackenzie.

[05:55:02] Tim Mackenzie: Hello, um, just want to note the item 10.2. This lawsuit is because of the hiring of a police officer from Sunnyvale, who was who shot someone while on the job, and then MVPD decided that this was the type of person that fit with the police department's culture, um, and then now our city is facing a $10000000 lawsuit because, um, this person, this, uh, officer forcefully pulled someone out of a car.. Um, this, uh, just, I, I want to highlight the fact that this is someone not MVPD thought fit with their culture. So when things are said that Things are better here, um, that the evidence points other directions. Thanks. Hope you have a good session.

[05:49:57] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. So that concludes public comment. So we'll bring it back to council. So we will enter into our closed session and then after closed session, We will um regroup that will come back into the regular session to adjourn for today. So I just wanted to reiterate that for my colleagues as well as the public that we will be back. All right, see you.

[05:50:18] (archive recording) Unknown Speaker: Do you have an approximate time you're going to return?

[05:50:22] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: I do not have an approximate time that we are going to return. We are estimated to be one hour for the 2 items.

[05:50:28] (archive recording) Unknown Speaker: Okay.

[05:50:30] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. All right. So I'll see everyone in closed session.

[05:51:18] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: All right, welcome back. Welcome back everyone. Um, we'll move on to, um, From item 11. Uh, city attorney Chirpa, do we have a closed session report?

[05:51:29] (archive recording) City Attorney Krishan Chopra: There's no close session report tonight, there.

[05:51:32] (archive recording) Mayor Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So this leads us to item 12, which is adjournment. Thanks so much for joining us. And our next regular city council meeting will be on June 22nd, 2021. Until then, stay healthy and the meeting is adjourned at 1142 p.m. Thanks, everyone. Have a good night.

• ← Previous
• Next →