April 12, 2022 Regular Meeting of Mountain View City Council

Video

Transcript

[00:00:29] (archive recording) Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Good evening, everyone, welcome to our study session of April 12, 2022. I am going to read the usual announcement as required. This meeting will be conducted in accordance with California government code section 54953 E as authorized by resolution of the city council. Please contact city.clerk at Mountain View.gov to obtain a copy of the applicable resolution. 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.legisstar.com. youtube.com forward slash Mountain View Gov 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 by visiting mountainview.gov forward slash meeting to enter the Zoom meeting or by phone by dialing 669-9128 and entering webinar ID 843-512-67142. Any emails received by 430 PM today were received directly by the city council. The city clerk will take attendance by roll call.

[00:01:12] Unknown Speaker: House member, I think so. Council member, can I?

[00:01:19] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Here.

[00:01:20] Unknown Speaker: Council member Lieber?

[00:01:21] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Sure.

[00:01:22] Unknown Speaker: Council member Mattachek,

[00:01:23] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Here,

[00:01:24] Unknown Speaker: Council member, Shalter.

[00:01:26] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Here,

[00:01:26] Unknown Speaker: by Spear Hicks,

[00:01:28] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: here.

[00:01:28] Unknown Speaker: Mayor Amirez?

[00:01:30] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[00:01:31] Unknown Speaker: Thank you.

[00:01:33] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. We will now move on to item 3.one, fiscal year 2022 to 23 capital improvement program. The purpose of this study session is to provide the city council and overview of the capital improvement program and obtain city council input to guide staff in the preparation of the recommended fiscal year 2022 to 23 capital improvement program. Assistant public works director and city engineer Ed Orango will present the, uh, will present the memo. Somebody promote him if he hasn't. Been. Welcome, Ed.

[00:02:27] Ed Arango: Thank you. Thank you. Let me share my screen. This is the one. Right, you should be seeing the presentation?

[00:02:44] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Great.

[00:02:45] Ed Arango: Great. Okay, I'll start us off. So thank you, mayor and council members. Um, as I mentioned, I'm Edorango, assistant public works director and city engineer. And I'm also joined tonight by Don Cameron, public works director, and Robert Gonzalez, principal civil engineer. As a mayor mentioned, we're here to provide the city council an overview of the capital improvement program, regularly termed the CIP, and obtain council's input to guide staff in the preparation of the recommended fiscal year, 22 and 23 CIP. For background, the CIP is a biannual planning cycle where every other year is a relook at the entire CIP, and the off years are primarily focused on the 2nd year scheduled projects identified in the previous year's five-year CIP, or what we term rule forward projects for the next fiscal year. This is a roll forward year. And we are evaluating just what's planned for the next fiscal year. During this rule forward year, staff does identify modifications to existing rule forward projects, look at a limited number of new projects and amendments to existing projects. Next year in 2023 will be a relook at the entire program with a new five-year CIP. The CIP has 2 components, nondiscretionary projects, which are focused on annual and periodic maintenance and repairs and discretionary projects that do not meet the nondiscretionary criteria, and require council approval. Currently, there are 329 active projects within both nondiscretionary and discretionary projects. Looking at the 25 year periods over the last 10 years, the average number of new projects each year has grown. Comparing the 25-year periods, the average number of new projects has increased 15% in the 2nd 5-year period, and the total value of project is more than doubled during that same time. Recently, we've refocused and made a concerted effort to reduce the number of new projects, to deliver the existing projects more quickly and better align with staff's capacity. Staff has recognized there's a particular interest by council in the community for bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects. As shown in attachment to the limo. There are 26 active projects currently under development, with bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Here, we're providing a general status summary of those projects and how these projects relate to vision 0 and local road safety plan currently under development. Of the 26 projects, one is complete, 5 will be or have started construction in this calendar year, 18 are in design with an additional 11 starting construction in 2023. Some sample projects include the El Camino RiR repaving project led by Caltrans, that is incorporating 3 new pedestrian crossings, bicycle lanes, high visibility crosswalks, and bulb bouts I select locations. There are 3 traffic signal replacement projects that will provide proven safety measure improvements for reducing conflicts between pedestrian and vehicles. The Miramonte repaving improvements project, integrating class 2 bike lanes, and filling the sidewalk gap. Where, for this Miramonte project, council will be seeing at the next council meeting, additional scope recommendations to provide further enhanced bicycle improvements along their money for use by grand middle school students. And finally, the California complete street pilot project to include a lane reduction, temporary bulldouts, and midlock crossings. In looking how these projects, in looking at how these projects relate to Vision 0 and local road safety plan, we note that 13 projects are located on the high injury network, 15 projects are at locations with known collision history between 2014 and 2019, 20 are applying known proven safety measures for collision type, and 15 of the products are on long school routes. There are 4 remaining projects that are not at these types of locations, as they are focused paving projects, but we will integrate bike and pedestrian improvements with these projects. As we look at the roll forward projects for the 2223 fiscal year, we review funding availability. The CIP uses 5 funding categories outlined here, each with specific parameters, how they may be used. While we did see a decline in funding sources over the last 2 years, some have recovered, including the construction of humane tax, and the development fees and charges fund. Available funding from these categories will be used to fund the roll forward projects, new projects, and amendments to existing projects. For non-discretionary projects, again, these are for annual and periodic maintenance and repairs. There are 25 planned projects with 2 modifications recommended. The annual street maintenance project, and the 4 street maintenance program, and street tree replanting project. Both are recommended for a one time funding increase. For the annual street project. This will add new streets for payment treatment, and for the forestry maintenance project, this will provide added work on Stevens Creek Trail and environmental education programs. On the discretionary project side, there are 3 main components, the role forwards, new projects, and amendments to existing projects. For roll forwards, 17 projects were identified in the fiscal year 2122 five-year CIP. This is last years. Staff evaluated the projects identified, and identified 6 could be deleted. On 5 of these 6 projects, this work is not going away, but in an effort is an effort to add construction phase of the planned project to an existing design phase, be an amendment, rather than creating a new project for the construction phase. The 6th project is for storm during system improvements, is recommended to be deleted, as these improvements can be funded through the nondiscretionary related project. Four projects were identified to be deferred to a future year due to existing high workloads and lack of staffing capacity. This results in 7 roll forward projects. For new projects, while we do try to limit the number of new projects in a roll forward year, these were determined by staff to address immediate needs and could not wait for the next five-year planning cycle, and we were able to identify staffing resources to deliver them. They include a few critical facility projects, grant funded projects, utility improvements, and council director projects such as the biodiversity strategy, which was a council strategic priority. This results in 12 new projects. Lastly, are the project amendments to 31 existing projects. Table 7 in the memo provides a full list of staff recommended amendments for private scope and or funding, including the modifications and reasoning identified for the shoreline boathouse expansive project. After receiving council direction. Staff will present the recommended CIP to the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee in April, the Parks and Recreation Commission in May, and we'll return to city council in June for adoption of the recommended CIP for fiscal year 2022, 23. The council question for tonight. Is, um, does the city council support the fiscal year 2223 CIP project recommendations, including row forwards, modified nondiscretionary and discretionary projects, new projects and amendments to existing projects? That concludes my presentation.

[00:10:09] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Ed. Um, any additional comments from staff? If not, we'll turn to the public for public comment and then come back to the council for council questions and then deliberation. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raised hands button in Zoom, or press star 9 on your phone. A timer will be displayed on the screen. Just get a sense of how many public comments there may be. Please raise your hand if you want to speak on the CIP item. Um, let's go with. more than this. Um, Let's do one minute and 30 seconds. And we'll start with Jesse. Uh, so I don't appear to have the option to unmute. Um, Any clerk or uh, Roger, are you able to unmute speakers? Okay, I just got it. Kathy, start your comment when you're ready.

[00:12:00] Public Speaker: Okay. So thanks for having me. I can talk. Um, So I just, uh, have a question about the Cup on the Green Street's project, 2140, as the... Okay, that policy is written right now. It doesn't trigger the 2% time for this particular project. The council does have the discussion to add an art aspect to this if they want. So, that's, that's a real nice for consider, um, how you could enhance this project with public art, whether it's, you know, painting a rule or something on the side of the, um, protected biker, or, um, are you even cutting in? Or artistic technology is coming another option. Um, if they're, if they're done by a sculptor, they, they suggest this is something that is possible, we could, um, And I think it's really useful. For the show, I have to get together and pick an artist and integrate it into the project, probably within 2 or 3 months. And so it shouldn't do a project if you do decide to go to this route and add a public art aspect. I think it could be important for helping hosts who don't much. We believe they would have a lot of us to go and be more accepting from this project. Um, because it's actually providing something to them too. It's giving them public arts. So they were just taking away anything, um, play planes. So thank you very much. better comment.

[00:13:35] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next speaker is Bruce England.

[00:13:42] Bruce England: Thank you mayor. Um, Bruce England. A member of Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning, and the group submitted a letter, and I believe others will be speaking to it, but I just want to say as an individual, I support the letter. I agree that the entire California Street Complete Streets project should be prioritized and completed at the earliest opportunity. That's the entire project, just the stretch it's being considered right now. Um, I'd like to see what's prior, what is prioritized, taken into account, uh, taking into account what has been defined in Access Mountain View and envision 0 goals. For the annual street maintenance program, I'd like to see bikeway conditions looked at as a separate consideration, separate from the actual vehicle roadway part. Um, given that further changes might occur around parking, I'd like to see the lot 5 parking structure work be deferred until later time. Um, and the Hope Street, the Hope and Villa Street traffic seal installation is new to me, or I had noticed it before, and I'd like to know more about that, and maybe I can find out more offline. But if you're wondering too, I hope you'll ask. And then lastly, how can the public see what the balances are at any point in time for each of the funding sources defined in the memo and what has been or might be earmarked from them? Thanks.

[00:15:01] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Rick Spillane.

[00:15:08] Rick Spillane: Hello? Um, I'm gonna explain. I live in Steel and Estates. I'm uh, I wanted to comment on item number 3.one. Um, Basically, within the state, um, We're planning to, um, add up to 3000 more people in the planning area and actually in tonight's, um, council session, we're going to be discussing, but they'll be studying, uh, hearing staff reports on a planned housing on a potential housing project as well. All these people coming to stealing the states. It's tragic. The Stealing States has no access to Stevens Creek Trail. Um, You have to go basically completely out of our neighborhood all the way down middle field, um, all the way back up, Moffatt. There's no real safe sidewalks to get you there. You have to basically run along the shoulder of busy highways, under bridges until you get there. I would like to ask, uh, council to consider making an access from Steel estates at Terabella Avenue to Stevens Creek Trail. Um, I think it can be done with a tunnel under 85 and then uh, a walking path under the flyovers after that. So I think it's feasible and possible. I'd like to understand. Um, If staff and counsel could consider that. Thank you.

[00:16:37] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Thank you for your comment. The next speaker is Cliff Chambers.

[00:16:46] Cliff Chambers: Hi, Cliff Chambers. I sent in a letter from the Mountain View coalist for Sustainable Planning on California Complete Streets. Um, I was very happy to see that 2 potential alternatives were provided in the response to questions from the council. Um, and I I would really like to see both, uh, the segments from showers to Mariposa, with the Senator Turnlane, and from Mariposa to Shoreline segment, where those meeting and traffic lanes could be reduced from four lanes to two lanes. Both segments would really have significant safety improvements in active transportation instructor, and it would be a really good adequate response to the 2015, um, complete street study. And in June, it'll be 10 years since William Ware was killed on California Street. I also sent in a letter on, uh, and you received many letters on the need for additional pickleball courts. There is definitely a need for eight to 12, uh, new permanent courts, and I was happy to see that we're gonna be, uh, it's gonna go to the Parks and Recreation Commission for new painting new lines. But we really do need to explore alternatives, and I hope staff directs. I mean, uh, council directs staff to add at least six to eight new pickleball courts in the very near future. Thank you very much.

[00:18:18] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next speaker is Albert Jean.

[00:18:25] Albert Jean: Hi there. Yeah, I'm not sure this is exactly the place to say this, but, like, Rick, I have a want that I'd like to voice the council. I live in the Steriling Estates also. And as you know, uh, the former uh, village lakeside is current being built. It's gonna add at least a 1000 people, almost across the street from San Vrone Park. And that's just the 1st of many large projects very close to this park. This park at 2 acres is, believe it or not, the largest park, north of Central Expressway and south of 101 and west, oh, west of 85. And it only has 2 benches in it. Nope, no tables, you know, um, just 2 benches. And so I think it, and a lot of areas are also covered by ivy and not usable. So even though PG&E is building a gas regulator substation there, I still think the park would greatly benefit from a makeover, or redesign to make the space more efficiently used, and able to serve with a huge number of people coming into this immediate area. So I would just like to plant that seed, maybe, you know, maybe that's the thing to suggest that next year is a CIP meeting, but I just like to put that out there. Thank you very much.

[00:19:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next speaker is John.

[00:19:51] John Keane: Uh, hi, yeah, I'm John, John Keane, longtime resident of Mountain View, and an active participant in the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning, and also, uh, I rely on my bicycle for getting around and doing a lot of commuting and just getting around town. So I would like to express my support for the letter that came from Mount View Coalition for Sustainable Planning and authored by Cliff Chambers regarding the California Street improvements for cycling. So, I think, going beyond just a one block pilot segment would be a really good thing, making it a full length corridor, and there were some specific suggestions there, because I often ride along California Street, going to, for example, like the San Antonia Plaza. There's a bunch of good shops there. You know, there's Target and Trader Joe's Whole Foods, but I'm often taking some risk there, riding with the traffic, and it could be much better from a cycling point of view. Um, I guess there's other alternatives. El Camino Royale and Central Expressway, but they're not very good. So California Street would definitely be better. But right now, it needs some improvements. And we've seen some good examples of that. You know, if you go to Palo Alto, Bryant Bicycle Boulevard is a really good way for getting back and forth on that segment of Palo Alto. So I'd really like to see something like that here in Mountain View, California Street, just seems like a good place to do it. So count me in for supporting the memo that you received from MVCSP. Thank you.

[00:21:22] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Be very much. The next speaker is April Webster.

[00:21:31] April Webster: Hi, um, April Webster, I've lived in Mountain View for over 10 years. Uh, I wanted to also voice my support for the MVCSP letter regarding the California Street pilot project. I am super excited about this project to see it moving forward. Um, just a few asks, actually four, one, um, that Cliff brought up and John also mentioned about extending the pilot beyond just a block. I really feel too truly and adequately study, um, and demonstrate the benefits of the complete street proposal. One block just really isn't going to cut it. Particularly if a traffic study needs to be done to evaluate the 85th percentile speed limits. Uh, it's just, one block just won't be enough, I feel. Um, the 2nd is to consider quick build options. These have been used in a number of communities to condense timeline, cut down planning and engineering costs, et cetera. This was done on Casio Street near Graham Middle School. Um, which is wonderful. The 3rd is, um, when doing, uh, to consider reducing car lanes to about 10 to 11 feet during the pilot, pilot. Um, Drivers have been shown to slow down when lanes are narrowed. Um, This would be more indicative of what to expect if a road diet was truly done, especially for the speed limit study. And then finally, I know I'm running out of time. Um, consider green infrastructure for the quick build buffers on the protected bike lanes. This would also have the effect of improving urban design and place making that Jesse...

[00:23:08] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, April. Um, the next speaker is James Kuzmal.

[00:23:15] James Kuszmaul: Hi. Um, Well, I guess on the previous speakers, I also want to um, encourage council to see what we can do to make more effective and urgent use of the the funding and resources we have to quickly implement um, street safety improvements. I really like the suggestion from Cliff in April with regards to California Street. Um, I think there's a good number of other locations, as I outlined in the literacy intent, about just sort of general things we could be trying to do to rapidly make improvements. Um, we currently don't really do quick build anywhere. We have a few things where we've sort of done the physical infrastructure or associate that you might call quick build, but where we went through a large amount of design process to do that rather than just doing it. Um, and in terms of just the resources required to do these sorts of things, I would just note that on the list of discretionary projects that are being added to this CIP, we have a $1000000 being spent to study a new downtown parking garage. If we can afford to spend a $1000000 on that, I think we can find some money and some staff time to at least explore the possibility that not all of our shoe safety improvements need to take multiple years to implement. Thank you.

[00:24:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. The next speaker is John Williams.

[00:24:49] Monica Williams: Hello? Actually, this is Monica Williams. Can you hear me?

[00:24:54] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Get there, you can.

[00:24:56] Monica Williams: Thank you. Um, yes, I'm Monica Williams. I've been resident of Mountain View for 25 years. Um, I should say good evening, Mayor Ramirez and the council members. Um, I'm concerned about the lack of pickable courts in Mountain View. And um, the city has known about the growing needs of pickleball courts for 7 years. Ever since my husband and I introduced it to the senior center in 2015. I'm president of the Palata Pickleboard Club. We have 750 members, about 200 of whom are Mountain View residents, and who, like me, want to play in their own community, Mountain View. So please find a way to do a feasibility study to find a site for permanent pickleball courts in this current CIP cycle. We'd all appreciate that, the 2 courts of the hitting wall were very much appreciated when they were opened a couple of years ago. But they're now insufficient for the number of, massive number of pickleball players that we have. Thank you very much for your time.

[00:26:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you for your comments. Next speaker is Celia Paymer.

[00:26:22] Silja Paymer: Hi. Um, I was just calling or speaking, um, also in support of expanding the, um, California Street project. Um, I literally just drove home on it and from uh, showers to Ortega. I can't even call it a pilot. It's like maybe a teaser. Um, So, uh, it would be really nice to expand it, especially considering it already goes down to one lane effectively at Picquetti, it would make more sense than since that's already going down to one lane to continue that. And then I would love for it to go further east. One thing I haven't heard people mention is that almost all of the summer camps for Mountain View are in Rankstorf Park, the senior center or the team center. Um, and there's not really any way to access that from the east. And also there's not a great way for people in Rankstorf area to access downtown. So that's definitely a channel we need to open up. And since Latham seems to be stagnated, even though everyone would prefer that, California seems our best option. So I hope you will expand that project. Thank you.

[00:27:27] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next speaker is Helen Carroll.

[00:27:35] Helen Carroll: Hello, can you hear me?

[00:27:37] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, we can.

[00:27:39] Helen Carroll: Oh, great. Uh, I'm Helen Carroll, president of the Mountain View Pickleball Club, uh, which began in 2019 when you built the 2 new courts and the temporary court and started with around 8 to 12 people. Now we have every single day, 20 to 40 people, trying to play on the 3 courts that are available from 10 to 2 p.m. And even at night, we have a really enthusiastic group that put up lights and try to trace, uh, play through the night. So like Monica said, there's a real big need for more courts. I think after seeing the neighboring cities of 750 people in that club, we really want to look at that club. So I'm hoping for this year, in the projects, we could look at blended lines on the tennis courts next to the Ranksdorf courts, which is very inexpensive. And then we can look at a facility, perhaps next year, in the, uh, in when we're looking at capital projects at that time. It's a port, it's a sport that supports the seniors of the community. Uh, myself, included, and as an athletic director, in Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee, and out here, I've built tennis courts and many other facilities. And I know I know the work that goes through that. So I'm really hoping that we can do this, get this set up, uh, and have it go forward for Mountain View. I think it will be really great for the seniors and everyone else. Thanks.

[00:29:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Very much. Mean, no other members of the public wishing to speak. We will return to the council for questions. Uh and then once we've asked questions, we will continue with deliberation. But any member of the council like to ask any questions. Council member Abi Koga.

[00:29:42] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you for the presentation, Mr. Orango. That's amazing how many projects we have going on. Um, I did have a question that came up actually as, um, from a, um, member of the public, um, and it's in relation to, um, the study session we have later this evening, but CIP Project 22 dash 30, the Terra Barra Bella bike lane study. Um, where are we on that study? Is it in progress or completed to provide an update?

[00:30:23] Assistant Public Works Director Ed Arango: Um, I'm gonna have Dawn help me with this question. Don, do you remember the status of the study?

[00:30:28] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Thank you, Don Cameron, Public Works director. We have not been able to start that study yet. It is an example of having way too many active projects and not enough staff. So it is on our list to start. I think when I checked in with our project team, We feel we may be able to have a, we expect to have a project manager available later this year or early 2023 to begin that study.

[00:30:57] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, and the other question I had, there was a comment, public comment about, um, I think, uh, speed studies and, um, I, I couldn't find it on the list, but, um, I had been, I have been hearing more, um, through my work at MTC about, um, vision 0, including, um, slowing down speeds, and I think there might be state law that's changed or changing that would allow us to, you know, be able to enforce those speeds better. Is that something that we're looking at or would that have to be a CIP project for, or is it more of a policy project that we could, we would put into our work plan at some point in time.

[00:31:43] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Thank you, council member. So, um, when it comes to speed management, and it is something that's definitely on the list of measures being studied as part of vision 0 and the local road safety plan. There are 2 aspects to it. One is looking at engineering solutions that do help naturally reduce speeds. And that is something that, as we do paving projects and restriping, put in bike lanes, as was mentioned by one member of the public, when you narrow from 12 feet to 11 feet in length with lanes, it does show that people naturally will drive slower, especially when more is happening around them. So, you know, these are part of what part of our strategies as we look at as we make improvements to manage speed. Um, there is, as you said, a new piece of state legislation, which technically doesn't become fully effective to 2024. That, um, I recall reading it. I'd have to go back and check it because I thought, well, really can't implement it to 2024. Um, it still puts limits on how much you can reduce speeds. It's not automatic all over the place. There's criteria you have to apply. But it will give jurisdictions, more flexibility to set, uh, lower speed limits. Um, However, I think you all know, just by spitting up a lower speed limit sign does not by itself slow down traffic. We see that time and again. So as part of any effort besides putting in any design solutions that we can, we also have to work with our police department in terms of their ability to help enforce.

[00:33:26] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So would you... Or, um, Maybe next year, bring this back.

[00:33:36] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: I, I would suggest that, um, as we work to complete the vision 0 and local road safety act, uh, plan, which is going to be happening by this fall, um, that's to be one of the efforts, I think, coming out of that is go ahead now and step back and look at that new piece of legislation, work with our traffic engineering team, to evaluate where we may as a city want to take advantage of it.

[00:34:04] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, great. Thank you very much.

[00:34:09] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next, I'm in public comment mode. Uh, Council member Meta Check.

[00:34:21] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: How much time do I have? Um, a few questions. Let's see, when do we receive the 2nd installment of our ARPA funds and can those be used for CIP projects?

[00:34:41] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Council member Matachek. So the 2nd tranch of ARPA funds is expected. Some point, we're thinking if it's not later this spring, we're thinking summer, early fall, last year we were a little delayed in getting the 1st trunch. We didn't get it until the fall. So we hope that the kinks have been worked out with just the system and the flow of the funding. So we should be getting that. The intention is to bring some recommendations to counsel as part of the recommended budget, but you will actually have time to make your decisions. So the funding does not have to be committed until the end of 2024 and then spent until the end of 2026. So, yes, CIP projects could be a part of that, but they do need to have some sort of nexus to COVID related impacts. Um, and I am working with with staff on that. But we will be bringing this initially for council consideration as part of the recommended budget. And then, of course, get feedback from council members in the community.

[00:35:48] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Great, thank you. Um, And I, you know, I don't know if, uh, this is something you can speak to tonight, but, um, I know where stretched for capacity in public works as well as in other departments. And, um, I am wondering about, you know, when, If, how? Are we doing in terms of increasing capacity, uh, if we want to do more, especially if we wanted to allocate some of the ARPA funds.

[00:36:21] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Great, thank you for that question, Council member Mattachek. So, we are going through the budget development process right now, and I'm working with our finance team and our department heads on the budget request to bring a recommended budget forward to counsel in June. So part of that recommendation is doing a lot of analysis and a deep dive into what some of the needs are in our departments, including public works. Um, you all may have heard me mention before what's, um, really happening with the development review process also. and the positions that were recommended in both public works and community development and IT as part of that review. So I will be bringing recommendations forward to council at that time. I do not believe that we will need to use ARPA funding for those positions. So, um, again, we're we're just formulating that and that that will come to council soon, but, uh, we do have other funding sources that we're going to be able to utilize.

[00:37:21] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. And I noticed on the, um, agenda flow, it actually has another question for us that, uh, hasn't been mentioned until the agenda flow. Are we supposed to talk to that tonight? About 2000000 in reserve?

[00:37:40] Ed Arango: Um, no, um, that should have been taken off of the agenda flow. I had a discussion with the city manager and she pointed out to me other opportunities to meet, um, the reserve need. So it does not need to be at this point a question to city council.

[00:38:00] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Um, great. Thank you.

[00:38:06] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Bye, Mayor Hicks.

[00:38:12] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you, yes, for a great report, Ms. Cameron and Mr. Rando. I have several questions here. Um, let's see, let's start with the, um, one of the new projects is the Lot 5 parking structure, and I'm wondering what deferring it might do in, in terms of, I feel as if we are, um, still discussing how to handle parking, uh, in the downtown, and that there are multiple options. Um, on the other hand, I don't want to defer this project if it were to, um, if it were to slow up the affordable housing project on Lot 12, but I would, uh, be interested in deferring it if starting it now kind of restricts our options. I'll give you one example. I saw a Google, uh, uh, parking structure that had micro units clad on the outside. I also think that there are other ways that we could handle parking downtown, including, I know the old Mountain View parking committee, is suggesting time limited parking on the streets, which I think could add a lot of parking. So I think there are multiple ways of handling parking in the downtown, and I don't want to get too deeply into this project before we've explored some of the available options. So I'm wondering what deferring it would do in particular to the Lot 12 project.

[00:39:54] Dawn Cameron: Thank you, Vice Mayor. So, um, the direction to proceed with the lot five parking structure, as you may know, was given by council last August. And at the time, staff was even asked, how soon could you get started on pulmonary concept development? And we said we had hoped, by early 2022, if we had staffing available, we did not, and we're now seeing that we could have a project manager available, um, at the early part of next fiscal year, and which is why we waited till now to ask for it to be added to the CIP instead of a mid-year CIP. Um, the question of deferring it is, it, well, obviously it's up to counsel discretion on that. We will note that when the downtown parking strategy was brought to council, that was after the direction for the parking structure, and was was built upon an assumption that that parking structure would be also in place, because it will primarily replace the 120 parking spaces, we're going to lose shortly on Lot 12. As well as we have another potential development coming in that is going to buy into the parking structure. because they're not going to provide any on-site parking. And we are, there are particularly potentially other parking impacts that we're going to see. So this lot was primarily going to replace parking that's going to be lost. And it wouldn't necessarily add that much more parking, and was seen as a way to keep us at sort of a net parking level for the most part. Um, deferring it. Could mean that we're, you know, downtown, could be parking challenged for a lot longer period. This is not a fast project to deliver. It will take a year to develop concepts and alternatives, and once, you know, there is direction and approval of what the alternative might be, then design is a 2 to 2.5 year process and then construction.

[00:41:59] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, well, that answers that question. We can we can ponder it a little more. Um, okay, now, another question I have is, could you give me a little more information on the Wisman Sports Center, HVAC? Is that all electric or what's the nature of that?

[00:42:20] Ed Arango: I take this one down.

[00:42:21] Dawn Cameron: Yes, I'll go ahead and take that one, because it's facility related.

[00:42:24] Ed Arango: Yes. Yes. Oh, and go ahead.

[00:42:28] Dawn Cameron: The, um, the Women's Sports Center, actually, there's two, um, gym facility projects that we're identifying here that the, um, HVAC system is at the end of its useful life, um, for both systems, and, um, among other facility improvements that are needed, such as the roof and other elements at both facilities. And the intent is to replace stage faces and within all electric HVAC system. Okay, I would like to add on a note, though, that we have a funding partner in this. The school district is responsible for half the cost at the Wisman Sports Center, and we know converting to all electrical cost more. So we're having discussions with them now about this is one of the city's goals is to convert to all electric and asking them to continue to provide for half of that cost. So we're working towards that.

[00:43:19] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, great. Well, that's that's the answer I wanted to hear. Um, then, uh, the Hope and Villa Street Traffic Signal is a roll forward project. Is that changed at all? The need for that because of the closed, um, three blocks of the downtown or not? I'm having trouble figuring how that fits into the whole that changes since the pandemic.

[00:43:48] Ed Arango: Yeah, the Hope and Villa signal project really stems from the Lot 4 and 8 development project. This is the Robert Green Company donor, where they're taking away the parking for lots 4 and 8. Um, so that development project triggered the need, um, with, we're doing a shared approach for that intersection where the, the development does need to put in a traffic signal for that, and it is anticipated that that'll happen this next fiscal year, and that funding's in place for that purpose.

[00:44:19] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, so you don't feel that the closure of the 1st 3 blocks change that is what I'm hearing.

[00:44:24] Ed Arango: Correct.

[00:44:26] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Good. And then, I'm interested in the, the, a whole bundle of issues around uh, California Street. Um, there are people have asked council people, asked several questions about how to expand that, and there were several options that, uh, staff gave. And then, uh, members of the public has have also talked about quick build options. Um, and, uh, I'm wondering whether you have a preferred option and whether a quick build option, would, you know, starting with the one block, but quick build for the rest of them, whether that would be an option that would be workable as well. So thank you.

[00:45:14] Dawn Cameron: So, I think, first, we, there are a variety of different understandings of what quick build is. And the way we're working towards quick build is when we're doing a temporary installation, a pilot installation. We will use those kinds of treatments that can be delivered when you construct them. They can be structed pretty quickly. It is paint on the ground, it's bullards that can be installed. It's not the more permanent improvements. And there are advantages with that kind of quick build approach because, as been said, it allows you to test out, you know, your layout, how is it working? How has it been received? And eventually, if you want to keep it over the longer term, you go in with more permanent installations that can also further improve safety after you make adjustments. The California Street project is, it is a quick build project in terms of the treatment it is going to use when it goes under construction. Now, I know we hear a lot of comments about quick build means less engineering costs. less design costs. You get out and take care, you know, and it's something you should be able to just get out there and just try and see what happens. Staff strongly recommend, and the process we've been using for all these projects is you still need to do proper design and traffic engineering considerations. Before you go and lay out the quick build project. If you do not do so, you can unintentionally create conflicts at driveways and intersections that can create other hazards and and, you know, and lead to collisions. So, for instance, the, um, the Castro Street in front of Grand Middle School was kind of references a quick build, and it does use very, a lot of quick build type treatments, but it was fully designed and vetted, because we want to ensure the safety of everybody on that street, including the students, for what's built. So that is, that is what's planned for the pilot project is a quick build type treatment. However, we 1st go through design. The other piece, as we pointed out in our Q and A, is this is a public works project subject to public contracts code, our own city codes, and we know the construction cost is going to cost over 100,000. Therefore, we still have to go through the formal bidding process where council approves the plans and specs. We bid it, we advertise it, and then we award a construction contract. So we still have all of that, leading up to, and then construction goes really fast, because it's a quick build.

[00:48:06] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So I guess what I'm hearing is that the proposal for California Street uses what you would say are quick build materials and can be improved on, hopefully, in the future with some of the things that members of the public have mentioned, um, some of the things like more green infrastructure or integration with artwork, um, but that for now, it is quick build to kind of see how it works out.

[00:48:30] Dawn Cameron: That is correct. And, in fact, I would not recommend trying to put in something more permanent, like green infrastructure, because if something's not quite working and we have to move it, we don't want to have to rip up any of that and have to reinstall it, that's more for the permanent installation.

[00:48:47] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you.

[00:48:50] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Sounds the number show, Walter.

[00:48:55] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Now, I just want to follow up on the, um, questions that a number of people, um, uh, ask about pickleball. I know it was answered in the council questions, but just so it can be, um, shared with the public here could, could, could staff, um, respond to the question about where we are in the process of, um, uh, bringing more pickleball courts into Mountain View, both, uh, as shared facilities, with tennis courts, and perhaps finding some, um, dedicated courts in the not too distant future.

[00:49:30] Dawn Cameron: I think for this one, we would ask, um, direct, uh, community services director, John Marchant, to help provide the response.

[00:49:38] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Is there a waiver that the moderator can promote him? I don't see him in the list last he's been moved over. There he is. There he is.

[00:49:59] John Marchant: Good evening, council member show Walter. Thank you for the question regarding pickleball. The recreation division has been going through a process to gather information through a community survey, uh, to learn more from both the pickleball community and the tennis community about adding blended lines to existing tennis court facilities. We plan on bringing some recommendations to both the tennis advisory board and the Parks and Recreation Commission over the next 2 months. And then based on their recommendations, be able to, um, look at expanding pickleball within Mountain View, utilizing blended lines at certain locations and certain tennis courts. So we are prepared to bring forward some recommendations to both of those advisory bodies. Uh, get some input. additional public input through that process. And then shortly after the, um, the recommendations are heard, uh, city staff can work pretty quickly to add blended lines as, uh, as we determine what is best for the community at this point, and that can be done at a pretty low cost. Therefore, we haven't asked for capital dollars for the capital improvement project to date. Um, we do understand that there is a desire for more standalone um, pickleball courts within Mountain View. In order to accomplish that, we do need to look at that more holistically, as we just responded to in the council question is, we think that there would be, it would be appropriate to bring on a consultant, to look at a feasibility study, to determine best locations, make sure that it is, what locations are most appropriate for those types of facilities that are existing park locations, and working with Dawn and my staff. Uh, we believe that, um, the capacity to add this additional project for the next fiscal year, um, would really strain our resources. Don doesn't have the appropriate staff to support the project at this time. So we are recommending to look at bringing this as part of the five-year CIP next year and being able to look at that feasibility study and look at additional courts for standalone courts. However, in the meantime, we are looking to create some opportunities to expand pickleball courts through the blended line program at, um, certain locations, um, that we will bring again forward to the tennis advisory board and the Parks and Recreation Commission over the next 2 months.

[00:52:26] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, and I, that's great. And I'm sure that you have a list of people you reach out to for these various meetings. I would imagine that people who testified are on the list, but, uh, if they're not, how how do people get on your list for, um, for being notified about the, uh, parks and rec media and the tennis advisory board meetings?

[00:52:48] John Marchant: They can go ahead and just send an email to the recreation division, um, and that's, uh, recreation at mountainview.gov, and they can request to be added to, to the pickleball list to be, um, to reach additional communication from us as available.

[00:53:07] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, that sounds great. Thank you.

[00:53:12] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Any other questions from the council? I've got a couple. Um, 1st for you, John, thank you for joining us. Um, we received a couple of comments um, about, uh, the residential development in the Terabella area and the eventual need for land acquisition for parks. Um, and, uh, no, there's not a lot of money for that planning area right now, but we're anticipating a pretty substantial sum of money, I think, from Sarasri just relatively soon. And I'm, uh, curious to better understand if there's anything to counsel can or should do, um, to key up, uh, the potential acquisition of land for a park, uh, in that, in that area. Uh, so is there any direction that we should consider providing in this meeting, what, what are good opportunities to talk about acquisition in Terabella?

[00:54:13] John Marchant: Thank you for the question, Mayor Ramirez, and I'm going to ask Don Cameron to jump into this question as well. She and I have had discussions related to opportunities in that area. Um, And I think as of now, there's no requested action on the part of council. Um, however, give us some time to continue. identifying possible locations, and I think Don can speak to another study that is being looked at in that area.

[00:54:44] Dawn Cameron: Thank you. So a couple things. One is, it is true that the city does own land, which is being used for the recycling center as part of our 0 waste and solid waste program. Council had previously directed staff to do a feasibility study for a park at that location, and it's in the 5 year CIP to do a feasibility study in about 2 years, is when we'll have the resources to do that. Um, I will say, and I think we've said this before, as staff, we do have concerns about it as a location for a park, given it's right at the intersection of 2 major freeways and all the other issues that you face when you're right up against a freeway. Um, other opportunities are that we want to continue to work with community development, and look at the overall, you know, eventually if council and city is taking on a precise plan for Terabella, that would be the best opportunity to identify where a part could be most advantageously located, to serve the current and future community, as well as to create the opportunity for assembling land. And and providing incentives to get that parkland in place. So, um, nothing tonight for the council to do. But we'll go ahead and plant that seed is, in order to really get parkland that is going to be useful for the community, it has to be part of a larger planning effort.

[00:56:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I don't disagree with you, but if the council chooses not to prioritize a terabella precise plan for, you know, an additional couple of cycles because there are many other things that we're doing. Um, I, I, I feel like, We, we risk losing out on some nearer term opportunities, since we know that there are property owners in the area, who had been interested in housing development. So that's not gonna happen. Maybe they would consider selling to the city. Uh, so is, is staff, even now, uh, in anticipation of the funding from Saras Regis, um, uh, looking at potential strategic acquisitions since park development can take quite some time.

[00:57:02] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: We try to always continue to look for strategic acquisitions, and we can, and when we do know we have quite a bit of money available and we can follow up on when that money's gonna be available, we have been known even to send out mailers to all the property owners to see if we can find willing sellers in certain areas. And if that is, you know, in general, the direction we're getting from council, we can, we can be more proactive in trying to seek out willing sellers in the Terabella area.

[00:57:40] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: That's great. Thank you. Um, and then, uh, I think this was also a part of the discussion from the Saras Regis project, but I can't remember the conclusion. Um, Is there any direction we could provide to explore the feasibility of connection, uh, from Terabella to Stevens Creek Trail?

[00:58:04] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: We would recommend that that be considered as part of the 5 year CIP next spring. I'm sure you can imagine that that is not a small project. It's a very significant project, and we would suggest that, and it would have to start with a feasibility study. And we would have to look at it in terms of all the other priorities, uh, related to buy compared improvements and connectivity. But it is something that we could put on the list for review as part of the 5 years CIP and bring it forward to council then.

[00:58:41] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, great. would be tremendous. Um, Council number. Go get this for a 2nd round of question.

[00:58:47] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Eric. Actually, I just wanted to add to your line of questioning. Sorry, my internet might not be stable, but, um, I was actually walking the neighborhood today and there was, there was a house for sale there. Um, so I was gonna send, um, the, my address to staff, but, you know, that's one thing is we, I know there's this issue of housing and open space, but, um, we have done that. So if there's property that is for sale and there are, I think there are a few, I'd like to ask staff to look at. Look at those. Thanks.

[00:59:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Any other questions from the council before we proceed with the question staff has asked. If not, um, what I'm going to suggest is what we've been doing with other study sessions. Um, if you have, so we'll start with the base line, which is the staff recommended set of items. Um, if there are, uh, amendments or, um, if anything you want to postpone, remove, or add, I'll collect the list, and then once everyone has, uh, share their recommendations, we'll go through and take, uh, straw, straw motions or straw polls for, for each of them. Um, so, anyone like to, on to the staff question. Bisoner Hicks.

[01:00:22] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Well, I generally support, uh, the staff recommendations, I guess my, um, my additions will be, uh, will be uh, to expand the cali- look at ways to expand the California street, quick build beyond one block. Um, to I also support the the options for Parkland and connections to the Stevens Creek Trail in Terabella, although it seems like that's not for this session. So I'm not gonna raise that for this session, but for the next five years, unless another council person wants to say, they've found a way to put it on for this session. Um, I would, uh, defer the Lot 5 parking structure to see if we can figure out parking in some other way, and I would also, um... You know, my understanding is that the, uh, blended pickleball solution would, uh, would be, um, something that we can do without putting it on the list here. Uh, I would like to add benches to that, but I think that's not a part of the CIP and something that we don't vote on. You know, I'd like to bring on a consultant as early as possible to explore more pickleball courts. And that's all I have.

[01:01:59] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Vice mayor, just to confirm, expanding the California Street, complete streets project, and then defer the Lot 5 parking structure. Was there a formal recommendation for the council to consider related to pickleball or?

[01:02:15] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Bring on a consultant to get to start studying that as soon as possible.

[01:02:22] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, and then for my benefit from staff, is that, is that a CIP request or is that outside of the scope of the study session?

[01:02:33] Community Services Director John Marchant: It would be a CIP request and public works would have to identify a project manager to to lead that feasibility study.

[01:02:44] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Fantastic. Thank you. Anyone else like to make recommendations. Councilman reliever.

[01:02:54] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. Uh, well, I am very much in support of um, increasing the, the California Street, uh, bicycle infrastructure. And, um, that I'm hearing staff's, uh, input that, you know, the parking structure process is a very lengthy one. And, um, the dependencies coming from that. So, so I'm okay with entering that process. I, I do have, um, a request that when we look at the equity statements that are, um, coming forward as a part of this, if we, um, include access for our community members with disabilities. And, um, when we're talking about, um, recreational infrastructure and, um, uh, projects, you know, that we include, um, children with disabilities and, um, and their needs. So projects like magical bridge, and, um, uh, play infrastructure that, um, can be used by a wide variety of children. Um, So those are my, my, my requests for that, that we, that we take the equity lens a little bit broader to make sure that we're covering all of our community members' needs in Mountain View. Thank you.

[01:04:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Count the number, Abby COVID.

[01:04:30] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. Um, I do support a status recommendation and in regards to the California Street project, um, which I appreciate that it's actually back on the list. I think Mayor and I talked about that because it had been taken off for a while. Um, I would support, um, the expansion of, and doing both one and 2 in the, um, it's, I think it's pay item 5, question 5, So showers to Mariposa both ways. Um, and then, um, In terms of pickleball, I guess I had thought that we were already the, the plan that Mr. Marchant laid out had included the project manager, but if that's not the case, I would support adding that. Um, And I think that was it. Thank you.

[01:05:28] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member, Matt Chak.

[01:05:32] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Um, so in general, I do support status recommendations. Um, I really appreciated, um, the breakout of the bike head projects so we could see those all together. And I appreciated the additional funds for street maintenance. I think that benefits more than um, just vehicles. riding a bike on a really bumpy road is not fun. Um, and I also appreciate the work on the Stevens Creek Trail. That sounds really good. Um, and while I feel like it's always tempting to tinker with uh, the list, I do have reservations about doing that because, um, I am, you know, um, very aware of the challenges we have with capacity. And I am concerned that, uh, tinkering with the list might have some unintended consequences of pushing something out that is really important to us. So while, um, I am supportive of expanding, I would consider it the pilot for California Street, I'm not interested in taking any shortcuts, um, in terms of, uh, the engineering, the design, and especially the public outreach. I think that's really important. Um, and so if there's a way to expand the pilot, uh, without cutting corners, I'm fine with that, as long as we have staff capacity to do that. Um, I guess, yeah, my concern is that, you know, the more we add, the more it might halt projects that are in the works or push them out, and churning of projects, I think, is not a good way to approach this. I would rather start a project and get it done, start projects and get them done. Um, I am supportive of, again, if it doesn't uh, throw a wrench in things, um, a project manager to look at the pickleball. And I'm very supportive of figuring out additional park space, not just in the Strolling Estates area, but throughout the city. Um, but I was going to comment on parks when we get to the uh, Other topic on our agenda tonight. So I'll hold my comments on that one. Um. Let's see, and I think that's it. Thanks.

[01:08:07] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. and I see your hand up, Don. Go ahead.

[01:08:11] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Thank you. I would just like to clarify on the pickleball. First off, uh, what the director Marchant was mentioning is that the blended lines is something that he and his team can pursue. Uh, you know, after they work through the process of ensuring support for. So that could give near term options for additional pickleball courts. Uh, what he was referring to is in terms of a brand new dedic- you know, dedicated courts. Uh, we would need to do a feasibility study. We were suggesting we could look at how to put that into our work plan in terms of staffing resources as part of next spring's five-year CIP. It could start the following fiscal year, the feasibility study. If, if counsel is saying that they are interested in the feasibility study beginning this current fiscal year, the fiscal year we're about to go into, uh, we, when I said we would need to identify a project manager, I wasn't talking about hiring a new staff person or anything, what we would do is look at our capacity among our project managers and engineers and see if later, you know, mid-fall, something like that, enough projects are kind of moving along that we could freeze somebody up to go ahead and start the consultant selection process and get the project going. So I just wanted to provide clarity. So if council does direct, they want to see that feasibility study started, then the next fiscal year, it is something we would look at adding ACIP before you approve it in June. And and we would look for the, you know, move things around as needed to provide the project manager capacity.

[01:09:53] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. That's a helpful clarification. Council member show, Walter.

[01:10:02] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Thank you. First, I want to just, um, make a shout out generally to, uh, public works, and all the incredible amount of effort, well, and also community services, all an incredible amount of effort that these lists involve. I mean, this is just a tremendous amount of work. And, um, behind this, and we know this is only kind of the carry forward. There's a lot going on that's not on these lists. So, um, I just want to mention that we, we really do, uh, appreciate all this effort, and, um, it makes such an incredible difference in the quality of our city. And we all, you know, we all benefit from it. So thank you. First of all, then getting to the questions. Um, I, uh, yeah, if you can fit in the pickleball, getting the pickleball started in the next year. I think that's a great idea, but I was really pleased to hear that we're making great progress on, um, uh, figuring out where we can reline some of, um, our existing, uh, tennis courts so that they can be used for both. And, um, I know that there are always some governance issues, associated with this kind of shared use, but that's why, um, it's gonna be discussed by the tennis advisory board, and the, um, Parks and Rec board, and I'm sure they'll come up with, uh, you know, rules that make it work for everybody. Um, I, too, think, increasing the California Street by the project is a great idea. I like the suggestions that are in the council question for both showers to Mariposa and Mariposa to Shoreline. But at the same time, you know, I really, um, uh, I think that council member Amatek said it quite clearly, we don't want there to be any shortcuts for safety. So this is something that, um, I really trust staff to, in a sense, make the best decision about, um, you know, how to go forward with this. And if it's possible to do those other segments, after you've looked at it again and staff resources, let's do it. If it doesn't look reasonable, then, you know, I certainly trust you to make that decision, then it's not reasonable at this time. Um, Then, uh, I think the idea of our equity lens, including access for people with disabilities, is, you know, a good addition. I also wanted to bring up the idea of including public art in the complete streets as a concept. I think it really fits quite well. Um, And, uh, Then in terms of deferring lot five. Um, it seems like, it sounds like this is gonna be a very long process anyway. And so the discussion related to the downtown parking will already be available by the time the design is finished. So it can be incorporated, you know, that way. So I don't think that needs to be deferred. I think keeping going with it is a good idea. So, is that everything?

[01:13:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Well, I, so I'm collecting the recommendations, and then we're gonna go back and do some quick straw motions based on...

[01:13:25] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, thank you.

[01:13:26] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member Kime.

[01:13:29] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Um, so I think, and I'll just wait until the straw motions, I think, to, you know, take all those items one by one, but, um, I just, I think kind of my, my comments are really appreciate the way this CIP update was, um, put together by staff. It was really clear. We can cross-reference. It was, it was, you know, I really appreciated the refresher because some things, we've approved a long time ago and council needs to shock their memory. Um, and I do want to commend the equity lens. I think this is the 1st staff report where I'm seeing the equity lens highlighted, and I know that this passed unanimously just last year, and um, the city and council has been doing the budgeting 101 workshops. Now we're adopting the equity lens as part of the REI action plan. And I think there's ways to make it even more inclusive as some of my colleagues brought up. And I think that that's really great. And I would say, um, you know, I want to make these comments because I think this is a really great model for how we're, how council is presented, um, this in the future. So other staff reports that would include an equity lens. I think, um, staff has really laid a really great framework, um, with which to build a pond. And so just really wanted to highlight that. Um, and and thank staff. And it was also, um, I think helpful where staff called out a few certain projects that, um, actually would even benefit, um, And so I think that it was not just, you know, there's no negative impact, but they, these are the, you know, XYZ projects that would would benefit the community, um, particularly our, our most disadvantaged, um, residents. And I thought that was the whole point of why we talked about putting forward the equity lens. So thank you very much. Um, I do, um, agree with some colleagues who have talked about wanting to see projects through all the way. And so some of the projects we're talking about beginning, you know, when we 1st started on council, some of us start on council in 2019. And I do feel hesitant to add, tweak, augment anything. Um, one, because of staff capacity, 2 to see things through, right? I think um, it's difficult to give feedback on something while they're still in progress. I'd rather see some of them kind of be completed and then be able to give feedback rather than providing feedback. It feels a little bit like cart before the horse for me and I really want more, more data and more information. Um, so that's uh, why I didn't kind of put anything forward and staff as usual is really forward thinking. It sounds like a lot of the emails we've gotten about some of the concerns related to the CIP staff is already addressing. Um, so just want to say thanks. All right, turn it to you, Mayor, so we can hear the different straw poles. Thank you.

[01:16:21] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I'm going to take a quick turn and then we'll go to, um, see you by Snare. Uh, so echoing with council member come A, uh, council member shovel for another, have said, uh, tremendous work. This is uh, a remarkable schedule, a lot of really important and uh, um, I think responsive projects. We've heard a lot over the past couple of weeks, especially, um, related to bicycle pedestrian safety. Um, I think we're doing uh, great work and, uh, as much as I support expediting that work, um, you know, I think we have to also recognize that, um, there's a lot in the pipeline and not a lot of staff capacity or resources to deliver everything. Um, but having said that, I will be also supporting, um, the, um, expansion of the California Street project, uh, as described in, um, the responses provided by staff to the council, um, in advance in the meeting, and, and the, for a couple of reasons. First, I I've always been a little nervous about the pilot as proposed. I feel like we risk getting kind of the worst of all worlds where if you just have one block, it's not going to be sufficiently safe for people, I think, to ride their bikes, they're not usually just traversing that block. They're going down. I do, right? I go down almost the entire corridor every time I I go down California Street. Um, so I, I feel like it's not sufficiently protect, protective to get people, you know, on their bikes, and, you know, it's, it'll serve us sort of a pinch point because it's between, you know, segments with more lanes, and so I worry that, we'll hear from motorists who are trying to get through, and express concern about that pinch point, and we won't have the full benefit of, uh, the full complete streets project. So I, I appreciate staff offering those options, and I'm happy to support them. Um, and then I'll, I will also be supporting the uh, pickleball item as well. Um, Visner Hicks, did you want to add anything before we start the straw hold?

[01:18:19] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: I just wanted to clarify one of the comments that I made. Um, when I was talking about, uh, deferring, uh, the Lot 5 parking garage, uh, my thoughts are just that, uh, because expanding the California Street bike lane, and because the pickleball carts seem to have been, um, recently rising priorities, I would let that... I would let staff, uh, if it, uh, freeze up staff capacity, I would allow the Lot 5 to kind of, float down the list and allow the pickleball in the California street to float up the list. I don't know whether that really adds staff capacity. Maybe it's entirely different kinds of staff working on those two different things, but if that is helpful, that's how I personally would arrange the list. Thank you.

[01:19:13] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Just for my benefit, Vice Mayor, did you still want to retain that as an item for counsel to, uh, provide input on or is that?

[01:19:22] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Sure. Yeah, you can say it as allow lot 5 to float down the wrist if the list if that provides more staff capacity to do the additional items that we're putting on the that we're putting on the list. Yes, you can phrase it that way. Thanks.

[01:19:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, no problem. Council member Metachek.

[01:19:42] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: It's just real quick. So, um, for me, the audio, when Mr. Cupp was speaking, was really poor. Um, and so I did hear adding public art to something, but I didn't hear what. And I just want to clarify, was that, as you just said, Mayor, um, the... Oh, no, no, actually, sorry, it was Council member Michelle Walter, was it the complete streets? It wasn't a specific project? It was... the, um, like, the program of complete streets.

[01:20:14] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I happened to know the answer to this because he and I were just talking about this. So, um, this was primarily in response to the California Street uh, pilot project. Um, he participated in the, um, ride with staff. I think a few weeks back. Um, I wasn't able to go, so he'd still be in and he told me, um, he felt that a public art component might help increase public support for the pilot program. So, I think he would probably not oppose a flying K5 to all complete streets project. But his comment, at least, as related to me, was nearly scoped to California Street.

[01:20:51] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Great. Thanks for the clarification.

[01:20:54] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: No problem. Any final thoughts, recommendations? Um, bison or hicks?

[01:21:03] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, now that does leave me with an additional question. I mean, I do support, uh, adding public art to, uh, to bicom pedestrian and other public space projects, but I don't know, beyond general support. I don't know, and possibly may or you know, from talking to this particular member of the public. Uh, possibly you know, is there a way on this CIP, or is there a list of projects, or is this just something in general? Now council has brought it up? Some, uh, members of council seem supportive, and we can continue to talk about it when we talk about other projects. So there a specific way to fit it in here? Because if there is, I would do that.

[01:21:48] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: So, my understanding and staff, please correct me if I'm wrong. Counsel policy case 5 allows counsel the discretion to apply, um, a public art component to projects, there's a list that's sort of, you know, explicitly included, and then other projects as counsel sees fit. Um, California Street, Complete Street, is not included in that white list. So the council would have to affirmatively direct staff to include a public art component. That was my understanding, but if, please staff, let me know if I'm wrong.

[01:22:23] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Thank you, mayor. That is correct in terms of the revisions out to policy K 5 that were recently approved by council. is that counsel did retain the discretion to direct staff, to include public art component in projects that would not otherwise qualify. I do want to just caution again here is, you know, what we've been hearing is deliver this project as quickly as possible, make it a quick build. The public art strategy process takes time. So, um, you know, you may want to consider that in terms of the pilot project. Now, when it's time to come forward with more of the permanent improvements, which is going to be, you know, a longer term project, you know, that's where you may want to consider public art, but adding it to this would slow down the project.

[01:23:15] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes, so I'm not going to add it now. Thank you for the clarification, but I, I, I am supportive, highly supportive at some point, but not adding. Thank you.

[01:23:24] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Oh. Thank you. Council member, Shelter.

[01:23:31] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, I was just gonna say, I, I thought, in my head, it was related to the permanent, uh, complete streets, and that's when it seems appropriate, so I, I, I definitely concur with that. Thank you.

[01:23:47] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: And counsel member, Lieber.

[01:23:49] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. Um, I just wanted to confirm, my staff, if my understanding of things is right. Um, so, the entire, um, uh, pickleball, uh, issue, uh, the shared use side of it will go to the tennis advisory. And I don't know if there's any pickleball members of that board, or if we need to broaden it out to be a racket sports board. But then the, the, the broader, um, pickleball question, including, um, the, the shared court space issue would go to Parks and Recreation Commission. And that would be in June. Is that I'm understanding that correctly?

[01:24:51] Community Services Director John Marchant: Council member Lieber, are you able to hear me?

[01:24:53] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Yes, I am.

[01:24:54] Community Services Director John Marchant: All right, thank you. This is John Marchant Community Services Director. Um, and if I can um, reiterate your question, and that is, what is the timeline for this to come back to the Parks and Recreation Commission?

[01:25:07] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Yes.

[01:25:08] Community Services Director John Marchant: And that is going to be June 22nd.

[01:25:13] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay. Great. Um, so I, I think I'm, I'm interested in having a, a consultant on the, the issue of having more, more supply and and where it is throughout the city. Uh, because I think our our demographics are shifting and the popularity of pickleball is really shifting. Um, but I want to make sure that we, uh, really, uh, honor the efforts of the people who have committed to being on the tennis advisory um, board over time. Um, as well as as Parks and Rec. And then, um, I want to make sure that as we're considering, uh, additional courts or any paving of of open space. Um, that we, um, we have the adequate amount of time to really consider where to place that. Um, I know that a few years back, um, there was, uh, some additional recreational opportunities that were suggested for Rainstorf Park, and it was very difficult, um, and nuanced conversation about, um, putting those additional opportunities in, in there. So, I just want to make sure that we have, um, adequate time and that, that we respect everybody's, um, efforts in that, um, obviously, we've gotten a lot of, um, pickleball related, uh, email messages. And, um, I want to see if we can make sure that the clubs, um, in Mountain View, as well as Palo Alto. And, um, you know, the, the surrounding area, that they're informed about the, the opportunities for them to, um, speak out so that they don't just concentrate on counsel and miss, um, the advisory bodies, uh, as well, because I, I think it's, um, it's good for them to, uh, also voice that they're, because the advisory bodies, I know, are taken very seriously by counsel. Thank you.

[01:27:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Any final comments or recommendations? If not, here's the order I'll propose. We'll 1st do baseline SAP recommendation, and then we'll go through each of the recommendations. There are going to be 3 separate votes related to California Street, the 2 segments that, staff that proposed for the expansion, and then the consideration of applying council policy K 5, uh, public art to, um, the permanent project. And then we'll do um pickleball and the equity runs. So 1st um, let's raise hands if uh, you support the staff recommendation. 345 that's unanimous. Thank you. and then, um, 1st uh, recommendation, uh, is, uh, expanding the California street, uh, quick build project to, so remember, 2 separate segments, showers to Mariposa, as described by staff, and the recommendations of their support for that. One, two, three, four, five. So that's unanimous as well. And then Mariposa to shoreline, is there support for that, that segment? And that is also unanimous. And then applying the public art component or council policy K5 to the permanent California street complete streets project, is there support for that? And that is also unanimous. Um, the, uh, pickleball, uh, Project manager or consultant for a feasibility study is described by staff, is there support for that? 234 by 6. also unanimous. And then the last is, um, expanding the equity lens to include access for, uh, individuals with disabilities, so that would be part of the formal evaluation used by staff or, um, public works projects, and then also recreational for, for folks with disabilities too, for support for that. Two, three, four, five, six. That's also unanimous. Did I miss anything?

[01:30:06] Unknown Speaker: Yeah.

[01:30:08] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Is that clear? Okay, fantastic. Thank you very much for your work on this. Um, let's go through the regular session until, um, public comment and then we'll take a quick break and then we'll proceed with the, um, remaining items. Is that everyone comfortable with that? Fantastic. Thank you. So now we will move to the regular session. Um, and I'll make the usual announcement. Uh good evening everyone. Welcome to the meeting of the city council of April 12, 2022. This meeting will be conducted in accordance with Cal, the California government code section 54953 E as authorized by resolution of the city council. Please contact city. clerk at mountain view.gov to obtain a copy of the applicable resolution. 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 meeting live may do so at mountain view.legistar.com. youtube.com forward slash Mountain View Gov 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 by visiting mountain view.gov forward slash meeting to enter the Zoom webinar or by phone by dialing 669-9009128 and entering webinar ID 843-512-67142. Any emails received by 430 PM today. Today were received directly by the city council. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. City clerk will take attendance by roll call.

[01:32:04] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilman for Abby Coco?

[01:32:06] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Here,

[01:32:06] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilman Recome,

[01:32:08] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: here.

[01:32:09] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Lieber.

[01:32:10] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Here.

[01:32:11] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Mattachek,

[01:32:12] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: here,

[01:32:13] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member, Shell Walter,

[01:32:15] Councilmember Pat Showalter: here,

[01:32:15] City Clerk Heather Glaser: by Slayer Hicks,

[01:32:17] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: here,

[01:32:17] City Clerk Heather Glaser: may I Ramirez?

[01:32:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[01:32:20] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Thank you.

[01:32:22] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Now, we will now move on to item 3.one, uh, national volunteer appreciation week proclamation. Spanish translation services are available for this item. We will now hear from our interpreter.

[01:32:38] Unknown Speaker: Esta tarde tendremos interpretación en Español, disponible, sigalas indicación se la pantaye, un para tenere interpretación, y selecione el idio más, pa. Selecione el idión, my Español. Gracias.

[01:32:58] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Please note, this is a presentation only. The city council will not take any action. Public comment will occur after the presentation item. We are happy to be joined this evening by community volunteer Paula Perez, who will accept this proclamation. Palo Perez has been an active member of the Spanish speaking community for over a decade, actively volunteering and local schools. She has been an invaluable part of the city of Mountain View Ambassadors program for the last 5 years. During the COVID pandemic, She was one of the pillars that helped the Spanish speaking community navigate very difficult situations, bringing them timely information and accompaniments. Furthermore, Powell was pivotal in communicating the services of the eviction health center in our community, helping build trust, and the rent release services, doing outreach, making referrals, and volunteering at the center on a regular basis. The proclamation reads, whereas, throughout Mountain View's history, residents have dedicated time to service to the act of looking out for one another, to improve our community, and to make our city a better place to live, and whereas volunteering increases self-confidence, makes a difference in the community, provides social opportunities, and a space to learn new skills, increase connections between members of our community, and whereas volunteers in Mountain View step up to meet the needs of the community, including mentoring our children, feeding our hungry, comforting our lonely, beautifying our green spaces, and supporting our charitable organizations, and whereas the spirit of volunteerism grows stronger in the realm of unprecedented challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. And whereas the city of Mountain View wishes to recognize and thank the individuals and organizations that have volunteered their time at our library, Deer Hollow Farm, Ringstorf House, the Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, Senior Center, and Team Center, as well as programs such as junior leaders, trail ambassadors, special events, and the community emergency response team over the past year. And whereas national volunteer week is a 48 year national tradition designated throughout our nation for the purpose of recognizing and honoring those individuals who give of themselves and to promote and encourage a sense of giving and service by all citizens. Now, therefore, I, Lucas Ramirez, mayor of the city of Mountain View, along with my colleagues on the city council, do hereby proclaim April 17th through 23rd, 2022 as National Volunteer Week. Ms Perez, would you like to say a few words?

[01:35:41] Paula Perez: Yes, please. Bueno, noche, respectable, miembros del consejo. Mi nombres, paola Perez, es un monor para mire severe la proclamación de la semana nacionalia gradicimiento los voluntarios. Montevio es una ciudad, marabillosa, y con una red amplia de voluntarios compromitidos, y solidarios and diversas arias. Todos supportandos u distressas, y sus fortalesas, para crear el bienestar como. For taliciendo la unidad, communitaria, especialmente en tiempos dificiles comoros questamos viviendo, actua mente. Es muy satisfactorio e inspirador que la labor de todos y todas las voluntarias. Ser reconose y se valora a trabez de esta proclamación. Muchas, gracias, en nombre de todas y todos voluntarios de mountain view. Por esta grand reconosimiento. Gracias. Good evening, respectable members of the council. My name is Paula Perez. It is an honor for me to receive the national volunteer appreciation week proclamation. Mountain View is a wonderfully diverse city with a wide network of committed and supportive volunteers in various areas. All of them contribute their skills and strengths for the commonwealth being, strengthening community ties, not only in normal times, but especially in difficult times, like the ones we are currently experiencing. It is very satisfying and inspiring that the work of each and every volunteer is recognized and valued through this proclamation. Thank you very much on behalf of all Mountain View volunteers for this great recognition. Thank you.

[01:37:40] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Would any member of the council like to say a few words? Bye, Snur Hicks.

[01:37:48] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Well, I just wanted to give Paula a personal congratulations for all the awards she's winning lately. I've known Paula since her children and mine went to Castra's school together, so again, congratulations.

[01:38:03] Paula Perez: Thank you.

[01:38:05] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Any other comments from the council? If not, I will go ahead and 2nd that, um, you are a tremendous community leader and partner and we're very grateful for all of the work that you do for the city. Uh, we will now take public comment for the presentation item. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on the presentation item listed on the agenda? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone. A timer will be displayed on the screen. I've not seen any members of the public wishing to speak. So um, we will return to the council. Thank you, Father, for joining us, uh, and for accepting the proclamation. We're very grateful. Thank you so much Have a good night. Now, I would like to make an announcement about agenda item 8.2 commercial development at 590 Castro Street. This agenda item will not be heard or discussed this evening and will be continued to the city council meeting of May 24th, 2022. Public comment will not be taken on this item tonight. Uh, so for members of the public who are here for the, uh, office project proposed by Sobrado on Castro Street. Um, there will not be an opportunity for public comment. Uh, we will not be hearing that presentation tonight. It has been uh postponed until May 24th. We'll now move to the consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the council wishes to remove an item for discussion, with any member of the council like to poll an item. By SmartKace.

[01:39:57] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: I would like to, um, pull 4.5, which is, uh, regarding historic preservation and 4.7 regarding, uh, fire department fleet replacement. Thank you.

[01:40:18] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member Medachek.

[01:40:21] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I also wanted to pull 4.5. Thanks.

[01:40:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Any other members of the council who would like to pull an item? If not, um, we will, uh, proceed to, um, public comment. So, um, since items 4.5 historic preservation and 4.7 uh, regarding the replacement of the fire fleet, have been polled, will take public comment for those items separately. So would any member of the public like to speak on any consent calendar item that is not 4.5 historic preservation or 4.7 fire sleep. Being no members of the public, public wishing to speak on, uh, uh, Bruce England. Uh, let's uh do 2 minutes.

[01:41:15] Bruce England: I won't even need that, mayor. Thank you. Um, yes, I just want to comment on 4.9. This is the accept public improvements for a particular project. I've actually commented on this before. I don't think that you get enough information about these projects. They're basically tables that list what the improvements are, but no details that enable you to really accept those. And also for members of the public. We can't see what those improvements actually are. I would encourage you to ask for more details in those reports. I realize that's not going to affect your accepting the public improvements on this one tonight. Um, but in the future would be great. You could see more details than the public could as well. Thank you.

[01:41:58] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Um, Luis Katz.

[01:42:08] Louise Katz: Thank you. This is regarding a 4.5, the historic preservation. Am I in the right place, sir?

[01:42:15] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I'm sorry to interrupt. So 4.5 has been pulled, so we're going to hear it separately and there will be enough opportunity for that.

[01:42:21] Louise Katz: Okay, thank you. That's what I thought. I came in late. Thank you.

[01:42:24] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: No worries. Um, see no other members of the public wishing to speak on the balance of the consent calendar will return to the council for a motion, and um, the resolution titles are in the agenda flow. Emotion is in order. Council membership Walter.

[01:42:53] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um, just a 2nd. Let me pull up all the things to read, but, um, I I move the, uh, the remainder of the consent calendar. And, um, that includes 4.2, adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, authorizing and continuing virtual meetings of city council, committees, boards, and commissions, pursuant to AB 361, and making required findings to be read entitled only further reading waived. 4.3. Adopt an ordinance of the city council of the city of Mountain View, amending chapter 36 zoning of the city code to establish procedures and standards related to dual urban opportunity, DUO developments, and urban lot splits in compliance with Senate Bill 9, and to make other minor amendments relative to inactive permit applications, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and adopt an ordinance of the city of Mountain View repealing Mountain View City Code chapter 28 subdiv In its entirety, and replacing it with a new chapter 28, of the Mountain View City code to reorganize and renumber the chapter, and to include procedures and standards related to urban lots bullets in compliance with Senate Bill 9 to be read entitled only for the reading waived. And then 4.10, Adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, amending the master fee schedule to change fees for electric vehicle chargers, to be read entitled only, for the reading waived.

[01:44:29] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much, Council member Medachek.

[01:44:31] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Second that.

[01:44:34] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Any questions, comments? If not, I'll ask the city clerk to start the roll call vote.

[01:44:44] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member shelter?

[01:44:46] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes,

[01:44:47] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Matachek?

[01:44:49] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[01:44:50] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Abby Hoga?

[01:44:52] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi.

[01:44:52] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Kame?

[01:44:54] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[01:44:54] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Lieber?

[01:44:56] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[01:44:57] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Nice Mayor Hicks.

[01:44:58] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:44:58] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Ramirez.

[01:45:00] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah.

[01:45:01] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Motion care is unanimously.

[01:45:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Fantastic. Thank you. So now we will move on to item 4.5 regarding historic preservation. Um, let's do it this way. Let's take questions from the council first. Then we'll go to the public for comment and then we'll return for deliberation. Um any questions from the council? Not seen any, so we'll go to. The public. Now is the opportunity for members of the public to speak regarding 4.5 historic preservation. Uh, let's go ahead and yeah, still 2 minutes. Thank you. Um Robert Cox was the 1st speaker.

[01:45:45] Robert Cox: Can you hear me?

[01:45:48] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, we can. Yes, we can hear you.

[01:45:52] Robert Cox: Okay. Thank you. I'm Robert Cox from the steering committee of Livable Mountain View. We support staff's plan for a comprehensive update of our city's historic ordinance and registry, but we believe that qualifying key historic buildings for the state registry must and can be done urgently. At the May 5th EPC meeting, staff's consultant identified 8 buildings in the downtown historic district 8, they believe, were qualified for historic status. Since the list was not included in the memo submitted by the consultant, the EPC asked which buildings they were, and planner Eric Anderson responded by naming 11, such buildings identified by the consultant. Two of the buildings, the Wildheimer House, and Tidehouse on Bella Street, are already qualified for the state and his federal historic registers. I know that because I was in our livable Mountain View group that hired the attorney and submitted the evidence for the qualification in Sacramento, and I was at the current hearing. I'm not here to quibble about whether it should be eight buildings or 10 buildings, or even all the buildings, and District H, which are on the register. Our local register, but I want to just state that this small number of key historic buildings in district gate should be qualified for a state registry as soon as possible. It's not a huge amount of work nor need to involve a lot of staff time. If a consultant with the right expertise and tractor is selected, like the one we used. I'm perfectly all right with the laying staff's proposed ordinance, and registry up to date, as welcome as it is, until the qualification of these historic buildings is completed. Please act on this ball we have time. Our district H buildings deserve the protection of state, registered qualification. They are the heart and soul of our downtown. And I'll let Louise talk about why this has to be done urgently. Thank you.

[01:47:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next speaker is Mary.

[01:47:52] Mary Hodder: Hi, this is Mary Hodter, thanks for giving me a 2nd to talk about the historic, um, uh, proposal. I want a 2nd what Robert has said, and I'm a member of Livable Mountain View, and I also submitted, or signed the letter that we submitted, but I wanted to share one piece of information. When livable Mountain View, went through the process of working on the historic preservation for, uh, what we know as Tide House, or the Airbase Laundry, and Wildheimer House, or Shea TJ, um, that process took a year, maybe a year and a half because of the way that the state operates in terms of getting historic status. So I really want to encourage you to take the interim step of putting 8 or 10 buildings that are not yet on the historic register into process now without having to make the entire list and the entire overhaul of the ordinance. Because that is such a long lead time. Um, in the meantime, we can also concurrently do the other historic work, it's necessary. It's important. I really appreciate that you're taking it up. But, um, getting a consultant to just do the 10 buildings, um, or 8 buildings that we are considering um, 1st or that we think ought to be considered 1st. Um, would be a short-term kind of a, uh, in a smaller scope of work that would get them into that year and a half process. Um, and I don't want to lose the opportunity to do that. uh, by waiting for the, the larger scope, because, um, at any time the state could pass a law, and historic buildings would be, um, you know, the list could be, um, limited, and we wouldn't have completed that process for those key buildings that need this, this interim work. So I really just want to encourage you to focus on that as well as the other larger project. Thank you.

[01:50:02] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mary. Um, and I know, uh, Luis, Cass, you had your hand up, it's not up anymore, so just wanted to invite you to speak, um, if you would like to. Uh, the next speaker is April Webster.

[01:50:16] April Webster: Hi, I wasn't actually planning to speak on this topic, but I heard a pop up. Um, and I wanted to echo my support for this. Getting on a state registry provides a lot of, it provides additional protection for historic buildings. It also opens up the option for applying for different types of funding for improvements. Um, I just finished spending a year, Um, fighting to save a historic train station house in my hometown in Canada. Um, and we struggled with getting, it's still not on any sort of registry. But there was local protection, uh, identifying it as a historic site. That was overturned by the current council, um, however, if it had been earlier protected, um, as, um, in one of these, you know, the provincial or, um, federal registries. Um, we wouldn't have necessarily had to go through the fight that we did to save the building. So, um, I just wanted to echo how important it is to get it on these registries. Thanks

[01:51:24] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Um, last call, uh, Luis, were you still interested in speaking on this item? I don't see your hand up? Okay, I, Popped up for a 2nd. I'm just going to allow you to talk. Louise Cat.

[01:51:42] Louise Katz: Thank you. I sorry, I don't know. I had to raise hand, but it didn't seem to work. So, thank you, counsel and mayor. I wanted to address this historical question. Um, SB 50 was intended to restrict any sort of historic preservation only to buildings which were already on state and federal registers, basically, to try to solve one problem they were creating another, because then, basically, we would have no history going forward. Anything would be cut off from preservation, if it wasn't already there on the day that this law passed. The law didn't pass, but we should not assume, or believe, or have any doubt, that it will not, it will not reappear in some iteration. That is, again, why it's necessary to move forward as quickly as possible to preserve our downtown buildings. Also, just as a note, if the state approves the state historic registry status for a building, it automatically goes to the federal board for consideration. So these are not two separate acts and responsibilities of the city. The point is also is that when the Pacific Railroad gave us our beautiful, unique buildings when the railroad came through and vitalized Mountain View in the 1860s. It also made us our beautiful downtown vulnerable, because the railroad that allowed Mountain View to grow in the 20, now in the 20 and 21st century is what threatens its existence, because of its status of being buildings that are close to transit. So, I would urge the city to the council to please move forward, prioritize the downtown buildings, and then work on the ordinance if staff cannot believe that it is not possible to do both in parallel projects. Thank you.

[01:53:40] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Any other speakers regarding the historic preservation item? If not, we'll return to the council for deliberation and emotion. Vice Mary Hicks.

[01:53:59] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Basically, what I'm hearing from uh, members of Livable Mountain View and uh, various members of the public is that the, uh, downtown buildings, that I believe it would be the 11 buildings that Eric Anderson, uh, named minus the 2 that are already uh, designated as historic uh, state historic buildings. So I guess that's nine. Um, are a priority over building scattered all throughout the city. And, you know, I agree with that. I think the downtown is kind of the heart and soul is what of the city it kind of gives, um, it's kind of like our front facade, and, um, gives our city kind of an image to, uh, to visitors and residents alike. It also, uh, helps visibly tell, we've been talking about public art. It is, architecture is public art, and it kind of visibly tells the story of the immigrants that have come and built this city. We've been a diverse city for, you know, over 150 years. And these are the physical remnants of, you know, kind of telling the story of how this city was built. So, I do support, and I could tell a bunch of stories now, but I won't. Um, so I do support prioritizing those buildings above buildings scattered throughout the whole city to, um, uh, to do those downtown buildings 1st and to hire a consultant to do that.

[01:55:31] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you. Council member of Medicya.

[01:55:37] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks very much. Um, I have, uh, similar thoughts as council member Hicks. Um, and I believe it's actually 8 buildings. There were 10 originally, I went back and listened to Mr. Anderson, and I think he listed 10 and 2 of them have already been taken care of, thanks to livable Mountain View. Um, and so there's 8 left. And, um, I do feel a great sense of urgency around this given what happens at the state level. And I would hate to have the state do something that would have a negative impact on our historic buildings. And since we know that these 8 are important, um, I think it's a great suggestion that we heard from, uh, the public about, uh, switching the order and doing the 8, uh, buildings 1st and then update the ordinance. Um, so I would absolutely support um, council member Hicks's suggestion.

[01:56:34] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you Council member Lieber.

[01:56:39] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. I am also very interested in um, preserving the importance of the downtown buildings that are such a critical part of the, the fabric of our history. Um, and and it's not that I want, um, the historical resources that are in other parts of the city to, um, uh, take a back seat, but I, I do think that our downtown is changing so rapidly, um, that if we, if we lose one of these critical, um, assets, and, interiors that have been untouched over time, um, have been really dramatically changed in just the last, uh, year and a half to 2 years. And, um, so I want to make sure that we do everything in our power to, um, really have have a high level of protection, uh, for the, the fabric in the streetscape of, of the city. Thank you.

[01:57:53] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, a quick question for staff. Um, if, I think, it's pretty clear that council's interested in exploring a livable mountain view's request, um, if, if we were to do that, uh, what would be the best way to provide that direction?

[01:58:11] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Um, I think it would be good if the council could say that they would like to prioritize the 8 buildings. Um, uh, looking at state slash national, um, register listing for them, and to prioritize them, um, over the other two pieces, which is the citywide survey and the ordinance. That will give us the priority order, and then, um, you know, there might be some work that could be done alongside if there is, if there's time. Um, it will add about 9 months to the process. Um, and, um, it will add, um, I'm estimating, because I don't have, um, all the information I need, but it costs up to about, um, 14,000 per property, to prepare the paperwork, and then there will be additional, um, potentially cost for the consultant to attend any meetings, um, as well as, uh, meetings at the, um, the, the state commission that accepts these nominations and makes the, does the review. So I'm ballparking about $100,000 more, but it's not clear. Um, you know, we haven't confirmed the number. But a council could maybe authorize up to an additional 100,000. That gives us some leeway to move forward. And then we would come back if there's a change, but not if there isn't, a change to that contract. amount. So again, to confirm, um, adding those 8 properties, um, state and national, um, register, um, listing, um, prioritizing them, and um, uh, authorizing up to an additional 100,000. For the project as well as the city manager to sign the contract.

[02:00:06] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thats helpful. Council number command.

[02:00:09] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thanks, Mayor. That was gonna be my question. So I'm really glad you asked it. Um, and I, you know, just, I'll just state, I'm comfortable with, I guess, the, the, kind of shifting that would need to happen to make sure that that these are added. So I know that, um, Vice Mayor Hicks and Council Mayor Matachek are the ones that pulled it, so I'll let them make the, you know, motion if they'd like, but, um, I do support the direction this is going in and, um, I'm comfortable with, I guess, the, uh, components that Mr. Vostova said are necessary to do this. Thanks.

[02:00:47] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Council member, show Walter.

[02:00:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Just basically, ditto, what, um, uh, former mayor Kame said, and and everyone else. I think that, um, we all do really treasure our downtown, and, um, want it to be preserved, and, uh, getting things on the register is, um, you know, an unpleasant task. But it's probably best done by our consultants, and so this seems like an appropriate time to make that change. Thank you.

[02:01:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Bye, Snur Hicks.

[02:01:29] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Gosh, so I was gonna make a motion to, um, prioritize the 8 buildings for state national designation above the other parts of the project. uh, authorized up to $100,000 for the project, although I, I have to say, and speaking with, uh, people from Liverpool Mountain View, who did it before, they said it took 5,000 per building several years ago. So I'm hoping, although we authorize that, that we will not be spending that. Um, and but authorize up to $100,000, and also authorize the city manager to sign off, tinker with those words, if you'd like.

[02:02:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: And then, uh, council member of Metachek, is that a second?

[02:02:14] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: It is.

[02:02:15] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you. We'll go to interim city attorney Quinn.

[02:02:22] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: I just thought that...

[02:02:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay.

[02:02:25] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: I thought that perhaps, um, Miss Shrivastova could clarify what, where the $100,000 would go. There's 3 recommendations in the staff report, and the 3rd one has to do with the amount of the contract, and I was wondering, just for clarification's sake. If the $100,000 should be added to that amount or somewhere else in the recommendation.

[02:02:46] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Yeah, so, um, it would be added to recommendation one, which would be approving the major capital improvement project, um, and transferring and appropriating 530,000 instead of the 430. Um, it would be, um, adding to the scope of work. Um, um, uh, the, the, uh, preparing the paperwork to nominate 8 buildings in the downtown. Um, to the state slash national registers, and then adding authorizing the city manager to execute the service contract, in an amount not to exceed $455,385.

[02:03:34] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Any other questions or comments from the council? Or clarifications from staff, by Snare Hicks.

[02:03:43] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So, did you want me, um, uh, interim city attorney Quinn, to change the wording or is the wording I used for the motion fine?

[02:03:54] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: The wording that you used is fine. I just wanted to make sure that we're accurately tracking it and following through. I think the intent of your emotion and your motion was to do just that. We're just clarifying what the dollar amounts would be.

[02:04:07] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes, it was.

[02:04:07] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: Okay. Thank you.

[02:04:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. If there are no other questions or comments, I'll ask the city clerks to start the roll call.

[02:04:19] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Bye, Mayor Hicks.

[02:04:23] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[02:04:25] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Transmember Metachek?

[02:04:27] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[02:04:28] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Cancer number Abby Kuller?

[02:04:30] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi,

[02:04:31] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Kamei?

[02:04:32] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[02:04:33] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Kim's member Lieber.

[02:04:34] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[02:04:35] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member, sure, Walter.

[02:04:37] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes?

[02:04:37] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Ramirez?

[02:04:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah.

[02:04:40] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Motion carries unanimously.

[02:04:44] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Great, thank you very much. So we'll move on to 4.7 regarding the replacement of the fire fleet. Um, questions from the council before we go to public comments. Not seeing any questions from the council, so we'll proceed to public comment. Uh, any member. Uh, Let's start with Bruce England.

[02:05:14] Bruce England: Thank you, Mayor. Yes, very briefly on 4.7 We just like to request that all the replacement vehicles be electric, not gas powered. Thank you.

[02:05:27] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. See, no other members of the public will return to the council for deliberation and a motion. Can we remove the timer, please, if that's okay. Thank you very much. Um, would any member of the council like to speak? Bye, smearhead.

[02:05:46] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Well, I would love for them to all be electric, but I'm not sure if we can go for that at this, right at this moment, but I'm just hoping to add, uh, um, what I understand from reading the staff report is that we would be authorizing, um, looking into the next fleet and then purchasing it, I would also like a consideration of, um, any more sustainable measures, from what I've seen, some cities are buying one or two tests, uh, hybrid, electric, plug in hybrid, electric, uh, fire vehicles or smaller emergency vehicles that allow smaller roads, and that are safer for bikes and pedestrians. So I'm just hoping that we can explore that while we're exploring the purchase of the new fleet. I will let other council members make other comments. Thank you.

[02:06:46] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member show, Walter.

[02:06:49] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, along those lines. Um, we are, uh, you know, trying to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions dramatically, and we're, I mean, we're working very hard on that. And we're making progress, and one of the things that, um, has a big carbon footprint is large trucks, like fire trucks. So I think as part of, you know, walking the walk of things we are asking other people to do, we need to, um, also look into the, you know, the what's the best we can do at the moment with existing technology. And so that's really what we're, you know, we're asking to be considered. And also, um, if there is technology that is sort of on the cusp of being available, like, five years down the road, um, is there some way to defer some, or would it be wise to defer some of this, uh, expenditure, um, so that that could be taken into account? And I, personally, think this, I know this is a very complicated subject, and, um, I think it's the kind of thing that we can, um, uh, delegate to our city manager and chief sustainability officer, sustainability staff, and fire staff, to all work on together for the, you know, the best, um, outcome for, um, for the city. Thank you very much.

[02:08:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member of Bikoga.

[02:08:22] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. So, I appreciate the comments about sustainability. Obviously, I'm supportive of that, but, um, the challenge right now is that technology is not there yet, and from what I read, um, the, if we were to go electric, we would have to have backup generators, which are diesel run. Um, so it doesn't really um, solve the problem. So, um, I understand, and I think, you know, there's definitely, um, interest and talk about, um, trying to, um, to push the industry to, um, come up with police, even police cars and fire engines that can last, you know, the duration that is needed for the them to provide the service that our city requires. So, um, I would like to, you know, move forward with this fleet replacement project, CIP project. Um, I was around when we brought in the current fleet fleet back in 2009, and I remember it, it just, it takes a very long time for, um, the department, um, firefighters and our, and, um, staff to come up with all of the specs for, and then the build of an entire fleet takes quite a bit of time. And so I, you know, feel very strongly that we should replace start the replacement on our regular 15 year schedule. But, you know, certainly on the side, we should be looking at what new technologies come forward. Um, I would point to also the Bakmed, the Bay Area air quality management district that I serve on. We actually have a grant program for, um, agencies to, um, apply to, um, for funding to, uh, replace fleet. And part of that. Um, I've heard some, um, East Bay cities actually have, I think, purchase police cars. Um, I haven't heard of anyone doing fire engines yet, but, um, there is this program that we could look at accessing if we need funding for it, but, you know, I would do that on a separate track and move forward with this fleet replacement. So, if it's okay, with counseling automatic, I'd like to go ahead and make the motion to move item 4.7. Thank you.

[02:10:46] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member about it, John.

[02:10:50] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Yeah, so I'll 2nd that motion. But, um, I feel like the police department has already done what has been suggested tonight, looking at the options and concluded that what's in the uh, recommendation is the best option for now. Um, and so I am prepared to move forward with it. Thanks

[02:11:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. We have a motion in a 2nd for the staff recommendation. Council member labor.

[02:11:16] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. Um, well, I am, I'm very supportive of the environmental goals that have been mentioned, um, by council. I do have a concern that in an increasing number of instances, we are sending our vehicles and staff out large distances to fight, um, urban, or, you know, suburban wildlife, wildfire, um, areas that are very separate from our community. And um, we also know that a major earthquake is, um, likely in the future, uh, for the San Francisco Bay Area. And, um, I just, in this very specialized instance, I want to have, uh, the most robust, flexible, uh, equipment that we can possibly have, um, for the the community. Um, and so I want to kind of, um, defer to our, our fire chief and our fire staff, uh, for what, what is the strongest option that we can, um, possibly have for this very, um, highly specialized need, and, and knowing that at certain times, where, um, required an increasing way to go hundreds of miles, um, away from our community to, uh, provide mutual aid to other departments, um, so that's where I'm at on this particular item. Thank you.

[02:12:56] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member committee.

[02:12:58] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Um, so I will be supporting the motion um, by council member, Abi Coca and council member, Mattachek. Um, I feel like Mountain View, we are always looking at being the most, you know, making the right decisions, trying to be as sustainable as possible, and I know that if it was possible, we would. I would say that we've seen a lot more opportunities to, I would call, green our fleet, um, with, um, our vehicles that we have, like, our maintenance vehicles. I just saw some today that are hybrid. And I know we have some electric vehicles. And I think that's where maybe we could, um, focus our efforts and, and move the needle there, that, like as, um, Cosmo Rabe Cooka mentioned, the technologies is more kind of in the smaller vehicles. And, um, I would say, um, you know, appreciate the, the thoughts and the idea here, um, but I would say kind of working to green our fleet, um, is something that I've seen in Santa Clara County and other municipalities I used to work for. And I think that's where we should focus our effort. I also wanted, you know, to take the opportunity to thank our fire department, who has been going above and beyond during the COVID 19 pandemic to provide, you know, in-home vaccinations, um, working 247, and I believe that this is, you know, the request is something that council should fully and wholeheartedly support. Thanks.

[02:14:29] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Bye, Mary.

[02:14:31] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So, with that, I, I brought this up in part to uh, highlight the, um, increasing sustainability of, of the fleet, and perhaps I should have started. I wish I'd started by, um, in council questions, uh, because I see Chief Diaz here asking what, you know, what had been under consideration already. Um, I will be supporting the motion on the table now, but I did want to have a little bit of a dialogue, and I want to continue to have a dialogue on, um, you know, on making this move as as soon as possible. And I am starting to read about other cities, LA, Rancho Cucamonga, Baltimore, and San Francisco. And I'm sure there are others. Um, starting to get a hybrid, uh, hybrid fire trucks, and smaller emergency vehicles. So I wanted to start that conversation, and, um, I will trust that we have started that conversation, and we'll continue it. Thank you.

[02:15:34] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Any, uh, council member, Che, Walter?

[02:15:41] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I mean, I just wanted to say, too, that um, this doesn't come before us very often. We don't get to talk about it. And, um, so I think the the point that, um, that all of us are trying to make is that, um, when the technology is ready for, um, us to do this job well with, um, more sustainable, um, uh, equipment, we're interested in that. And if it's not now, well, then let's keep on the... keep on the lookout for it. And when it is available, take advantage of it. But, um, uh, it doesn't work if, if, if, uh, you know, if the technology isn't available. And as council member Abi Koga brought up, it's, you know, there's multiple parts to it. If you have to have a diesel generator, well, that's, you know, that's pretty much, um, canceling out the value of the, uh, electric feeble vehicle at this point. But perhaps, you know, sometime down the road, that might not be the case. So, um, so I think that, you know, what we really want to have here, what we're really having here is a policy discussion about the council's approval of, um, of sustainability, which, you know, we talk about a lot. But we don't talk about fire trucks a lot. So this was the time we talk about how. It's part of the fire truck conversation, too, just maybe not quite quite yet. Thank you.

[02:17:13] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much, and I see our chief has joined us this evening. Thank you for being here. Any, um, remarks that you wanted to share?

[02:17:21] Fire Chief Juan Diaz: Thank you, Maryland. May I send, uh, honorable members of the city council. Can you hear me, okay?

[02:17:27] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, we can.

[02:17:28] Fire Chief Juan Diaz: Thank you. So, correct. Our fleet is due for replacement. We explore every option. I personally looked at one of the hybrid fire trucks, and the technology has, as has been reported, it's just not there. They have a limitation because of their batteries to only about 30 minutes of pumping, and about two hours of driving. Most of these fire trucks that have been purchased by the cities that have been mentioned are really in the prototype stages. The Piers manufacturer, who was the one that we're buying our fleet from, they're not ready, they have a prototype, they're working with, but they're not even ready to sell that vehicle. The cost is also quite high. The particular one that was purchased in Southern California is nearly $2 million. And so we are exploring all the options. We do have a smaller vehicle, council approved, and last year's budget, for us to have a quick smaller vehicle, which we are in the process of acquiring. But we're constantly in the fire department as being in a very modern, progressive class one fire department. exploring all the options that we can to improve our services. And having a hybrid or a completely electrical vehicle will be a benefit, not only to the environment, but also to the firefighters, because diesel is not the most healthy thing to be around. So I'm continued to explore, but it seems to me we're about 2 to 5 years away, and there'll be other opportunities. We have another, we have the hazmite unit that will eventually need to be replaced. And we also have the rescue unit, we need to be replaced, and perhaps when that comes around, we can explore some other options. Thank you.

[02:19:14] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: You very much. Any final questions, comments, or thoughts? If not, I will ask the city clerk to start the roll call, though.

[02:19:25] City Clerk: Council member Abang Coca?

[02:19:27] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I,

[02:19:28] City Clerk: Confirmer Matachek?

[02:19:30] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[02:19:31] City Clerk: Council member Kamei?

[02:19:34] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes,

[02:19:34] City Clerk: Council member Lieber?

[02:19:36] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[02:19:37] City Clerk: Council member, show Wilter?

[02:19:38] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes?

[02:19:39] City Clerk: Nice Mayor Hicks?

[02:19:40] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[02:19:41] City Clerk: Mayor Ramirez?

[02:19:43] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah.

[02:19:44] City Clerk: Motion care unanimously.

[02:19:47] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: You very much. Um, in case anybody came. thank you very much, Chief. and Brian for being here. Um, the, uh, in case any member of the public came late. I want to again make the announcement about agenda item 8.2 commercial development at 590 Castro Street. This agenda item will not be heard or discussed this evening and will be continued to the city council meeting of May 24th 2022. Uh what comment will not be taken on this item tonight. So, if you are waiting for the Sobrano office project on Castro. Um, it will not be heard tonight. Um, we'll proceed to item 5 oral communications from the public. We'll take a break and then we'll return, um, with the Terabella Avenue study session. Um, so item 5 oral communications from the public. 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 the section. State law prohibits the council from acting on non-agenda items. Spanish translation services are available for this item. We will now hear from our interpreter.

[02:20:56] Spanish Interpreter: Well, here, Commentario del Public on Español, Serra ducido al ingles, para los miembros el consejo, gracias.

[02:21:05] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. But any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item. If so, please click the raised hand button in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone. A timer will be displayed on the screen. The 1st speaker is Stephen Goldstein.

[02:21:25] Stephen Goldstein: Thank you for your moments. My name is Stephen Goldstein. I've been a resident in Mountain View since 2007. And recently, I had, unfortunately, uncovered some very unselling information, and I'm selling facts. About a year ago, my balcony was prepared, under the the approval of John Carr, and, in fact, later on, John Carr testified in a legal proceeding called a rent reduction hearing, saying that, in fact, the structural components of my balcony were perfectly within normal conditions. However, I just recently discovered that, in fact, there are very significant parts missing in the support structure. And, in fact, I have provided the city council, it will wake to a video that shows that, in reality, that the repaired work is actually starting to tear itself apart. And, in fact, the support beam that supports the outer edge of the balcony is actually splitting in the middle of it. And so, I'm very concerned, because John Carr actually testified on behalf of a private landlord, while acting as an employee of the city of Mountain View, and, in effect, stated information that, clearly, I can show by evidence today, was not necessarily, uh, easily, uh, provable, if not, it was very easily observed, that the parts were... not in place, and unfortunately, the repaired, never did anything to deal with it. And that's why my balcony is starting to fall apart again, and it's only been a year. I thank you for your time, and I hope that we can get something to get done about that. Thank you.

[02:23:46] (archive recording) Mayor Lucas Ramirez: You very much. Being no other members of the public wishing to speak will return to the council, and let's take a, um, it's a 15 minute break. Does that sound good to everybody? 15 minutes. All right. Um, so uh, we will return. I guess that makes it at 810 PM. See everybody done.

[02:24:22] (archive recording) Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Welcome back, everyone. I think we might be seconds shy of 810 technically, but I hope nobody will get mad by at least read the idol of the item. 6.one 1020 to 1040 Tarabella Avenue. The purpose of this study session is to receive council input on the projects at 1020 and 1040 Tarabella Avenue, including a general plan amendment, zoning map amendment, and development proposal. This study session gives council the opportunity to provide input on key project topics that guide the applicant and staff and refining the project design through the remainder of the development review process. But any council members like to make disclosures. Council member Medici.

[02:40:05] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So um, I will disclose that I met with the applicant. I've been by the site on my own, and I've met with the Sterland Estates neighbors. Thank you.

[02:40:17] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Bye Mayor Hicks.

[02:40:20] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: I also met with the applicant and have been to the site on my own, and I've met with the Sterling Estates neighbors, but that was some time ago.

[02:40:33] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Council member show Walter.

[02:40:37] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes, I met with the applicant several times, and, um, I visited the site.

[02:40:47] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Very good. Council member labor.

[02:40:51] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. I had an opportunity to meet with the app con virtually. Thank you.

[02:41:00] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: And I will also disclose that I met with the applicant. Um, and we can come back to Council members of the Koga and Kame if they have disclosures. Um, Council member Kame, do you have any disclosures?

[02:41:18] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, we're talking about terrible, right?

[02:41:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes,

[02:41:20] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I met with the applicant.

[02:41:22] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Oh, fantastic. Thank you. And then we'll come back to council member Abe Coco when she, um, is available. Uh, senior planner, Edgar, uh, Maravia, will presents the memo.

[02:41:38] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Yes, thank you. Okay. Thank you mayor. Good evening, mayor, council members and members of the public. My name is Ed Scaramaravilla, senior planner with the city of Manobu. I'm here with Community Development Director slash assistant city manager, Artis Ravostovo, and planning manager, Stephanie Williams. Today's presentation is a study session for 1020, 1040 Terabella Avenue, a personal storage development, and an affordable housing development. There are 2 separate projects, but are connected by way of an August 2020 city council authorized gatekeeper application. Specifically.

[02:42:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Edgar, do you have a presentation? If you do, we can't see it.

[02:42:24] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Oh, interesting. Okay, give me a minute. I was sharing. Sorry about that.

[02:42:47] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: No worries. While we wait, uh, council member Abikoga, did you have any disclosures regarding uh, the Terra Vella development?

[02:42:53] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Oh, thank you. Sorry about that. Um, yes, I met with the applicant and I met with the neighbors, some of the neighbors. you.

[02:43:05] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Okay, let's try this again. Okay, that should be sharing the screen now.

[02:43:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, we can see it.

[02:43:18] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Okay, great. Let's start from the beginning. Get a new mayor, council members and members of the public. My name is Edgar Maravilla, senior planner with the city of Monobio. And today I'm here with community development director, assistant, and assistant city manager, our teacher, Basava, and planning manager, Stephanie Williams. Today's presentation is a study session for 1020, 1040 Terabella Avenue, a personal storage development and an affordable housing development. There are 2 separate projects, but are connected by way of an August 2020 city council authorized gatekeeper application, specifically, the sites are proposing a land transfer, and the public storage site will donate over half an acre to the affordable housing site as a community benefit for an increase in FAR. The project parcels are in the Terabella area and front San Rafael Avenue, Terabella Avenue, and Landavista Avenue. 1040 Terabella, the personal storage site, is located directly adjacent to Highway 101 and 1020 Terabella, affordable housing site, front on Terabella and San Rafael Avenue. The site is surrounded by several existing industrial uses, offices, and research and development uses. Recently, there was 2 mixed use commercials and multifamily projects entitled in the vicinity, not visible on the map, as the projects are not yet constructed, but the approximate location is shown in group. This is a reference page highlighting the existing bondering line, top left, and the proposed adjusted lot light, top right, for the gatekeeper community benefit of the land, transfer, and land donation. The land transfer would increase the size of the affordable housing site from 26,618 square feet to 45,180 square feet. For a net gain of 24,562 square feet. Allowing for more units to be constructed on site. Additionally, you will note the affordable housing site, but front on Terabella and the public storage facility would be tucked behind adjacent to highway 101. As the middle of this project was authorized by city council in August 2020, and it includes a 100% affordable housing project at 1020 Terabella Avenue, requiring a general command amendment from general industrial to high density residential, is only map amendment from general industrial district to plan P district, a state density bonus, and a parking reduction for 1040 Terabella. The authorized requested a 2 phase approach, a general planned text amendment to allow an increase in FAR, is only math amendment from general industrial to plan P different, and a parking reduction. The applicant public storage has revised their projects since the original gatekeeper, adding an additional story to one building and decreasing the height by one story for the other building, as shown on the chart in the right. On the right hand side. Staff therefore brought this provision to counsel for feedback. This is the site layout for 1020 Terabella, the 100% affordable housing project by Alta. The parcel is one. 04 acres in size, including the land transfer by public storage. Project site would allow 80 units per acre, and the applet will use a 33% state fancy bonus to propose 108 units. Project will have individual entrances to all the units working on Terabella Avenue, and units above would be accessed by the entry plaza. Bakeware access into at rate and above grade parking is provided by way of Sarabella in San Rafael Avenue. Here you get to see a better view of the private open space in the overall design of the building, which is a simple modern building, formed with flat roof and prominent window frames. The building is broken up along Tarabella Avenue by 3rd floor courtyards, providing open space to the proposed tenor. Other building materials include board, form, congrete, cementes, flap siding, AP, standing scenes, metal siding, and aluminum windows and accents. Planning commission had the following to say about 1020 to rebell. Step should work with the applicants, with the applicant to create a warmer front facade, but only by way of low cost modifications. Step should keep in mind 100% affordable projects have limited budgets. Design modifications should ideally be cost neutral, and staff was encouraged to work with the applicant to meet state airlines to help secure state local funding for the affordable housing project. It's a site layout for 1040 Terabella. The parcel site would be 3.7 acres in size. After the land donation to the affordable housing site. The project site currently has 18 existing single story storage buildings, the applicants proposing to demolish all 18 storage units to construct a 6 story, 285,000 square feet buildings in a 4 story, 124,000 square feet building. This is proposed by way of a 2 phase approach, further discussed on face approach on the upcoming slides. Bakler access to the site would be survived by way of Glenda Vista in San Rafael Avenue. Here you see a view of the San Rafael and Linda Vista, frontages, and the overall design of the building, which is a modern building with a flat roof proposing strong vertical and horizontal orange trim bands around the building. Other building materials include clear and spandro glass, a mixture of concrete cementis material, stucco, and metal panels. As noted in the earlier slides, that brought this project to a steady session to receive feedback on the proposed high increase for one of the storage buildings that feels the high increase can be supported as it would be similar to the existing and slash future scale nearby development for 5 to 7 story buildings ranging in height from 70 to 88 feet. However, additional design work may be needed to support this increased height and more prominent building views to ensure the proposed buildings will fit into the evolving mixed use neighborhood. The environmental planning commission had the following to say about 1040 Terrebello. They supported the high change, asked staff to work with the applicant to include more on-site trees, highlighted the new buildings would be a substantial improvement over existing structures. Did not feel substantial design modifications beyond staff preliminary recommendations are needed. In addition to building high change for 1040 Terabella Avenue, the applicant is requesting a commercial housing impact fee waiver. Pursuant to city cozy commercial housing impact, you can be waived by council for projects, when no employees are fewer than one employee per 2,000 per feet. The building must be designed and built such that it cannot be converted to a use capable of how to mark their number of employees, except by major reconstruction. Staff recommends consideration of the fee waiver as this project is proposing no more than 4 employees for the 409,000 square foot square foot growth building. As designed, the building is solely intended for personal storage and any deviation would require substantial improvements and modifications. Of the building, which would require city review. Prepare staff highlighting the question that was highlighted throughout the report. Following the council study session, the project will continue through the development review and see book process and will go to environmental planning commission for a recommendation into the city council for a final decision. In conclusion. Staff is requesting counsel's feedback on the questions. This concludes staffed presentation, more than glad to take questions. Please be advised, the applicant also has a combined presentation for counsel.

[02:51:09] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much, Edgar. Uh, we will now hear a presentation. Um, from public storage, uh, by Brian Miranda, regional vice president of public storage. Brian, whenever you're ready.

[02:51:49] Brian Miranda: There we go. I am no longer on mute. I was unmuted my phone, but not my computer. I was double protected, just in case. Um, good evening. Um, mayor and city council members. App appreciate the time this evening. My name is Brian Miranda, as mentioned by Mayor Ramirez. I'm a regional vice president for public storage. I want to thank staff for a thorough presentation. I'll try to cut mine a little bit short since it's probably been a long evening for evening for you all already. As you know, this is a one of a kind collaboration between all the housing and public storage, um, very unique to see a private developer slash private property owner. Um, work with an affordable housing developer. It's great, something that is very much needed in almost every community throughout our state and the country. Um, as mentioned before, it's about a little over a half an acre contribution of land, to all the housing through the form of a lot line adjustment, that's going to allow them to more than double the bedroom counts and roughly double the number of, uh, units. Um. Their site will end up fronting Terabella, so that's going to be great for pedestrian friendly, friendly environments. And our, our site will be pushed more towards the 85 over pass in the sound wall and closer to the one on one. Overall, what, uh, what is being requested is a general plan amendment to allow residential development. General plan text amendment to allow greater FAR for industrial use, zone change to allow residential, and secret approval of a mitigated negative deck. Of course, those aren't heard tonight. Just giving an overview of what's gonna, not the throughout the process. As I think you've all seen, here is the current parcel configuration. Uh, on the blue is the Alta housing property and then the red is the public storage property. With the half an acre development. uh you can see the reconfiguration of the parcels. It allows for a much more efficient and larger rectilinear site for all the housing, which really not only allows them to fit a lot more units. that allows them to construct the units they uh would have otherwise constructed in a more cost-effective manner. And you can see we give up, um, not only when we, when we execute phase one and hand them the property before we built anything. We have to tear down a bunch of our square footage and our office. Um, so that's, that's, uh, I think a big, initial, um, sacrifice into showing how committed we are to this property. The community benefits that are, I think, clear in this situation, you know, from a design standpoint and approves the efficiency layout, quality of the affordable housing project, as mentioned before. It provides the Terabella frontage, creates a better community, uh, and walkable environment on Terabella. It achieves not just city's goals, the state's goals for affordable housing. As mentioned before, it increases their housing counts, uh, and it, uh, reduces the cost of all the affordable units. The, what you're, what you're looking at now is, is the plan for public storage in, in, um, gray is the, or in black and white outline is the, Alta housing property. Phase one will be on the left and phase 2 will be on the right. At Gatekeeper, those were switched. Um, that was one change. 2nd change is we're decreasing the total building area from just under 442,000 square feet to just under 409. We're going from 25 story buildings to a 6 story and a 4 story building. Uh, which changes the max height, and the FAR drops from 2.62 to 2.49. The plan is to execute this in 2 phases. Removing 16 buildings and eventually constructing 2 buildings that will all be interior access to climate controlled, secure storage, uh, we build very energy efficient buildings. We incorporate solar in most of our new developments, California, anticipate that here. Uh, the loading will be on the north side of the building, adjacent to the sound wall in the 85 overpass. So, from a, from a noise and visibility standpoint will be very self-contained. And as mentioned before, all the units will be climate controlled and secure. At Gatekeeper, uh, was the design we presented a gatekeeper in 2020. That's very prototypical orange tower, orange stripe at the top, orange doors behind glazing and 2 shades of tan. As you can see on the right in collaboration with staff. The design has changed materially. You can see both vertical and horizontal articulation. Incorporation of a significant amount of glazing, changes of materials. Um, and I think it, it looks, it reads much more like a tech building. I think it belongs in the city of mountain view. I think it's an attractive building personally. You can see the building from the corner of Linda Vista, and the cul-de-sac up by up by the 85 overpass. The only clear glazing we have is in this tower elements. And at the ground floor, which would be the office, every all the rest of the glazing is spandrel. This is important for many reasons. One, 1st and foremost, the use behind it, if it was vision glass, you would actually see the backside of storage units. Um, so, were giving me appearance of a office or tech building. Uh, well, at the same time allowing it to operate as a storage facility, uh, to help make this transaction work. Um, we have both, as mentioned before, horizontal and vertical articulation, um, pedestrian scale at the ground level, with, uh, some grounding elements, and additional colors and materials from what we have before. Here's the same um, effective designs in the 2nd phase, i.e. the 4 story. It was a 5 story on the left, now it's a 4 story on the right. And here's a view of that same 4 story from San Rafael, the other cul-de-sac, and the white building in the background is actually Alta housings building, and you can see that it's a couple stories taller, which we create a good sound barrier, a great, great barrier to the freeway. But it still has a lot of openings for light and uh, And so that the bedrooms aren't right next to our building. Here's a view, a bird's eye view from the 85 overpass, um, looking at the building, you can see both phase one and phase 2 as you, as you head down here. A lot of visual interest, um, as you progress down the, the, uh, the freeway, and you can see all of the changes materials and glazing all about. Uh, as mentioned by Edgar, we're seeking a housing impact fee waiver. It's as if the, um, the fee waiver language was written for us. Uh, it's for very low employee usage, that's us. And we build a very single purpose, specialized building. Our structural systems are typically for this type of building on a 10 by 10 grid, which is not, uh, conducive to effectively any other use, frankly. Um, in addition, we, uh, have a land donation is pretty significant with a community benefit. Um, we only mentioned, as I mentioned, 2 to 4 employees, and we provide a manager's unit for uh, one to 2 of our employees. So we're we're taking care of our own affordable housing needs. uh in in our facility or in the combined development. Last, as mentioned by Edgar as well. There's a 7 year development agreement being requested. This allows us to phase the development, um, phase one alone is 260,000 square feet. That's a lot to build at one time. So we need the time to absorb that 1st phase before we start in the 2nd one. As part of that, we pay a public benefit fee that's incorporated in the agreement as well. And I'll hand it over to Edgar. I mean, excuse me, to Carlos, with all the housing to take it from here. Carlos.

[02:59:41] Carlos Castellanos: Thank you, Brian. Um, I'm Carlos Castellanos, uh, vice president, real estate development. at Alta housing. And, uh, just to go over, uh, from the gatekeeper to now, uh, we've we've heard, uh, based on community and staff feedback, we've made changes, uh, since that gatekeeper application. We've we've uh, actually done, uh, we've increased the efficiency of the development, as you may have seen at Edgar Slide, that we've, we've not only removed one story of the uh, building, um, and reduced it by a 13, 13 feet height, uh, we've also been able to be more efficient on our massing. So we've actually increased the building massing, the building square footage. And we've been able to increase the number of units from 105 to 108. Uh, we've also shifted the massing to the rear, and, um, we've, um, added, um, additionally, um, was able to bring down the affordability of the units, uh, from 50% of the area median, uh, to currently at 45% of the area median. And we have 2 parking entrances, which we'll show in a few minutes. The next live here, um, is, uh, is showing the, um, the current shifting of the mass, uh, back and that, um, is really showing how the, um, the development is now more efficient and allows for a larger, um, front, uh, loaded, uh, podium, uh, uh, courtyard space. And it's actually makes it for a much more usable space that we can partition into different zones so that we can have different activities happening and it's almost a quarter acre space. Next slide. So here, it's showing the rendering, how you can see on the ground floor, we have a very publicly engaging ground floor frontage, both with the corner entrance to the building and right off the corner. We have a bike entrance to our bike storage facility. And, and then we have a, a, somewhat linear park uh feel going down Terabella uh, away from San Rafael. And then on top of that, 2 stories above that is our large deck, our podium level, which you can see in the slide below. And we actually, the next slide goes more into detail there. And so actually, this slide 1st is is, again, showing the ground floor, how it is, um, laid out where we have an opportunity here for play, to relax and to learn. Next live, please. And uh, these are renderings of that ground floor here. We are, um, We have an example of how we want to engage residents and community right at the, at the entrance on the corner of San Rafael and Terabella. And then the other slide on the top right shows how we have created a bike room with a potential bike shop and our workshop area for fixing bikes and possibly have programmatic uses there. It creates that indoor outdoor activity space there. And then we also have, um, uh, we have also sculptural stones that can be seating areas that can also be used more actively by children, and we have interpreted signage, which is what you see on the on the bottom left, uh, along the the whole, uh, frontage of Terabella, where it talks about the different kinds of landscaping that we have, uh, planted and in on long Terabella. Next slide, please. And now, again, going up to our our podium, we have the, uh, the, as I mentioned before, the zoned areas here where we have active and more passive uh, areas for the residents to to enjoy, and and the a feature here is is, uh, the bottom right slide is actually uh, a slide, a uh, a view from inside the community room, which you see on the right hand side. looking out. We actually are going to have an open opening to that. So it's going to create an indoor, outdoor, much more expansive and spread out for larger events. Next line.

[03:04:31] Bryan Miranda: Um, that was it for uh, the housing portion, we're going to conclude here pretty quickly. Just want to go through the path for entitlements. Um, this is what we have completed and is in process. Uh, gatekeeper in 2020. As I've mentioned before at previous meetings, we started this back in 2016. We submitted an informal application, which was as robust as a formal application. Went through a review on that, a formal application, uh design review with staff, uh multiple design review meetings with staff, no application. We, uh, participated in the EPC study session. Here we are at city council study session. And as you can see, there's still a, a good amount of work to do to get to what is the goal of, of, uh, allowing all the housing to achieve funding in early 2023. So, the hope is that we can get all of these items completed by year end so that they can make their funding deadline. It's not nearly as urgent for public storage because we don't have a deadline like that, but we certainly want to make sure that all the housing doesn't have to wait another year for funding. Uh, we have to initiate a, a sequel M and D. Um, we have to uh, work with DRC and attend DRC. No if application has to be accepted. Uh, I'm I'm assuming there's uh, many community meetings and community outreach. Then we come back to an EPC hearing. Uh, for recommendation to city council, and uh, the city council action would be GPMM, a GP text amendment, so and change the sequence mentioned before. And then we have HCD state funding application. Again, all to get to the 2023 funding. So in conclusion, um, we're requesting support for the following, the height changes for both buildings, uh, support the proposed design as it stands, uh, with the exception of potentially working with staff, and DRC and minor design revisions that are revenue, neutral, revenue, and cost neutral, support for commercial housing fee waiver, and support for development agreement. Happy to answer any questions.

[03:06:34] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Brian and Carlos, for your presentations. We're going to go to public comment 1st and then return to council port. questions, uh, and deliberation. 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. A timer will be displayed on the screen. First speaker is James Kuzmal.

[03:07:01] James Kuszmaul: Yeah, good evening, um, council. Just wanted to say, this looks like a wealthy project and I look forward to a lot more affordable housing coming to Mountain View as soon as feasible. The only minor notes I'd wanted to make are. First off, to request that counsel in the city not impose any additional parking requirements on the affordable housing beyond what all to themselves wants to build. I believe council already indicated in a housing element study session that they, um, are willing to remove all parking minimums for affordable housing developments, and I'd like to see that occur in these projects. Um, as a reminder, underground parking especially is incredibly expensive. Um, and we don't want our affordable housing fees going to any more parking than is absolutely critical. Um, I would apply the same notes to the public storage thing. After all, I live in a small apartment without a car, and I can, I've definitely had use for, uh, private storage rentals before without needing a car to get my stuff to and from it. Unless I just wanted to ask that, uh, in general council look to try to reduce the amount of process and number of council meetings and everything that these sorts of projects have to go for it. It seems a bit silly that effectively we are having yet another study session on a project because we're handling over a few feet of height when we're talking about building lots of affordable housing. Our question should be, how can we get the project to happen as quickly as possible with as much affordable housing as possible for the funding we have. and not be having to worry about whether it is 80 feet tall or 85 feet tall or whatever. Thank you.

[03:08:38] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Rick Spillane.

[03:08:44] Rick Spillane: Hello, my name's Rick Spillane. I've been in a resident of, um, San Pablo, which is the street closest to Terabella for, um, 8 years. I support the idea of having more affordable housing in Mountain View, but the region in Terabella is an aging light industrial region and is highly non-walkable. Um, there's very, there are no amenities. There's, uh, one overloaded park, San Veron nearby, but otherwise it is not a hospitable area in which to live. Having public storage behind the building will definitely help with the highway. But uh, the area is generally cut off from access to uh, any, any like parks or shops or grocery stores that you would walk to. Um, and Since the parking situation is not going to be very good. There, that is going to be very problematic for any potential residents that live there. With that said, I recognize and understand the need for more housing in Mountain View. Um, I think that adding more housing this area means that we should add a commenser amount of park space. The only park in the area that's remotely reachable, Sandron Park, which is going to be accessed by the apartments going up by Village Lake and over by the temple. And that park will be extremely overloaded. Adding more housing in Tarabella is going to continue to put load and pressure on that park, and still in the States, that area in general, hasn't gotten very much park development over the last 10 years. And it's not looking promising as of this point going forward either. So, Any new housing should have a commensurate amount of park space to go with it. That's my, um, strong desire and wish. Thank you.

[03:10:46] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Albert Jean.

[03:10:53] Albert Jeans: Good evening. Oh, I have a presentation, of course, and I'll start my timer when the presentation comes up. Good evening, council members and Mayor Ramirez. Thank you. Yeah, like Rick, I'm a member of, I'm a resident of Sterling Estates. I've been here for over 30 years. Um, I'm actually very supportive this project. I really liked the collaboration between public storage and alta housing. I've talked a lot with both parties, and I'm very impressed with them. As Rick said, what we're mostly worried about is the environment that this is going into next slide, please. Um, as you can see, it's pretty isolated. It's in the middle of this, you know, industrial area. As such, there is a question about whether people really need cars here. Next flight, please. Whoops, wrong way. And the problem is, you know, unfortunately, over the last year, the environment here has changed quite a bit for the worst because of the narrow streets ordinance, a lot of oversized vehicles are now parking on Terabella, and so that nice frontage that will be in front of Alta could be all for naught if that is installed. So I was happy to hear that bike lanes are sort of on the table for the city because that would solve this problem and also make the street much more walkable, rideable, and even triable because it's very dangerous now because of limited visibility. Next slide, please. Yeah, it is, yeah, it's 3 quarters of a mile to the Safeway. So again, I'm not sure somebody would want to walk that every day. Next slide, please. And I'm right next to Sandrone Apartments, which are 100% affordable, and we do have an overflow parking problem. Next slide, please. Um, yeah, and this highlights, again, the storage or park space, this area, this is city-owned parks in this, um, area. And as you can see, there are only 5 less than 6 acres here for what will soon be, you know, something like 13,000 residents. Next slide, please. And so what we'd like is, yeah, for the city to step up and use this as a chance to improve this area and make it a really livable area. And unfortunately, I'm out of time, I set these slides to you, if you, I think it's very interesting, the last slide, because it shows how the, there's a sort of inequity in the parkland distribution in mountain view. Thank you.

[03:13:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: You very much. The next speaker is Celine.

[03:13:15] Salim Damerdji: Hi. I'm Salim. I live in work in Mountain View. I support this project. I think we all support this project, I'm guessing. Um, I also think EPC is right on to ask for any changes to be low cost and minimal. We need to get this project built as quickly as possible. I was concerned when I saw the slide that showed the path forward and included a DRC meeting, uh, going back to city council, uh, getting another application approved from the city, and then funding, uh, getting an application for state funding. Um, There is so much process just to get this done by, or just to get funding by 2023. This project started in 2020. So with our new housing targets, we have to build almost 800 below market rate homes per year. So that would be basically one 1020 Terabella per 6 weeks. And this is going to take us more than 3 years to just get funding. So when we have this much process, we have to ask, what are our priorities, and who are we serving? I hope we're serving the people who will be living at this project in the future. And I hope we can make sure that they live with housing and security for the least amount of time that's possible. Because for every month it takes to build this project. That is another month that 108 families are living with housing insecurity. So please streamline this process so we can get these homes built as quickly as possible. Thank you.

[03:14:49] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Very much. The next speaker is Alex Brown. Alex, we're not able to hear you. Are, um, unmute yourself if, uh, you haven't already. All right, well, we'll come back to Alex. Um, and we'll move on to the next speaker, uh, Zur, Nahushton.

[03:15:33] Tzur Nehushtan: Hi everyone. I'm also a resident of Sterling Estates. I want to share my friend, uh, concern about the safety on Terabella. I would like to see wider sidewalks, proper pedestrian crossing marks on the intersection of San Rafael in Terabella. And as well as the bike lanes. And ideally, as soon as possible and definitely before people move in into this development. Thank you.

[03:16:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Well, try Alex Brown again, Alex, one more time.

[03:16:13] Alex Brown: Okay, can you hear me now?

[03:16:15] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, we can.

[03:16:18] Alex Brown: Awesome. All right. Hey, Alex Brown, resident of Santagabella, North Bay Shore, just on the other side of the 101 from this project. I have a speaking strong support. Uh, I several of the other speakers have said, there's not a lot going on in the Terrebell neighborhood right now, but I think that the best way to start is by having affordable housing and a good commercial uses. Uh, I think that this is a great project to create housing, to incentivize bringing more parks, grocery stores, coffee shops, to the area, that I can then walk to, because again, I'm right there. Thanks.

[03:16:55] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next speaker is Kevin Ma.

[03:16:59] Kevin Ma: Evening city council, my name is Kevin Ma. I got the speakers. I'm in support of this project, and we'd like to see these kind of sub projects done quicker, much as we talked about quick builds earlier, because every day, there's a delay in these kind of, um, projects, the more harm we are consistent, that we are providing to those who are in most need of the housing. Thank you.

[03:17:23] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. The next speaker is ED Keating.

[03:17:31] Edie Keating: Hello. E.D. Keating, Mountain View resident. Having a business provide land to a nonprofit is unique. And it is also something that I think everyone here hopes is not unique going forward. We hope it is something that is repeated. Your support for this project will make a different difference to any other developer who might consider a similar contribution of land. Make it easy. I listen to concerns about this property raised at the planning commission, questions about parks, parking, walkability, improvements regarding these concerns will be great, and they should not slow down this project. I trust all to housing, that they will design a project, that a building, that people will want to live in, and will feel very lucky to live in. This is not just housing. This is 100% affordable housing. I encourage you to strongly support this project.

[03:18:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Edie. The next speaker is Kati Blus.

[03:18:46] Katy Blus: Great. Thank you. Hi, my name is Kathy. Um, just for the record, not against the project, but I say, I live in Sterling Estates neighborhood, and I'm very close to Terabella, and I drive on that street daily. Um, since this project will add more residents and families. I would like to request a few things that can benefit the future residents and current neighbors. Safety is priorities. Um, at the moment, Terabella is not very bike or walking, uh, friendly. Would love if we can add more visibility by adding bike lanes that help connect Arabella and middle field and Crittenden middle school. Another thing is greenery and park space, um, some, okay, perhaps spark space is not necessary priority for future residents that will reside at this project, but I'm sure they would appreciate having a pleasant and nice surrounding for themselves and their children. Um, street parking is very limited at the moment. So if possible, I would recommend exploring a solution for that. Lastly, I want to make it very clear as a current residence nearby, I welcome any project that will make this area better. My request is to consider adding amenities, and of course, insurance safety as a whole, to this area and not just focus on the improvement of specific corner or curb appeal where the projects are being proposed. Thank you so much.

[03:20:17] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Being no other speakers, uh, from the public who will return to the council for questions, and then, uh, deliberation. Are there any questions from the council? Council member Abi Koga.

[03:20:38] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank Mayor. I understand, uh, this is a steady session and we have specific questions to respond to, but, um, it's come up a number of times, um, with public comment. I had some, um, I was kind of curious too. Like, do we have streetscape improvements planned? I know we talked earlier about the Terra Barabella bike lane project on our CIP, but what about the sidewalks and widening them or just making them more walkable?

[03:21:13] Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Aarti Shrivastava: Um, Council member Avicoga, I'm gonna have to go back to public works and maybe answer that question. Um, um, after this meeting, but, um, I don't believe there are any big streetscape plans. Other than the bike lanes, we had asked this question. Um, I believe when the gatekeeper came in. Um, At one point, there was some talk about converting this to a mixed use district, but, um, that particular conversation didn't move forward and we are not doing a precise plan for Terabella. But if we were in the future, we would probably look at some changes um, to the district. As it stands, it is still industrial. And so, um, we, I don't believe there's a plan to, to, you know, make, make, create wider sidewalks. But we do look at existing how existing proposals, such as this one and the one that Saras Regis proposed, to kind of get ready for the future and to make sure that the sidewalks and the frontages are consistent with how we have, um, you know, developed other residential projects. So this is something that staff tries to do with any of the newer gatekeepers, um, to get in place, um, for the future.

[03:22:37] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I guess I was thinking specifically about when, I think it's 1001 Shoreline, the Cereswe just project, and I couldn't remember what that front escape was going to look like, but, um, I think it was, you know, an improvement. So, um, I thought was like, can we just finish off that? um, Tarabella, the whole stretch, um, and, you know, you make it uniform and improve.

[03:23:06] Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Aarti Shrivastava: Yeah, we are actually working with Alta, who's doing the front part of their project. And so that entire block going all the way to Linda Vista will have that frontage. And then the altar portion. Um, there is one property between Alta and the Linda Vista, and they're not really proposing any changes. Then I guess if it does come in, we could work with them, if it proposes, um, any significant changes. So we do look at trying to knit all these pieces together as projects come forward.

[03:23:41] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Right, thank you.

[03:23:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member Shovel.

[03:23:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, um, I uh, I wanted to talk a little bit about the the funding cycle. I understand that the funding cycle has changed so that it's an annual cycle now. It's not a, um, a twice a year thing. And so, um, that's why we have the, you know, the very real deadline of the end of the calendar year to get so many things done. So, um, all the can apply for the, um, apply for the financing. So I was hoping that the applicant would explain that change a little to us in the funding cycle and why it's so important.

[03:24:32] Carlos Castellanos: Certainly. The what we're doing is stacking and getting the all the funding that we need together to be able to get this to construction. And one of the key pieces is going to be a state funding source, which used to be had rounds throughout the year, but the state has consolidated all of their financing sources into one round once a year and that round is early in the beginning of the year. Um, so, so we've been targeting for the, the, the one, what they call a, a supernova, uh, uh, that they would have in early 2023.

[03:25:19] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So if you don't get it in, if you're not ready to do it in early 2023, then you can't do it until early 2024.

[03:25:26] Carlos Castellanos: That's right. Then we wait till 2024, one year passes.

[03:25:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Thank you.

[03:25:31] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Thank you. Council member, that a check.

[03:25:38] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. I was wondering if the utilities would be undergrounded?

[03:25:46] Senior Planner Edgar Maravilla: Um. Uh, public storage is is proposing to underground the utilities, um, um, along along the the street frontages as part of their project. It's not required.

[03:26:03] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Great, thank you.

[03:26:07] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: You very much. Vice Mayor Hicks.

[03:26:12] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: I wanted to, um, confirm 2 questions I asked in my, my meetings with, uh, public storage and and alt housing. Uh, the 1st is, I guess, for Alta that, um, so for Carlos. Um, as one of the members of the public said it would be nice to have, like, more coffee shops and so forth. My end, I do like larger projects like this to have some interface with the public on the street. But my understanding is that's pretty hard with tax credit projects that you're actually not really allowed to do that. Um, you know, I would love it if your community space could be rendered out to the larger community. But we did talk a little bit about maybe the bike repair, since it's not in all, some of it is outside making that plaza and the bike repair, maybe open to the larger public, which might pair well with bike lanes on the street and more safe routes to school. So I just want to confirm, 1st, that that's something that you could do, because I think that would be pretty important, as, like I said, as the package, the bike lanes, safe routes to school, and outdoor bike repair.

[03:27:23] Carlos Castellanos: Yeah, we're investigating through our design team and with our management and operations, internal, uh, staff, how we can, uh, because you're right, um, the, we cannot, uh, with the tax credit financing. It has the, the, the indoor uh, has to be for the benefit of the residents who live there and cannot include the, the, um, the public outside, but we want to do that. That's why we have that. Really, it's an 18 foot at least and 18 foot setback so that we're having these very open areas for exchange where we can have, and that's why we tried to create an open area right around the bike facility, the bike storage. So we're investigating that with our team right now and what we can do and what can be properly maintained through the life. We will be the ones maintaining whatever's there. That's why we put in some interpretive signing. We put in some, uh, kind of climbing, uh, features out there too, but we're also, we also want to look at what we can do with the, with the bicycle, um, facility there.

[03:28:33] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, great. Thank you, because yes, that's the main reason I can't ride my bike. I can never keep it repaired. Um, and then for Mr. Miranda from public storage. We also talked a little about, um, how, uh, different ways to make the, your storage buildings more attractive, both from the, the freeway and from the, the housing and neighborhood, and, um, recently, I've been seeing, um, you know, larger buildings like yours, uh, for example, when I was recently in San Francisco with murals, um, instead of kind of an office look. Um, and I know that our our visual arts committee is, um, doing its strategic plan. So I'm kind of thinking about muraling and all. And when I, um, when I talked to you, I think you said that that was one possibility and that it would actually be less expensive than some of the things that are being recommended. So I'm, I'm asking if you're open to muraling if that, if that's something that council supported.

[03:29:38] Brian Miranda: Yeah, it depends on where we'd execute it, for sure. We're open to looking into it. Um, there's a lot of angular walls along the freeway overpass that I think would be visible to a lot of folks. Um, the other the other facades may not lend themselves quite as well to it, just because you've got limited eyeballs seeing it. But yeah, we'd certainly explore it.

[03:29:59] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, have to. Those are my questions.

[03:30:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member commit.

[03:30:08] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thanks. Um, so I had a quick question for staff, um, about the commercial housing impact fee waiver. So, um, if staff can just remind us what is typically, um, what the city typically uses those fees for.

[03:30:28] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: The city uses them to fund affordable housing projects.

[03:30:33] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So if we, um, do the 1100000 waiver, then that would be funding that's not going into our affordable housing fund, is that correct?

[03:30:45] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: That's correct.

[03:30:46] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay. Um, yes. So, um, and given the the staff report, is it correct that staff is recommending that we, um, accept the fee waiver given to the number of, um, that it's kind of gonna have the low, um, what was the wording? Um. So we'll only have 2 to 4 employers on the facility, is that right?

[03:31:17] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: That's right. Um, so the city has um, a fee waiver, um, uh, policy written up in the ordinance, and it basically applies and extends the waiver to projects that would have a very low employee count, thereby um, requiring um, very little affordable housing to offset the, the square footage they build. And then the other criterion is to make sure that the project itself is a specialized building that can't later be converted to a different use. Um, and, uh, you know, um, so it could have more employees. And so because this project meets both those criteria under our ordinance, uh, we are recommending the waiver.

[03:32:05] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Appreciate that.

[03:32:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. I have a quick question for staff. Um, as part of the housing element constraints analysis, are we looking at um, the development review process, including design review?

[03:32:27] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Uh, we are looking at the, at the process improvements in general, um, and we can certainly look at a number of items, uh, including design review. I think with most housing development, we have become a lot more efficient. Um, uh, with design review, and, uh, we focus on very few DRC meetings, uh, trying to be fairly objective about our standards, um, and especially so with housing developments. Most of them, most of the affordable housing developments are qualified under SB 35, Um, and have very tight turnarounds, and we meet those. In this case, it's slightly different, because it's a legislative action. Uh, but we still want it to be efficient, um, and I think staff has been quite efficient with road projects. Public storage took a little bit longer. I think you could saw them before then afters. Um, but we were, we had a light touch with the altar project and we're very mindful that, um, you know, we don't want to increase costs there. Mayor, um, you're on mute.

[03:33:41] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Wow, rookie mistakes. Thank you for your for your response. Um, from Steph's perspective, uh, are we on track for the 2023 state Nova?

[03:33:52] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Yes, in fact, I just recently, I think we recently amended the scope of the sequel document to include, um, NEPA, which is national uh, environmental review, because the project may be requesting funds that have uh, federal source. So we wanted to put that all together. Uh, we expect that the Nova funding um, will come in the fall to counsel. Um, developers actually like to have that certainty. earlier. Um, and so they will get that. And then the project itself. Uh, we just um, scope the timelines is expected to come to council in January and then the funding, I believe, um, is uh, end of March. So we should be on track for the project to get funding.

[03:34:43] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: That's encouraging. Thank you. And then last question. Is it typical that we include? I guess most of our affordable housing? Well, I don't even want to say most, like Montecito also requires a general plan amendment and rezoning. Um, do we typically do NEPA, um, clearance for affordable housing? Is that is that?

[03:35:02] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Not unless they have federal funding sources that require NIPA. Um, I believe I recall one or 2 projects I've done in Mountain View. Previously that we knew needed fun federal funding. Um, I don't specifically know what that source is, but I understand it might be a county source and, um, also might know more about it. Um, we've added the NEPA funding and consultation with them.

[03:35:29] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. I mean, need for review. Yeah. Understand. Thank you.

[03:35:34] Carlos Castellanos: Those are the section 8 funds that comes in the Housing Authority. They are federal funds.

[03:35:40] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, I did, okay, that's that's an important clarification. Thank you. Any other questions from the council? Not seen any. So let's proceed to deliberation and, um, I, I'm not sure we will need this, but just, the sake of continuity, um, if there are recommendations beyond the staff recommendations that you would like, um, straw polls for, um, I'll go ahead and and catalog those, and if there's anything that we want to recommend beyond what staff is recommending, then, um, I'll, I'll keep track of that, and then we'll go back. and take a strong motion for each one. But, um, if anyone would like to, feel free to take any and all of the questions, I think, I think all 3 of them are, um, Spoked narrowly enough where we can probably take comments for for all 3 simultaneously. Um, some membership, Walter?

[03:36:48] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Sure, I'll give it a try. Um, Question number one. Does the council support the design comments and direction by the EPC or have additional feedback for 20 uh, 1020 Terrabella Avenue? Yeah, I do support their comments, um, and, uh, in particular, I think, as we've all said, this, uh, this deadline, uh, of, um, the no for funding is is real. So we want to make sure that we need that. And then, um, does the council support the design comments and direction given, um, by EP set, see, for, um, 1040 Terabella. I think, is that the, is that the public storage one? Yeah, okay. Yeah, I, I, um, I really am pleased with the changes that were made. And, you know, when I first saw this, I thought, Why, you know, this is just, um, uh, kind of a shifting of things. It's not really different in terms of, or significantly different, in terms of the impact on the community. So I kind of wondered why it was coming to us as a, you know, a study session item. But then, when we get into the details of it, It's because we have to formally give them the okay for the fee waiver. So, um, while we're doing that, we, you know, it's good to discuss the whole thing and for them to get, um, support for the entire, um, project. So anyway, yes, yes, I think that, um, I really appreciate that public storage and out the housing are working together. There are a lot of things that government can do. Um, but, uh, amalgamating parcels like this isn't one of them. And I think that this is creating a much better project for our community. So I really, um, you know, I'm really, I really appreciate public storage, Alta, and the city staff for, you know, for all working on it together and making it work. And so I also want to say yes for, um, for, uh, question three, I do support the consideration of the waiver. I think that, you know, when we think about the nexus for a housing development fee, the idea of that nexus is that, um, is, you know, is the project going to induce a need for housing? Well, it induces a need for housing if it has a lot of employees. Well, if it doesn't have employees, it doesn't induce the need for housing, which is why, um, it's part of the, uh, um, regulation that it should get a waiver. And I think that this, as staff has shown. This fits in beautifully with the language of our ordinance. So, so that's, uh, I think this is a good project, and I'm looking forward to, um, uh, seeing it through this stage and the next two.

[03:39:53] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Council member Lieber.

[03:39:56] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. Well, I'm a, I'm a yes on all 3 questions, and I'm a big yes on all the work that public storage and alta housing and our city staff have done together. I think that this is really a shining example of the way that things should be. And I really appreciate everyone's flexibility in particular, public storage. I, uh, I don't know where I've ever seen, um, something work as seamlessly as this has.

[03:40:25] Councilmember Sally Lieber: And, uh, I'm really happy with the end result design wise. It's gonna be a great place for homes for people in Mountain View. So thank you, thank you, thank you so much.

[03:40:40] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Council member Abi Coca.

[03:40:44] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. Yes, for number one, I do support, in general, APC's comments. Um, I will just, you know, be honest and say when I 1st look, um, the building looks a little heavy. Um, and a little boxy, but I trust with DRC's input, um, maybe in with maybe some changes in the materials. Um, we'll see a little bit more, um, form and, uh, you know, more, uh, features or details that will add to the design of the building. Um, and then in terms of two, uh, I support APC as well. I actually thought the public storage building was a noticeable improvement from the original. Um, and I, I know that, um, They had to go outside of their, you know, usual look, the colors and whatnot to do this. And so I really appreciate the extra effort that was made to do that. And, um, I think it looks really great, um, as is. So, um, maybe, and maybe there are some minor changes that could be made that are low cost. But overall, I think it's moved remarkably to the improvement improved zone. So I'm happy with the building there. And then 3, as already mentioned, I support the, um, waiver of the impact fee, um, in light of the, um, very few employees that will be there. And I read in the question answers about how, and I think the applicant mentioned that they'll be providing housing for their, um, couple of their handful of employees that they're having. So I appreciate that. And overall, I just want to thank, um, of course, staff, but really, um, public storage and also housing for their, um, partnership. Someone had asked me, what was the origin of this? And, um, I remember it being a gatekeeper and when they had originally come, um, with their proposal, I think it was about 70 units of affordable housing that was being proposed. And, you know, for me, gatekeepers are very special. I don't like, I don't, you know, seek to let them all through easily. And so I had ask the applicant to look at, um, providing significant affordable housing units, um, you know, 100 or more and didn't really know if they would do it. But here they are. And so I'm just really, really thrilled at how this has come together. And I do really want to think, especially pure storage, for being flexible and making this happen so that we have a significant affordable housing project here. Thank you.

[03:43:36] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Council member Kameh.

[03:43:39] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Um, so, uh, I'm yes to all 3 questions. I think that, I know it's been a long journey and I talked to the applicants about this, but, I feel like what we're seeing is a really incredible partnership and an amazing final M product that I think integrates into the community a lot better. Um, and so, uh, you know, I, I, I just want to thank them for sticking in and trying and working and and being innovative in the design, especially in the, the placement and the size of the parcel. So, um, you know, the, the one thing I do want to do and it's difficult to go from a work day to, to read all the council questions. Um, but in terms of, um, and this is, I think, separate of of the applicants is the discussion about fees and waivers, right? We constantly as a city and a city council hear about how difficult it is to leverage funding for affordable housing projects. And so, um, you know, while I support what's, um, you know, question 3 and its waiver. I think that I just want us to all be cognizant of the trade-offs that we're that we're making. I think it's really important for the community as well. Sometimes they ask council, different questions and, um, you know, I think we're, it's a delicate balance. Um, and tonight we're we're discussing one of those. Um, and I think one of the great things about this project too is Alta is going to be using rapid rehousing. Um, some units for rapid rehousing as well as those with developmental disabilities. Alt is always great about, uh, Carlos, you and your team are always great about finding that funding, um, being innovative in terms of the units that are created. Um, but I just know that it's such a struggle to do the funding. I mean, that's why we're talking about it tonight, right? Um, being able to make those deadlines. So, um, just wanted to talk about that. And I'm sure that'll come up as we're talking about our strategic goal setting and work plan items in the future. Thanks.

[03:45:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Important point Council member Metachek.

[03:45:49] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So, uh, kudos to the team who came up with the, uh, idea to rearrange these parcels and do the land dedication. Um, and actually, I'm going to start with question 3 because from my perspective, while it might be in the ordinance about waiving the affordable housing fee because of the few employees, um, and the inability to reuse the building, for me, the land dedication is huge, and for affordable housing. And so, I'd much rather have that than, um, the money to put toward additional affordable housing, 'cause this got us much more, um, than the feet would. Um, so, um, on question one, specific comments about the, um, alta housing project. I um, I do agree with staff's input on the project. And in particular, I really want to emphasize a couple of points that resonated with me, and that was the, to address, um, the landscaping in front. Um, and, um, Sorry, that was the one staff comment that I wanted to say. I also agree with. I had a few comments on my own. Um, and I did talk about these um, with, uh, the applicants when we met. Um, I was a little bit concerned about uh, the colors. Um, I feel like I want affordable housing projects to look like market rate housing. And um, I, I think sometimes the colors indicate um, that. And so we specifically talked about lightening up the dark colors and making sure that the, um, they're not loud colors. Um, like, uh, there's some orange throughout the city that, um, I'm not sure I'd use that. So I want to make sure the brownish color isn't actually orangeish. Um, and so, um, sorry to be so particular here. But I do want to make sure it's just a really attractive building. Similar to a lot of the other affordable housing projects we have in the city. Um, I also wanna make sure on the wall, um, the back wall that there's, um, maybe it's broken up a little bit. Um, so it's not a solid wall. And we talked about that as well. Um, I do appreciate that a parking study is going to be done. Um, but I must quickly admit that I think I've been very disappointed in pretty much every single parking study that I've seen. Um, and I think the thing that causes that for me is, um, a lot of times it's more convenient for people to park on the street than it is in the parking structure, the underground parking. And so if you are just looking at the utilization of the, um, official parking. Um, you might draw the conclusion that it's uh, overparked. Um, when in fact, if you include looking at the streets that surround the development, you'll see that there are lots and lots of cars on the street. And it makes it very challenging for people. And so I would request that, um, when a parking study is done for this one. And that if you're gonna look at other projects, you also include what's happening on the street, surrounding those projects, and not just what's happening in the official parking lot. Um, we saw pictures from, um, one affordable housing project, uh, near San Verone Park, and, um, there's one near me where, uh, yeah, the streets are really, really crowded. I also want to echo the point about this being in kind of an industrial area. And while, I am supportive of the project. I do want to make sure, at some point, we do talk about as a council, um, taking a look at the entire area, and making sure we add the, um, The park space, uh, the, maybe it's bike lanes, make sure it's walkable, it has trees, all the things that makes for a really nice complete neighborhood. Um, this is a start, um, but there's so much more that I think needs to be done. And when it comes to parks, I mentioned earlier, I was going to talk about this. And, um, that's because I think it's going to be really challenging to, uh, find park space in this area. And so if there are existing opportunities, as council member, Abikova mentioned, I absolutely think we should pursue those now and not wait for maybe a precise plan or something way down the road. We can use more park space in that area now. And so I don't want to miss an opportunity that might not come along later. So definitely want to look at that now. Um, question two. Uh, in terms of the public storage building. I am not an architect or a city planner. The building looked fine to me. Um, but I know Steph's had some comments on it. And, um, I, you know, appreciate that folks who have more experience at this than I do, um, are thinking about things. Um, and so I'm good with whatever, whatever staff is recommending on that one. Um, The one comment I do want to emphasize that staff made is about the landscaping, and I do think it needs more variety. And I also would like to see additional trees and taller trees along the freeway, so that there's more of a buffer. Um, Creek myrtles don't get very tall, and, um, they're not gonna really, you know, cover the, uh, freeway. And, you know, my experience with tulip trees, although they're tall. They definitely drop a lot of sap unless you constantly treat them. So, um, I just be mindful of that. And I already talked about question three. Thanks very much.

[03:52:17] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Bye, Snor Hicks.

[03:52:23] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So my answer is also, yes, to all 3 questions. I appreciated, uh, council member committee bringing up uh, maybe uh, taking careful consideration in the future of when we waive fees. I'm open to that. Um, but for this one, I would vote yes. Um, in terms of, uh, some of the things that resonated for me, uh, I'm doing comments on design of, for the, for both uh, pure storage and the alta housing project, um, more trees, particularly buffering the freeway. Um, uh, reducing the prominence of the parking garage. These are things that the EPC, I guess, had mentioned as well. And I, those are things that, like I said, resonated with me, possibly using warmer colors for the building, making it the Alta housing, building making it more welcoming. And then I would add, possibly use, um, murals, uh, on the pure storage building to also make it more welcoming on, um, on both sides. You know, the freeway side and the side, facing the neighborhood and residence, um, and possibly reducing the cost of the building as well. In addition to that, I just agree with a lot of the things that the neighbors said, I think that increasing widening the sidewalk making it more walkable, making the bike routes to school safer, possibly greening the streets, and adding parkland is really important and not to be put on. And that's it. Thank you.

[03:54:07] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Take a quick turn here, and then we'll see if there are any additional questions or comments. Uh starting with question 3 Also, I support the fee waiver, and I agree with council member Mattachek, that the land dedication has significant value far beyond the, the $10000 we would get from, um, uh, from the fee. But I, I also uh, appreciate council member Kame's observation that, um, it's extremely valuable to have local affordable housing funding that we can leverage. The only way we're going to get access to, um, you know, county, state, and federal sources of funding to deliver projects, um, even with the dedication of land. Um, I'm anticipating that, and I think Scaff already spoke to this, also will approach the city for um, uh, a local subsidy. Uh, so, so we do need to be mindful about where local sources of funding are going to come from uh, down the road. Um, for questions, one and two. Uh, just as Peter Katz spoiled my punch line at the annual, uh, city update. Council member Matachek, you've spoiled my punch line for what I was going to say here, and that's essentially, you know, putting my hand very deep into the way back machine, and taking out my council member of town means that. I'm not an architect. I'm not a designer. We hire professional staff to do this evaluation. Uh, the developers, uh, have architects and design designers too. And at least, you know, Tom had his own technical, like, expertise as an economist. I'm a music major, so I have nothing to offer other than opinions about musical aesthetics. So if we're talking about constructing a rudimentary fugue or if you want a harmonic analysis of a bot corral, I can help you with that. But I'm completely worthless to you. We're talking about architecture and design. So I support the planning commission and staff's recommendations for questions one and two. Um, any other thoughts? Um. It looks like hearing the comments. A fair summary, maybe, there's unanimous support for the EPC and staff, design recommendations for questions one and 2 and there's unanimous counsel support for, um, the fee waiver consideration. Um, Anything else staff that you need our input on? Not seeing anything, so, thank you very much, uh, Carlos and Brian and Edgar and, uh, our T, uh, everyone who, uh, provided information during, uh, the study session, um, will conclude the item, and then we'll proceed to item 7.one introduction of an ordinance to enact campaign contribution limits, amend campaign finance reporting and disclosure requirements, and repeal political sign regulations. Senior assistant, city attorney Nicole Wright will present the item. Nicole, were having trouble seeing and hearing you.

[03:57:45] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: I can hear you now. I'm not sure if you can hear me. I see my videos not displayed, though.

[03:57:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: We we can hear you.

[03:57:53] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: Okay. I'll go ahead and get started and maybe my video will decide to work. The light is on as if it's capturing me, but it's not. Um, Sorry about that. So good evening, mayor council members. I'm Nicole Wright, senior assistant city attorney, and I'll be presenting this evening on the proposed ordinance to an act campaign contribution limits, amend campaign finance reporting disclosure requirements and repeal, political sign regulations. And let me screen share. Okay. And since I don't know what you can see right now, I'm hoping you can see my presentation, thank you.

[03:58:35] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, we can see the PowerPoint.

[03:58:37] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: Great. Okay. So as background at the March 8th council meeting, council directed staff to return with an ordinance that included the following established candidate campaign contribution limits of $1000 for candidates at exception in here to the voluntary expenditure limit, and $500 contribution limit for candidates that do not accept or adhere to the voluntary expenditure limit. Council also directed that staff, including the ordinance, that's recommended amendments, the disclosure and advertisement ordinance, and to also include enhanced reporting and disclosure requirements for local committees that receive contributions, or make expenditures in excess of $500. In addition, council directed staff return with a process for reporting to the FPC, non-candidate controlled committees that do not file campaign statements in accordance with the political reform act, and to also prepare an ordinance repealing the political sign ordinance. As directed by council, this evening staff is returning with a proposed ordinance that addresses council's direction and includes the following. It includes the council directed campaign contribution limits. It also includes staff recommended disclosure and advertisement ordinance amendments. And in addition, uh, it eliminates in the advertisement, in the start, in the disclosure and advertisement ordinance, eliminates the two-year time period to bring criminal charges in the enforcement provision. Uh, this was based upon staff's further review of that provision, and in conformance with state law, the period for bringing a criminal action would actually be subject to a one year time period. The proposed ordinance also includes enhanced reporting and disclosure requirements. Um, the proposed approach addresses the council's concerns about the need for enhanced disclosures for transparency in campaign communications. And strikes the balance of the practical needs of staff resources for enforcement, and allowance of campaign communications below the threshold amount without reporting or disclosure. So the streamlined approach requires reporting and disclosure for independent expenditures of $500 or more. As proposed, it would not require committee formation. Um, and it would also apply within the 90 day window preceding an election. The 90 day window is when most campaign communications occur. It would also be applicable to a person or group of persons who are only active in the local election, or primarily support or oppose a local candidate or measure. What would be required is submittal to the city clerk of an FPPC form currently 496 is the entitle of the title of that form. And that would have to be submitted within 24 hours of expenditure. Staff is recommending use of an FPPC form, since it already exists. This particular form is to report independent expenditures. It's an existing form that includes instructions on how to complete it for ease of use, of anyone subject to the reporting requirement, and also ease a receipt by the city clerk's office, since it's a form staff is already familiar with. In addition, um, a person or group of persons subject to the reporting requirements here would also be required to include disclosures on advertisements consistent with state law. So, for example, disclosures such as ad paid for by on a flyer would be required. If subject to these provisions. And finally, uh, the enforcement provisions include penalties, consistent with the city's disclosure in advertisements ordinance, um, as modified, uh, like staff's enforcement of the disclosure and advertisement ordinance staff, which strive to obtain voluntary compliance for possible, and enforcement would be on a complaint basis. The proposed ordinance also includes, um, uh, requirement that the city clerk will develop administrative guidelines for receipt and review of alleged violations under the political reform act, and coordinate reporting of suspected violations to the FTPC were appropriate. Consistent with the city clerk's office, current practice, they would continue to seek voluntary compliance or possible. Finally, as directed by counsel, the proposed ordinance would repeal the city's political sign ordinance, um, and the recommended action this evening also includes a resolution to rescind, the designated locations where political signs may be posted on public property. And that concludes staff presentation, but I'm happy to address any questions that counsel may have.

[04:03:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you for the presentation. Are there any questions from the council? Is it okay if we remove the PowerPoint? Okay. Thank you. Um, I'm not seeing any hands up. I do have a question though. Um, a follow-up from a response, uh, to a question submitted in advance in the meeting. Um, so, uh, is, is it true that if a, uh, campaign committee making a, uh, an independent expenditure in a local campaign in Mountain View, it receives a contribution in excess of $50,000 is subject only to the state disclose act regulations and not the city. disclose disclosure regulations.

[04:04:36] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: I, I believe that's correct because $50,000 or more, well, taking a step back. So our disclosure and advertisement ordinance addresses additional disclosures beyond state law with respect to top contributors at thresholds below the state threshold, right? And so, if their receipt of contributions from contributors at the $50,000 or more amount, that would trigger compliance with state law. And they would not need to comply with our top contributor, the city's top contributor disclosure requirements, they would instead comply with state law.

[04:05:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: State law is less restrictive than our local ordinance. Isn't that the case?

[04:05:21] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: It's actually pretty consistent with our local ordinance in terms of disclosure. Well, our ordinance requires the top five contributors be disclosed, state law requires top three, but in terms of the nature of the disclosures and some of the technical requirements for the formatting of it, it's consistent, there are some differences, I'd have to review to kind of call those out. But the real difference between the state law and the city's ordinance or the primary one is the threshold. Um, as a threshold amount that triggers compliance. So under our local ordinance, it's contributors of 2,500 or more.

[04:05:57] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Right, but the, the, concern would be, if there's only one contribution in excess of 50,000 and 4 between 2549,999 under state law, only one contributor would have to be disclosed. Right?

[04:06:18] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: I see what you're saying. Um, and that's a good question. I think I think that would. Yeah, sorry, I realize you can't see me. I think that would be, I think that would be correct, that I think, I think our ordinance would not apply because there are top contributors subject to the state requirement, and so the state law would apply. We don't we don't have a provision in our ordinance that that really, to be honest, anticipated some sort of hybrid between between the two.

[04:06:53] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, um, but state law doesn't preempt our ability to regulate that gap, right? So we could say, in excess of 50,000 state law applies between the local threshold and the upper limit, you know, step by state law, the local ordinance would apply. Could we do that?

[04:07:13] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: That's something I'd want review to confirm, but offhand, I believe that we, I believe that we could, but it's something I'd want to take a closer look at to, to confirm that we're not preempted from doing that.

[04:07:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Thank you. Those are all my questions. Any questions from the council before I turn to the public for comments? Okay, seeing none. Uh, we'll go to the public. Uh, 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. A timer will be displayed on the screen. First speaker is Katie Zogman.

[04:07:57] Katie Zoglin: Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and city council members, thank you for your consideration of this proposed ordinance. Um, and I do hope that you will support the proposed amendments um, requiring disclosures for the independent expenditures for ads, as well as the campaign contribution limits. Um, there's one section related to the campaign contribution violations that would benefit from some discussion, and this was not discussed in the presentation to council. Um, if you look at section 2.173 of the proposed ordinance, on my copy, it's page 5 of the proposed ordinance, um, sort of talks about the remedies or the consequences, if you don't don't comply, and, and, 1st of all, I do appreciate that candidates would be given the opportunity to remedy excessive contributions, but there really should be some type of consequences if someone does not do so. So, one idea, and of course, you all may not be interested in this, or you may have, there's plenty of other ideas that may be out there as well, would be to have a penalty that is double the amount of an excessive contribution. So, for example, if a candidate has accepted a voluntary contribution limit, under the source, they could accept $1000 in contributions, but let's say they receive 1500 and decide not to return the extra 500. I would suggest that you should consider having a penalty of a $1000. So that's 500 for the excessive contribution plus a penalty of additional 500. That way they don't benefit from not complying with the ordinance. As I said, there may be many other, um, ideas, but the bottom line is there should be some consequence if someone does not comply with the, the, uh, contribution limits. Thank you.

[04:09:52] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Seeing no other members public wishing to speak on this item. Uh, we will return to the council for deliberation and emotion. Any member of the council like to provide comments. Council member Leaver.

[04:10:20] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. I, I believe that Ms. Oglin's comments were very well taken. And I'd like to know from staff if we wanted to move in that direction. Would that be an item that we would bring back? Uh, or is that something that we could, uh, add to the proposal tonight?

[04:10:45] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: Nicole, do you want to address that or would you like me too?

[04:10:50] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: Um. If you would like to address. I mean, I think we could try to craft some language. We might need a few minutes to craft some language to address it, but I think it's something we could try to address this evening. But Janet, good.

[04:11:04] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: No, I agree. I agree with you

[04:11:07] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay, I, I, I would very much support that because I, I feel that, um, we need to present, um, a disincentive to, um, unfair play. And and uh, I'd like to hear from my other council members, but when the time is right, I'd be prepared to um, present a motion.

[04:11:34] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member Shelter.

[04:11:39] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, um, I wanted to talk a little bit about why we're doing this. Um, we, uh, you know, we, we need to have campaign finance rules so that, um, we, you know, we have good campaigns, we get a good council, and things are fair and, and, um, above board. Uh, I think that our voluntary uh, campaign limit is exceedingly effective in, um, uh, making it so that a wide range in our community is eligible to run for office. We are literally, our voluntary limit is literally about a quarter of what people are spending in neighboring communities. And that allows a lot of people to step forward and run for council, and that's good for us. That's good for the city. So I really applaud that, and I think it's worked really well for us. I think it's been in place maybe 20 or 30 years. It's not new. But, um, it, you know, ratches up. And I think that's really the... kind of the, uh... the backbone of our campaign reform. I think that, um, I'm not so sure that this, this campaign limit, um, uh, you know, this contribution limit is really very important, because I think that the spending limit, um, of, uh, I think it's about 27,000, maybe it's 28,000 now, it gets rected up. That's what really you know, that's what really makes the difference. And, um, so, I, I, I just, uh, I want to bring that up again, because there are very few of us who have, I have had, I have had one contribution in excess of $1,000. And, uh, in my, uh, my campaigns. And I think it, you know, in general, people are incredibly generous, but, but, um, the normal contribution we get is $100. And, um, you know, then the most generous, really, that I see is a thousand. So I just feel like... I'm wondering if we're putting more burden on staff, then, um, then we're going to get banks, literally, banging for our buck here, um, because the system that we do have, with the voluntary spending limit, has been so successful. So I just wanted to bring that up again. Um, and, uh, then say that I, I think that all the other changes, you know, about the, the, the signage and, um, are, uh, are perfectly necessary, because we, we want to be legal. We need to do it in conformance with California law. And then the other thing, I think that's important is that we do have, um, we do have good disclosure of, uh, high donations, particularly in the last, is it the last four weeks of the campaign, that you have to donate? Um, I mean, you have to, you have to, um, notify within 48 hours if you receive a $1000 donation, that, we, that's already there, right?

[04:15:10] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: The contributions is a 90 day period.

[04:15:15] Councilmember Pat Showalter: It's a 90 day period. Okay. So that's already there. And, um, a large percentage of the contributions that people get are in the last 90 days of the campaign. So, I just, you know, I just wonder how, um, how much difference? This is going to make in the future. And if it's worth the extra staff time, that's gonna be required to carry it out. So that's my comment right now.

[04:15:48] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member, Matt check.

[04:15:51] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks. Um, so I agree, uh, with Council member show, Walter. When we talked about this last time, um, I was not supportive of having limits on campaign contributions, and that's primarily because I don't think it has been an issue. And so, I do feel like we're adding extra burden to staff, to monitor and um, address, uh, campaign contributions that I I don't think they're an issue. So, I agree that the spending limits have been very effective. And I do support those, and I do support all the other changes that are part of this. I would just say we don't really need the limits on campaign contributions. Thanks.

[04:16:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Not the number for me.

[04:16:49] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thanks. Uh, well, I appreciate uh, council member, Shalter, and Council member, Mata Tech, bringing this up, because I think we were on the 3 side of this vote when this came forward. Um, and I think they very eloquently talked about why, um, I don't think, uh, it's necessary to go forward with the contribution limits. I do feel like we would be, should we not go forward with what's in the staff report? There is a state contribution limit with which we would adhere to. So we would de facto be going with what the state already has. And so, you know, I feel like with our voluntary spending limit, which I believe every candidate has adhered to, plus this new state limit, which I believe is about 4000 dollars. Maybe there's a little change, 4000 and change. I feel like there's already tools in place to monitor the contribution limits. I'm much more interested in the disclosures and the other changes that are made. Um, interested in pursuing what Ms. Oglin brought up, and I would, I guess, if it was a trade-off, I'd rather have staff be focusing on those items and bringing greater transparency. then be focused on just contribution limits. And I do agree with, um, with what Council member Showalter said in having that voluntary expenditure limit means that people who, you know, some of us do work, you know, full time, those who are, can still be able to, to have that, that people, all backgrounds, can can run for council. And I think that that's what's made in Mountain View so special. Um, and yeah, I don't know if there's an opportunity for that discussion to happen again, but appreciate the 2 of them for bringing that back up. Thank you.

[04:18:49] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member, Abi Coca.

[04:18:53] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. Um, so I did support this originally, and, um, you know, my main interest was in disclosures, um, and I had heard about the changes in the political sign, um, area, so I wanted to make sure we were, um, in line with the new laws. But, um, in regards to the, um, contribution limits. I do agree. I think our voluntary spending cap has made it, um, you know, a bit more made running for council here in Mountain View, much more accessible than other cities that may not have any spending limits or much higher limits. Um, but I guess I was looking at the, I think it's for actually $4,800, I believe, is the state um, limit. And, you know, that seems reasonable for, um, higher office assembly, state Senate, when, you know, those campaigns cost, frankly, a half a $1000000 or more. So I was just looking at it relative to that when our elections or campaigns are, I think it'll be about 29,000 this year. Um, it seems reasonable to me, um, that we set the limit at about a $1000 and even at that, you know, it's 29 people and a $1000. So I don't think it's that challenging to do, frankly. Um, and so that was, that was the way I looked at it. It was just in comparison to, you know, the state limits and what that really is applying to versus our local limits with a much lower cost campaign. Thanks.

[04:20:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Um, Before we get into a 2nd round. Any member of the council who has not spoken yet? Um, I did have a couple of comments. So 1st, um, I would request, uh, whoever makes the motion to include a fix for, or at least, staff consideration of a fix for that gap between 2500, $49,999 because as it exists, um, the local disclosure, or the disclosure, I guess, um, is more substantial for lower funded. Independent expenditures than for higher funded ones. So it's a peculiarity and I don't think that's the intention. Um, you know, just because a campaign receives significantly larger contributions, doesn't mean that they should disclose fewer contributors. I don't think that's the intent of the organs, even if you get a $50,000 contribution. You should still disclose any $15,000 contributions that you receive making independent expenditures because that's really the spirit of the local disclosure organ. So, I would request that we include that in the in the motion. Um, on the campaign uh, contribution limits for candidates. Um, the way I think about this is, it's not a problem until it becomes one. Um, I remember in 2008 when then candidate for president Barack Obama became the 1st major candidate for president to not accept public financing. And the reason he didn't do that is because he could raise enormous amounts of money very easily. And since then, no major candidate has accepted public financing. We've, so he, he set up precedent and now that we know you can raise substantially more money privately than you can through public funds. What's the point of adhering to that regulation? And I worry about the day when, um, people running for city council and Mountain View realize that you can raise a lot of money, um, very easily and spend astronomical sums and the voluntary expenditure limit ceases to be, uh, something that people voluntarily comply with. Um because we can't enforce it. It's, it's not, there's no, we're, I think, legally prohibited from requiring uh, expenditure limits. And I like the idea of a contribution limit as a safeguard for, I think when that happens. Um, other cities have voluntary expenditure limits that are regularly not adhered to, um, and, and I, I don't want that to happen here, but it could very easily happen, and I think that's why it's prudent to adopt, um, reasonable. Uh, campaign contribution limits um, at this time. Um, so those were my thoughts. Council member Lieber.

[04:23:53] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, Mayor. Um, well, I'd like to get input from staff, um, if we can, um, Uh, you have some language tonight to. Uh, work to span the gap that the mayor identified in terms of disclosure.

[04:24:21] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: Nicole? No, I'm sorry. Well, no, I think Nicole's gonna answer that one.

[04:24:26] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: Yeah. Yeah, I think, I mean, I think it's something that, as Mayor Ramirez indicated that staff could look at to consider, I don't think it's something that we can respond to an address this evening.

[04:24:42] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay. And in terms of the, the suggestion that um, Ms. Oglin brought up. Is that something that we would want to bring back as well?

[04:24:56] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: If there's, if there's a, um, majority interest by the council and that, um, provision related to the contribution limits, I think that is something that giving staff a little bit of time to craft that language could be incorporated, if that was council's direction.

[04:25:13] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay. Um, So, part of my thinking here, I know that the League of Women voters is working with um, Palo Alto City Council and, and they're putting forward a $250 uh, limit. I believe that Los Angeles has either $250 or $500. Uh, the county is substantially lower. Um, than, than where the state is. And, um, I do feel like the, the state limits are, um, unreasonably high for a local race that, um, should involve reaching out to grassroots, people in the community, and, um, our own voters in the community, um, and and not be, um, skewed as strongly, uh, towards, uh, particular interests as it can be when the limit is, is much higher. Um, So I'd like to go ahead and make a motion that we, um, introduce an ordinance the Mountain View City Council amending chapter 2, uh, article 12 of Mountain View City code relating to campaign finance and repealing article 3 of chapter 3 of the Mountain View City code relating to political signs, to be read in title only further reading waived, and set a 2nd reading for April 26, 2022. And 2nd that we adopt a resolution of the city council, of the city of Mountain View, rescinding resolution, uh, number 17876 designating public properties under which political signs may be posted, uh, to be read in title only, further reading, waived. And I think I'll, um, hold off on Ms. Zogland's, uh, very good, um, suggestion for right now and just, um, take that as my motion.

[04:27:20] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member, Abby Coca.

[04:27:23] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I get the motion.

[04:27:24] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. You very much. Uh, and uh, council member Lieber, uh, would you, does, does the motion include the direction for staff to evaluate fixing that gap? And then if there is an ability to fix it to return to council?

[04:27:42] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Um, my intention is to divide this motion and to raise that after the vote.

[04:27:48] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. That will be considered actively approved. This is the motion that's a staff recommendation.

[04:27:54] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Yes.

[04:27:56] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, fantastic. Um, any other questions or comments from the council? Uh, vice and our case.

[04:28:05] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yeah, I just wanted to clarify that the motion, I heard it just reflecting the staff report, but earlier, or the staff recommendation, but earlier I thought you were talking about changing the limits. Did I miss something there? Did you just move the staff recommendation?

[04:28:22] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Uh, yes, and the staff recommendation is what we came up with at the last meeting.

[04:28:30] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Right, which included the limits.

[04:28:32] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you. Any other questions or comments? I have a motion, um, made by council member, Lieber, 2nded by council member, Robbie Cooker for the staff recommendations. Um, if there are no questions or comments, I'll ask the city clerk to commence the roll call.

[04:28:53] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Labor?

[04:28:54] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[04:28:56] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Abby Coca.

[04:28:58] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I,

[04:28:58] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member, come May.

[04:29:02] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[04:29:04] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Mattachek?

[04:29:05] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: No.

[04:29:07] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member, Sher Walter?

[04:29:08] Councilmember Pat Showalter: No.

[04:29:10] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Vice Mayor Hicks?

[04:29:12] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:29:13] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Ramirez?

[04:29:15] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah.

[04:29:16] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Motion carries by Q.

[04:29:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Council member Leaver.

[04:29:22] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Uh, thank you, Mayor. Um, uh, I'm not sure if I need to make a formal motion, or just take a straw pole on, uh, asking staff to return to council, um, with, uh, a fix in terms of the, the gap on disclosure. Um, and, uh, also, uh, return to council with, um, uh, the, uh, the amendment on the, um, penalty in terms of uh, contributions accepted over the limit.

[04:30:05] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I think since that's direction to do new work, it will require a formal motion.

[04:30:13] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Okay. Then, uh, like to move that, uh, we ask staff to return, um, with legislation to, uh, bridge the gap, um, in terms of, uh, disclosure. uh, to bridge the local, to state level, uh, gap, and that we also, secondly, um, ask staff to, uh, return with, uh, uh, a proposed remedy, uh, for, uh, a penalty and and discorgement of, um, funds that are accepted over the limit.

[04:31:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council membership Walter.

[04:31:06] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Second.

[04:31:08] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Any, uh, staff or uh, interim city attorney Quinn?

[04:31:17] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: I think it might be helpful for staff to have just a little bit of clarification on the proposed penalty. So, hypothetically, if there was a $1500 contribution, and the limit is a 1000, It would be paying back the $500 and then an additional penalty. For exceeding that. So it's disgorgement and a penalty.

[04:31:41] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Yes.

[04:31:44] Senior Assistant City Attorney Nicole Wright: Well, wait a minute, isn't there? Oh, if I, if I may also add to dinner on city attorney's question, just to make sure that we're clear too. So is the penalty, that council is seeking would be in the same amount, that was the same amount of the return of funds in excess. So under the example of 1500, it would be a return of 500, that was in excess and a penalty of 500.

[04:32:10] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Correct.

[04:32:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Thank you. Um, so city clerk, uh, Glazer, you have your hand up?

[04:32:19] City Clerk Heather Glaser: I just also want to clarify, so, um, as the ornament is structured right now, we give someone 30 days to rectify. So are we also, we're saying that that doesn't matter whether they return it or not, they're gonna have to pay a penalty. Cancel, I'm believer. Is that? your intent?

[04:32:44] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Um, well, does Ms. Quinn, I noticed that the interim city attorney has her hand up, um, Not sure.

[04:32:52] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: Oh, it was a legacy hand.

[04:32:54] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Yes. Yeah, I would say that, um, The Disgorgement could happen, um, uh, as immediately as it's discovered, and and the, the penalty could be within the 90 days.

[04:33:17] City Clerk Heather Glaser: If I, if I can clarify. I mean, are we going to get, would we retain the 30 day, if somebody did it by mistake or they have 30 days to, to take it back? Or are we going to remove that 30 day grace period? Basically, it's a 30 day grace period.

[04:33:34] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Yeah, I can completely accept the 30 day grace period.

[04:33:39] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Okay, so we'll we'll retain that. Okay. Thank you.

[04:33:46] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: And then city clerk, you still have your hand up. Okay. Uh, so then, um, to restate the motion made by council member labor and seconded by council member Shel Walter. Uh, 1st to direct staff to come back or evaluate, you know, and make sure it's, it's feasible, a fix for disclosure between 2500 and 4000, 49,999. And then secondarily come back with, um, a, uh, a penalty for acceptance of contributions, um, above the limit. But with a 30 day grace period or basically a, a period to cure, right? So, if you discover as a campaign, I've accepted over the limit, you return it, there is no penalty. It only applies after the 30 day. Uh opportunity to cure. Okay, fantastic. Council member at a check.

[04:34:43] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks. So, um, I'm, I very much support the additional, uh, disclosure requirements to fill the gap there. But, um, since I am not supportive of, uh, limits on campaign contributions, it makes it hard for me to support penalties. Um, so, unfortunately, I have to vote no on something that half of it I agree with.

[04:35:06] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thanks. No worries. We understand why. Count the number, show Walter.

[04:35:14] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Oh, I was just gonna say that I'm the seconder, and I agree with having a period of penalty. I do think that, um, people make mistakes, and they ought to have an opportunity to correct their mistake. And if they don't do that in a reasonable amount of time, then they should definitely be penalized.

[04:35:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you for the clarification. Are there any other questions or comments from the council? Being none. I'll ask the city clerk to start the roll call.

[04:35:52] City Clerk Heather Glaser: From reliever?

[04:35:53] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[04:35:54] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member of Shelter.

[04:35:56] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Hi.

[04:35:58] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member M.A. Coca?

[04:35:59] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi.

[04:36:00] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Kamei.

[04:36:03] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Hi.

[04:36:05] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Metachek?

[04:36:06] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: No.

[04:36:08] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Vice Merricks?

[04:36:09] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:36:11] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Marys?

[04:36:13] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah.

[04:36:14] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Motion carry 61.

[04:36:17] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. I'm going to move to continue the meeting past 10 o'clock. We have one item remaining. Um, and I hope it's a pretty quick one. Uh, is there a 2nd A council member command?

[04:36:30] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: 2nd it.

[04:36:31] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Um, city clerk, can you, it will call?

[04:36:36] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Ramirez?

[04:36:38] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah.

[04:36:39] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member May?

[04:36:43] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[04:36:45] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Abby Koga?

[04:36:46] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Hey,

[04:36:47] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member reliever.

[04:36:48] Councilmember Sally Lieber: I,

[04:36:49] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Mattachek?

[04:36:51] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes. Yes,

[04:36:52] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Michelle Walter?

[04:36:53] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes.

[04:36:54] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Nice Mayor Hicks.

[04:36:56] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:36:56] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Motion carries unanimously.

[04:36:59] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: You very much. We will now proceed to the last item. 8... amendments to the tenant relocation assistance ordinance to apply to mobile home tenants. Spanish translation services are available for this item, we will now hear from our interpreter.

[04:37:15] Spanish Interpreter: Este noche andremos interpretación. Dispunules, indicación, se la pantaye, de supa tenere interpretación, selecionelli, dioma, que corresponda, selecione, lico, no de interpretación, con global la partenferior de la pantaye, selecione, le dioma, en español, gracias.

[04:37:35] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Assistant community development director Wayne Chen will present the item. Somebody promoted Wayne. Not seeing him in the ND list. City manager. Are you contacting when?

[04:38:12] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, can you just give me a moment, please?

[04:38:15] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Sure, no worries. Welcome, Wayne.

[04:38:57] Assistant Community Development Director Wayne Chen: Good evening. How are you all? Thanks for the, um, uh, the moment to get me set up here, uh, and uh, I'll take one more 2nd to share the screen. Okay, hopefully you can all see the screen. And I will go ahead and begin. Thank you. Um, as in, this is a public hearing, the 1st reading for, um, extending the tenant relocation assistance ordinance to mobile home tenants, and this item will go over the, uh, proposed amendments. Uh, Before I uh, go on, I do want to note that uh, Ankevon Dorsen, who's the project manager for the red stabilization team. I'm having some feedback on my audio, are you all having some feedback? Um,

[04:39:56] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I am not.

[04:40:08] Assistant Community Development Director Wayne Chen: I apologize. I'm hearing the, um, words being replayed back to me as as I'm talking, so let me see if I can fix the situation here. Okay, let me, let me try again. I apologize for that, um, disruption. Um, also, Karen Tiedeman, who is outside legal counsel for the rent stabilization team is also attending the meeting. Should any questions come up, they can assist in answering any questions. Um, so here's the recommendation, which is an uh, introduction of the ordinance to amend the uh, Trao, the tenant relocation assistance ordinance, to extend the benefits to mobile home tenants, who rent a mobile home in uh, Mountain View, mobile home Park. Uh, just a brief background. Uh, last year, as you uh, recall, uh, council adopted the mobile home rent stabilization ordinance and that ordinance went into effect uh, in October. Um, at that um, September approval meeting, um, council also included, uh, wanting to extend, uh, mobile home tenants, uh, 2 additional pieces, uh, relocation protection to mobile home tenants, uh, who are evicted without fault, and also a right of return, uh, to a unit, um, where a unit was taken off the rental market, but has been returned back to the rental market. So, I wanted to extend that right to mobile home tenants as well. Uh, just a brief, um, summary in terms of the applicability of this, um, modification, and a bit of terminology. We wanted to clarify that the recommendation would cover the tenets of a mobile home that is rented from 2 situations. Um, tenants could be renting from a mobile home owner who actually rents out a space in a park, but is renting out the unit to a tenant. It could also covers a situation where the park owner also rents out the space and the unit to a tenant. So in both cases, um, the tenants would be covered. Uh, the trail is not proposed to apply to mobile home space rentals by a mobile home owner. Meaning an owner who owns the unit, but rents a space from the park owner. In that particular situation, uh, state law, um, provides protections, um, for those for those folks. Uh, just a quick summary, the key provisions of the the trio. Um, there are income eligibility requirements. It is based on 8 city income limits that are published each year. And it's based off of the median, uh, uh, moderate income uh, limit, the 120% AMI limit, plus an additional 5%, uh, $5000 on top of those limits. So you'll see the 2nd row is the 5000 uh in addition to the income limits in the 1st row. So those are the income limits needed to qualify. The relocation assistance as part of the trail that would be extended to mobile home tenants would include security deposit refund, subscription to a rental agency, um, 3 months of equivalent rent, um, to a, um, comparable unit. And also, a special circumstance household would receive additional payment. It started as 8000 and suggested for inflation. So for this year, the additional special household amount would be um $8503. And special circumstances, households, um, includes at least one person in the household who is 62 years of age or older. Um, someone who has a, um, a disability or handicap, um, in the household, or one or more minor children who, um, is 19 years of age, or under and who are considered to be, uh, legal dependents, uh, The 2nd piece of the provisions is the 1st rite of return, and between the mobile home rent stabilization ordinance, and a tenant relocation assistance ordinance, it covers a variety of, um, a right to return situations. So the mobile home ordinance itself, um, covers situations where, um, units were removed from market because of substantial repairs. Um, owner moving into a unit. If the property was permanently withdrawn from the rental market or if it was intended to be demolished, um, and it was removed from the market. And then the trio, uh, would amendments would regulate the 1st right of return, the process for uh, implementing these right of return procedures and extending those procedures to, um, mobile home tenants. Uh, it does apply to a couple of different situations. Again, it can cover a situation where a park owner Um, also rents out units in the park, um, and they would have to withdraw every turn back. All those units. Or it could be a, an owner who, um, owns maybe one unit, or more than one unit, but rents the space out from a more, uh, a park owner. Um, in that situation, a mobile home owner, Um, would also be subject to the trail provisions. Um, the process today included a um, meeting with the rental housing committee because they are the, um, body implementing the mobile um, um, uh, run stabilization ordinance and they supported the, uh, proposed uh, amendments. This item also did go to the EPC in March, who unanimously recommended the amendments. Uh, we are here at the 1st reading. Um, if council approves, This will come back to council, um, for 2nd reading next month in May, and then it would take effect 30 days after, um, on June ninth. Um, so here's the recommendation slide again, and this concludes staff's uh, presentation and happy to answer any questions uh, you may have.

[04:46:46] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Wayne. Are there any questions from the council? Being none. Um, we will turn to uh, the public for comments. Uh, if you have any uh, comments, please, uh, raise your hand to the Zoom or press star 9. Are there any members of the public who would like to speak on this island? Being done, we will return Alex Brown, uh, as quick as you can.

[04:47:21] Alex Brown: All right, you know I had there. Uh, Alex Brown, now if you go home alliance. Uh this is very important to a lot of members of our community. There's a lot of anxiety about park closures and being put out of their homes. We also have a lot of members who are, uh, disabled elderly, who have, uh, who take care of their families, and I think that it's, it's a great move for the city to try to take care of them, help produce everybody, and protect them from being displaced. So thank you. Thank you for doing this.

[04:47:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. No other members of the public wishing to speak, we'll return to the council for, uh, deliberation and emotion. Uh, council member labor.

[04:48:06] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you, mayor. Um, if there's no one else who would like to um, speak on it, I'd be prepared to uh, offer a motion.

[04:48:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Feel free.

[04:48:18] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Thank you. Like to move that we introduced an ordinance of the city of Mountain View, amending article, 13 of chapter 36 of the Mountain View City code related to tenant relocation assistance, to provide tenant relocation, relocation assistance benefits, and a 1st right of return to mobile home tenants who rent a mobile home in a Mountain View mobile home park, and finding the ordinance to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Under sequent guidelines, 15061 v3, to be read in title only for the reading waived instead of 2nd reading for May 10th, 2022.

[04:49:01] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much, and Council member to May. Do you have a?

[04:49:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I do, but I see the city, the interim city attorney's hand up. So I was, I was going to 2nd it, but

[04:49:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, okay, sure. We'll go to the city attorney first.

[04:49:18] Interim City Attorney Jannie L. Quinn: I just had a clarification question that I'm wondering why it's not set for a 2nd reading at the 2nd meeting in April. Because it just, it needs 5 days between a 1st reading and a 2nd reading and that could, um, allow it to go into effect earlier. So I didn't know if Mr. Chen had a idea if that's, if there was a particular reason, or if the council would have the desire to move it forward, a meeting.

[04:49:49] Assistant Community Development Director Wayne Chen: I think that it was just determined in discussion with, um, processing the timeline, and I think if the council wanted to move it for, uh, faster, we could turn the report around and and place it on, uh, the next council meeting.

[04:50:13] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Account number today.

[04:50:17] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Sure, I'll 2nd it and add if we can get it on that other council meeting date if the motion maker is comfortable.

[04:50:25] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Uh, certainly.

[04:50:30] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Great, thank you. So we have a motion for the staff recommendation with the expedited uh 2nd reading. Any other comments, questions, or clarification? Seeing none, um, will turn to the city clerk.

[04:50:48] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilman reliever?

[04:50:50] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Hi.

[04:50:51] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member in to May?

[04:50:52] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[04:50:53] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member MA Koga?

[04:50:55] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi,

[04:50:55] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Council member Scholter?

[04:50:57] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes.

[04:50:58] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Oops, skipped councilor manager. Sorry about that.

[04:51:01] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[04:51:02] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Nice, Mary Hanks.

[04:51:04] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:51:04] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mary Ramirez.

[04:51:06] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah.

[04:51:07] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Ocean cares unanimously.

[04:51:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Great, thank you very much. And because God is merciful. We are skipping 8.2 and proceeding to item 9 council staff committee reports. Are there any council staff or committee report? I'm some member Metachek.

[04:51:30] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks. I just want to mention that I participated in a meeting of the Santa Clara County airport land use commission. Thanks.

[04:51:41] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member.

[04:51:45] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Premier. I know that my colleagues have received notice about this, but I wanted to mention it in public at our last MTC meeting. Um, we, uh, the commission passed a, uh, project's priority list to respond to the bipartisan infrastructure law funding that will be coming down. And on that list of priorities, we're very pleased to have Caltrain electrification on the list, as well as 6, uh, 3, there are 6, uh, um, grade separation projects, Caltrain grade separation projects that were, um, also on the list and 2 of those. Both are Castro Street and Ring Star separations made the list of six. The other one was from the Santa Clara County, was the one in Sunnyvale, and then there were some in San Mateo County, but so we are very well poised, if the funding does come through, to hopefully actually get that funding. So it was very exciting. And I just want to thank our staff, who worked really hard, to prepare, us, and we really were focused on project readyness and shovel ready projects and, you know, all the hard work that we've been doing the last 10 years or so to prepare, get these projects ready, I think, paid off. And I also want to, um, acknowledge our VTA staff who really worked around the clock until um, the very a couple of hours before the meeting advocating for our Santa Clara County projects. And so we did quite well, BART, the BART extension is also included in that, on that list too. So wanted to share that with everyone. Um, and then other um, uh, activities. I attended the state of the city. Um, and heard Mayor Ramirez's, uh, punch line about Ross Pharrell. I can't believe he actually, I think you were too young for that, but that was a great punchline. Was it Ross Perez? Roz Perez running mate. I forget his name, but who am I? Why am I here? Um, and then I attended the fire academy, I graduation. We have 5 new recruits and it's always great to see, meet them and meet their families and, um, to be a part of that badge pinning ceremony, and then attended, um, the Santa Clara County Public Health, um, discussion on gun violence. Um, they, uh, and, um, Counselor Roselli Labor was also there, um, taking input, um, from cities on, um, you know, what what are our biggest concerns around gun violence, what we think the root causes are, and, um, they're doing. The county has commissioned a study on the economic costs of gun violence, so this was all part of that. Um, and that's it. Thank you very much.

[04:54:46] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. A lot of good news. And I was 4 years old, so technically around, uh, council member labor.

[04:54:56] Councilmember Sally Lieber: You really know how to depress us, mayor. Well, I, I'd like to, um, add on to, uh, council member Abbe Kogo's good comments about the, um, the county, uh, the county, uh, meeting on gun violence and it's, it's quite interesting that, uh, public health department is, is really, um, taking the lead on this. And regarding, um, uh, gun violence is public health issue that does have an identifiable, uh, cost to society. And, um, so Mountain View's, uh, efforts were very ably represented there. And, um, as were, um, some of our other cities. And one of the issues that I was very interested in was the possibility of the county as a convener to, uh, look at, uh, the gaps in our local ordinances and how we could have, uh, a more cohesive, uh, landscape of policy, uh, across the cities. And they seemed quite interested in that. Um, so that's something that, uh, will be coming, and I think that we can share the, the lessons learned, um, that we've had and hopefully receive policy from other cities as well. And it's really good to see the strong interest. Um, There. So that was definitely a bright light in things. And, and then I want to, um, raise an issue with council, and see if we can, um, get support for a piece of legislation, uh, authored by Senator Josh Becker, um, who has been very helpful for the city in, in so many ways. And, um, he is authoring, uh, SB 1000, um, which is the public right to police radio communications act.. And this is a piece of legislation that would, um, clarify the the California Department of Justice, um, actions of a couple of years ago that led to, um, most, uh, police band radio communications, um, becoming encrypted. And so this legislation would require that, um, personally identifiable information, uh, be encrypted, but that, um, other transmissions, um, be on an open frequency. So the, uh, California Highway Patrol, um, has already adopted, uh, this hybrid approach and, uh, other jurisdictions in the state are doing so. So this bill would simply, um, clarify that and help to, uh, clear up some of the misunderstandings, um, coming from the DOG J memo. And, um, so mayor of, uh, I don't know if the best way to approach this is, uh, a straw poll, of those who would like to, um, uh, support Senator Becker's SB 1000 or, uh, to bring it back to council, to consider a position of support.

[04:58:22] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Let's 1st turn to staff. I see, um, police chief, Shang has joined us. Did you want to speak to this? Um, chief.

[04:58:34] Police Chief Chris Hsiung: Um, I can. I don't know if uh city manager McCarthy has anything she wanted to lead with or?

[04:58:40] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Um, yes, thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chief Shang. Um, I think if you maybe could give counsel an update on, uh, the process and and Mountain View and just where we're at and what SVRA did just to give a little bit of of context to what council member Lieber is talking about. And, um, the feedback about, um, from SVRIA and maybe what's what's happened and, um, Palo Alto in other cities.

[04:59:08] Police Chief Chris Hsiung: Sure, as council may recall back in March of 2021, our department joined the majority of other Santa Clara County agencies and law enforcement on moving over from encryption, and that was as a result of the Department of Justice, putting out a memo that basically mandated all police departments and sheriff's departments in the state to protect personal identifying information. And this comes about as in our day-to-day course of duties when we interact with people. We pull them over, we'll check their license driver's license. So if you have a scanner and it's unencrypted, you would hear this information over the air. And I believe the spirit of that behind the DOJ's mandate is to protect from ID theft. So SVRAA is the governing authority in the county that helps with interoperability of all of our radios. Um, and one by one over the course of last year, each of the agencies in our county moved over to the encrypted side. Oops, apologies for the technical error. Um, It wouldn't be a Zoom meeting without something like this happening, right? Um, as I try to speak and and uh, fix that and chew gum at the same time, um, hopefully that will fix it. Um, Does that look okay? All right. Um, I, so, um, with that, um, everyone has since moved over. Now, um, I am vaguely familiar with what the CHP does. I don't know operation that I haven't seen exactly how that works. For us is a little bit problematic in having extra channels per se, because for us, that operationally that represents the need to actually have a dispatcher, man that extra channel and listen for it. So right now, if you were to walk into our dispatch center, you would see uh, 3 to 4 dispatchers, one monitoring, all 911 calls coming in, one monitoring, all police channel, and one monitoring, um, the fire department, and then one for mid peninsula open space, which is our contracted city. We don't have the staffing currently to create a new channel for them to listen and just run license plates and personal identifying information. So there's some operational difficulties. And my understanding is Palo Alto, our neighbor considered this and looked at this as well. Um, I may stand to be corrected, I believe that their council voted to, um, maintain it as an encrypted channel. So, I don't know if uh, if uh, counsel has any other questions in regards to that.

[05:01:43] Councilmember Sally Lieber: Um, just to make sure I understand staff, um, have evaluated this particular Senate bill and, uh, is your recommendation that we do not take a position or, um, have you not had a chance to evaluate it? and would you be comfortable coming back with, um, a memo with, with your insight?

[05:02:10] Police Chief Chris Hsiung: I haven't done any like official analysis, if you will. Um, so I don't know that I would be prepared to go line by line and go into that bill. I know operationally for the county. It does present a number of challenges if, uh, enacted as it is because, um, it's with the technology as it is. The whole purpose for the SVRA was interoperability for a major event. So let's take the Gilroy Garden shooting, for instance. Everyone was able to go and be on one channel. When you add to the mix, encryption versus non-encryption, um, any mixing of the 2 will automatically default it to an non-encrypted channel status, which means in the midst of a critical incident, um, you don't want a situation where it's pure chaos, basically, and officers shouldn't have to say, is this channel encrypted or not, they just need to go about and dealing with that critical incident. So there's technological challenges that come with, um, something as simple as one, any one city in this, Santa Clara County that goes unencrypted. Now it presents a hurdle where interoperability now becomes at risk, if you will. So there's a lot, I think, that we would need to look at. Um, in order to kind of do carry this through.

[05:03:31] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, Council member, Medachek, that you want to speak to this issue.

[05:03:39] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I did. So, um, yeah, I served on SVRIA for several years and I was wondering, um, about the challenges it would pose, um, if you had both encrypted and unencrypted. But, um, beyond the dispatchers, um, here in Mountain View, I don't know if you've thought about this, but what would be the impact on everyone else using uh, the radios just to, you know, address situations in Mountain View?

[05:04:07] Police Chief Chris Hsiung: Thank your favorite question. So, um, one kind of aspect, if you were to go on a ride along and you would hear all the radio chatter, it might sound foreign, but to us, it's actually a great amount of situational awareness, so we understand what all the officers are doing. If an officer kind of switches channels and goes to a different channel to check personal identifying information, we kind of lose a little bit of that, right? That person could be on a different channel when something's happening, an Oscar calls for help is the typical kind of concern or vice versa, the person's on the other channel, and they're in trouble, and they have to call for help. Um, You know, the dispatcher obviously would hear that call for help, but you're talking about seconds of delay of not knowing, whereas right now, in any given time, a street supervisor would know pretty innately where each of his or her officers are in the city and what they're doing. Right? So you lose a little bit of that. And we're not unique in this in terms of how we are operating. This is consistent throughout Santa Clara County. All of law enforcement operates in this manner, and we're all kind of on the same on board with the encryption. Um, the talk groups are working, um, right now, for instance, if there's a pursuit that leaves our jurisdiction and goes into any Santa Clara County, um, Agency, it's seamless. We all go to one channel or the dispatchers can just patch us all together. You lose that if one agency kind of breaks from the fold and is unencrypted at that point.

[05:05:36] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[05:05:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. So, Council member Lieber, would you be comfortable with an off agenda memo with staff's, uh, evaluation of the bill? It sounds like it's, um,

[05:05:49] Councilmember Sally Lieber: certainly, and I, I do think that there are times in which, um, our department and other departments in our county, um, uh, be it, the, the sheriff's department or others do interface with the California Highway Patrol. Um, and so if the highway patrol is, um, uh, is adopting a hybrid approach, then there must be a way to surmount the technical, um, difficulties. I know that we're, um, you know, very, very close to, uh, 101 and and 85 and, um, that there are incidents that take place that involve those roadways or even, um, El Camino, uh, could involve CHP. So, I know that there are technological ways. And I guess some of the, um, the things that are important to me about this is that, um, we do have a, uh, position statement that we've adopted, um, uh, around transparency, uh, for law enforcement, um, in the community. And this is one of the largest, um, compromises, uh, to transparency that has, has happened, um, in a, in a very, very long time. And, um, I definitely, uh, understand the, um, the possibility of losing some of the information around, uh, situational awareness, but I I think that, um, in the future, uh, all of our, um, departments in our area and in our state will, Um, will have resolved the technological issues. And, um, this bill would, uh, take effect in 2023. And, um, I would really appreciate the, the offer of the, the off agenda analysis of the bill, because I think, um, having been up in the, uh, state legislature, one of the most frequent things that, that people, uh, kind of call out to each other is read the bill. And, um, I, I would really be interested in staff's, uh, staff's analysis and what, uh, what you see in it. And I'd like to, um, put particular, uh, emphasis on our our home delegations, uh, legislation. I think that, um, now, everyone in our delegation has been very open to Mountain View and, um, incredibly responsive. And, um, so I would like to make a good faith effort to, um, uh, to really analyze, uh, their priorities as well, because everything is, uh, is a reciprocal, um, uh, relationship in in this kind of a sphere. Uh, so I would very much uh, value that mayor, and I, um, like to continue to come back to this because of the, uh, the great importance of it, and, uh, this legislation, uh, is sponsored, um, by our news outlets. And, um, I think we've seen, uh, on the the international scene, and the the national scene, and frankly, state and local on every level of government, that when, uh, the sunshine of, uh, a free flow of information is not there is when, uh, things happen that do compromise, uh, the public interest. And so that's what I'm, uh, very, uh, motivated to maintain, and, and what we lost, um, frankly, with, uh, um, a DOJ memo that was, was not well stated, and, uh, was not clear. So I would, uh, appreciate this coming back. Thank you.

[05:10:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: City manager McCarthy?

[05:10:21] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Uh, thank you, Mayor. Uh, yes, I was gonna say if, um, counsel wants to take a straw poll on whether they're interested in an off agenda memo on this item, we can certainly analyze the bill further and also provide information that, uh, we have received from SVRIA about this. So if counsel would provide that direction, that would be helpful. Thank you.

[05:10:47] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: So we'll just raise our hands if there's support for an off agenda memo about the Senate bill. One, two, three, four, five. Okay, so majority support. Um, and it sounds like it's, it's good for us to understand since it may have an impact on public safety in Mountain View. Um, thank you, Council member labor. there anything else? Council reports or comments, council member show Walter?

[05:11:15] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well, this is just on a much lighter note, but on March 26th, I think it was. Most of us attended the Mountain View Multicultural Festival. And, um, I, I, I really enjoyed it. I thought it was, um, uh, just a wonderful demonstration of the range of, uh, cultures that come together and live in peace in our, um, in our community. And, um, so I just wanted to end on that and thank the recreation department for, um, all the effort that they went to, to organize it, and, you know, all the people who took part, and particularly with the things that are going on, you know, we hear going on in the world. Um, uh, these... Culture's getting together, uh, in a peaceful manner, it's really important. So, uh, I uh, I just wanted to bring that to everybody's attention. It was a lot of fun. Thank you.

[05:12:24] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, any other reports or comments? If not, we will move to the next item, closed session report. Interim city attorney Quinn, do you have a closed session report?

[05:12:36] Interim City Attorney Jannie Quinn: I do not have a closed session report this evening. However, I wanted to thank you all for the opportunity to come back to Mountain View for these last 3 months. I've really enjoyed being back in Mountain View and being able to serve you as your interim city attorney. So thank you very much.

[05:12:52] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you for your service to our city and for being willing to step in as interim city attorneys. Uh, difficult work and we really appreciate you stepping in. Only we could have done a proclamation for you.

[05:13:10] Unknown Speaker: Very nice one at home.

[05:13:11] Interim City Attorney Jannie Quinn: I have a very nice one at home already.

[05:13:13] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: So there we tried for proclamation, and it was found out, and interim attorney Quinn put the kibosh on that.

[05:13:21] Unknown Speaker: I had heard. It's too bad because I actually have things to say, but 1044 at night. twice to say thank you very much.

[05:13:32] Interim City Attorney Jannie Quinn: You're very welcome. I enjoyed. I enjoyed it very much and I appreciated it very much. It was nice to work with all of you.

[05:13:38] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Likewise. Well, we will now move to adjournment. Thank you so much for joining us. Our next city council meeting will be held on April 23rd, 2022. Uh, the meeting is adjourned at 1044 PM. Have a good evening.

• ← Previous
• Next →