UnGovr Transcript
iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.Scheduled start 6:00 PM · clock-time estimates pending review
0:00 – 0:0847 turns
We have a quorum. May we have the roll call, please, Gail?
Roll call, called by Unidentified speaker 2 · 1 under review
Show transcript
Excuse me. I'm here.
Thank you. Council Member Blatz? Here. Council Member Francina?
I'm happy to be here.
Council
Member Rywood?
Yeah, me too. Hi. And welcome everyone to the September 27th 2022 meeting of the Ohio City Council. Mayor Pro Tem will you please say the pledge
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled, click to expand
And let's move on to approval of the agenda. And I want to make a request. Could we please move up item number five which is, or I'm sorry six, the resolution supporting universal health care after number two, which is the Arts
Commission report? Can that be all right with everyone so that we can?
I'm not sure that I am because the priority is, I think, number three. Yes.
No, I agree we just have several speakers here and so just... So
maybe we'll hear the speakers but not necessarily deliberate in debate?
Well, I think it's going to be pretty...I think we would have time because I think they're...
I just don't want to take up time on three which is a priority for deliberation. Right.
So I'm
not sure
if... I'm fine with it. I'm fine. Okay, Susan's fine?
Assuming that the speakers won't be too long.
So what you're asking for is you have a presentation on item six. You'd like to move it up?
Yes, after item number two. It's going
to have deliberation and debate as
well
though. So it'll go two, six, and three.
How many speaker cards do we have for item three?
We have three.
And how many are on Zoom do we have for item three?
I can ask them to raise their hands if you'd like, but they might not even be here yet. We have nine people in the Zoom queue
for the entire meeting. OK. You know, I don't have a problem to move that if we only have a few speaker cards.
OK, thank you. I'm a minority. Okay, so approval of the agenda? A motion to approve?
I'll move to approve except for the change in item number six.
And I will second that. So roll call please Gail. Actually we're all here so we can just say your name. Everyone agree?
Okay wonderful. Well actually I'm no but
that's
okay.
We'll move on to presentation tonight. We are lucky enough to have County Supervisor Matt LeVere. Thank you so much, Matt. It's a presentation by Matt regarding community emergency response teams or CERT training in the city of Ojai and the Ojai Valley. So thank you so much. What a great program. We're grateful that you're here.
Well thank you and Mayor Sticks, Council Members, Mr. Vega great to see you all and thank you for having me for a few minutes tonight. You know in this day and age of politics it's really hard to find issues which we all agree on and I think the emphasis and the preparation of natural disasters and how we as a community respond how we respond to these situations is one issue that we all agree on. It's something we need to focus on and prioritize And so that's why I'm excited to be here tonight, you know in Ventura County over the last 10 years residents had to deal with fires mudslides floods earthquakes and then you know the Thomas fire was a painful reminder for all of us about the importance of emerging emergency preparedness.
And I want to start by commending the city and this council for all of the extensive efforts you have undertaken to really prioritize emergency preparedness. I think your community meetings have been exceptional, you have a great fire safe council doing amazing work and i think when you look at communities Ojai is really ahead of the course when it comes to emergency preparedness so I thank you and congratulate you for that And that's really the reason I'm here tonight, is to really kind of join in the efforts which you have already undertaken. And I'm excited to announce that there's going to be a new round of CERT classes starting in about three weeks. CERT is Community Emergency Response Team. It is basically a series of disaster preparedness classes.
It's put on both by my office and the county fire department. The classes are actually taught by county firefighters And it's a great way for the community to really get involved in helping themselves and helping their neighbors. I want to share just briefly kind of what the class is focused on, and it really emphasizes hazards in our community that are going to impact this community. What does it? It trains them in basic disaster response skills, fire safety, light search-and-rescue A team in neighborhood organization and disaster medical operations. And what you're really trying to do is build better prepared individuals and really better organized and prepared neighborhoods. So the goal is to really get people in the same neighborhood to take these classes together, and to start building that web of preparedness.
So classes are starting October 12th. It is a Wednesday night, it's five consecutive Wednesdays so through November 16th the classes are from 630 to 9 so 24 hours total they take place at the Oakview Park and Resource Center there on Maloney Street in Oakview And how it works is we need 20 people to start the class and we've got a good list started, but we're really trying to let bring awareness to the community for those in the room. Those watching please consider signing up. We want to get a full class today over the last 15 years over 1200 residents in the valley. have engaged in this training, which just goes to show Ojai takes this seriously and you have a lot of residents here who are well prepared. And so if you need more information, if you need help registering, you can register at www.vcfdventuracountyfiredepartment.org backslash cert C E R T Please feel free to call my office email me happy to help people if they have more questions that they need help registering I just really trying to get the word out.
Now, appreciate all of your support. I know it's something you all care about and if we can just get the word out in this community that another CERT class is starting and we're trying to get people involved. And so thank you so much for the time tonight and it's always great to be in front of you. Thank you. Thank you
so
much Matt. And I left some information with Madam Clerk on how to sign up and more fact sheets. So again thank you. It came
up in our discussion
of
the disaster
council. Again, thank you very
much for being here and doing this about the importance of something you touched on in your presentation and that's preparing neighborhoods Which also implies trying to organize by neighborhoods. And I'm wondering if of the people that a minimum of 20, hopefully we're going to have 120 or more. We get that neighborhood information who would be your office that would help organize maybe how to deploy by a neighborhood centric approach rather than just having a list of people or you know trying to basically make that a next step?
Yeah, it probably be a conjunction of the fire department. The sheriff's office my office would help and we get all the data from who participates this who graduates where our neighborhood volunteer cert volunteers are. And so yeah I think that's something that we can put out hopefully into so neighbors know kind of who in their neighborhood has gone through this training And the goal, as I said is to really get multiple people involved. And so you get these neighborhood kind of strike forces.
That's why I think the next step and maybe trying to have neighborhood CERT meetings, you know, as a next step after the training
based
on the location information.
It's a great idea if there's a group of neighbors that want to get together and maybe multiple neighborhoods. This resource is always available. I know my office Brian Brennan who many of you know Brian's here. Brian's been running And I would hope in the City of Ojai that the city could provide
0:08 – 0:2034 turns
Facilities if people want to have neighborhood meetings, you know or inside the city or maybe even so I just sort of influence Anyway, I just think it'd be a good way to implement a great and better.
Yeah, great idea Well, I have the pulpit. I just want to say one more thing. I know you have an item on Soule Park tonight I just want to really thank City Manager Vega Luis Gomez Luis is here but Luis Gomez your parks manager council members why Rick Haney? It's taken some time, but it was a very fruitful time we all spent together. And I'm really glad that we got it to the point where we got this partnership set and I really hope it moves forward. So thank you for all of your efforts in that. Thank you. Yeah.
Thank you Matt.
Thank you
for
advocating for that. Thank everyone.
Okay,
thank you so much Matt. All right, we will move on to commission reports. Any reports James?
Do we have any commissioner reports Gail?
Not that I know of, no. Okay
thank you all right we will move on to public communication and just a reminder to everyone these are items not on the agenda and because they're not on the agenda we cannot discuss them and that's because of the Ralph M Brown Act items have to be agendized 72 hours in advance When you make a comment, we're not ignoring you. We appreciate your viewpoint and participation And we can agendize items for the future and we'll be using a gentle chime When your time is up please respect that and respect each other's time And there is no giving away time to speakers so we'll begin with Jill Nolan and then Brian Eakins and then Robin Gerber
I'm back. It's Jill Dolan Dolan must get my name right. I'm with the Ojai Arts Center Theater and we're opening a new show this Friday and actually would have been better if we had opened this last weekend so that everybody here and everybody listening could come and see this play before you engage in what might be a contentious discussion later on maybe This is a play called Walter Cronkite Is Dead. It's very awkward for me to stand here and say this because I'm also in this play, but it is a play about two women from let's say opposite sides of the culture wars who are trapped together in an airport and they either have to talk to each other or sit in stony silence so there are some fireworks but eventually we realize that talking Listening, listening is a famous part of the story.
Can we can really discover our similarities and find common ground? So anyway we're opening on Friday I would have some cards I'd love if anybody has any place hang this in a store window that would be great 730 on Friday and Saturday night and two o'clock on Sunday we're running for three weekends And it really is a play of our time. So Walter Cronkite is dead this Friday, thank you.
Thank you Jill. Next we have Brian Aikens then Robin Gerber and then Leslie Rule.
Hello Mayor, hello Council. I am as many people may know I'm the chair of the City of Ojai's Historic Preservation Commission. This heat has dried out my throat. I'm here as an advocate of the city of Ojai local downtown historic district However, I'm not here representing the full HPC. We've been unable to get together a special meeting in order to get a consensus from the HPC but I am here representing the ad hoc committee which is made up of Commissioner McCattin, historian Craig Walker and myself and we've been working on this project for Many years. First of all, I want to thank you for the time that you did give me in the meeting two weeks ago allowing me to stand here and interact with you to ask questions, to answer your questions and to have a discussion.
I think it may have helped that there were only three people, me and two others that were left at that timeframe but again, I thank you for that time that you gave me. The reason I'm here tonight is in that meeting, you voted on a November 8th deadline for a vote on the Downtown Historic District. Community Development Director Lucas Seibert put out the documents on the Friday following that.
Here's the situation. We had our HPC meeting just the Thursday right before that we're not going to have another HPC meeting until October 13th, the deadline is November 8 I think that 26 days afterwards so that's not going to give us a whole lot of time. We're trying to do that we as an ad hoc committee meeting have been working since. The night two weeks ago because the three of us can can do that however as I said I'm here representing the ad hoc committee not the HPC and so I'm here to ask the council to consider putting on the.
You figured it out we figured out there's no meetings but of the council in the month of November none at all There are two meetings in October. So what I'm asking and I'm going to go under three minutes What I'm asking is that the council? consider putting on the agenda for the first meeting in October the consideration of moving the November voting deadline from November 8 to December 1. By having it December 1, that still gives time in order for the results to be discussed in the December 13 meeting. Again, that gives us I think 26 extra days for our commission not only to address what we're doing going forward for us to get consensus from the ad hoc committee to the full commission but also gives us that little bit of extra time
Thank
you all
very much. Thank you Brian. Technically, you're not supposed to ask people questions during
the date. Sure, okay. Brief question is fine. There's a possibility that we might have a special meeting November 15th I don't know if we don't know yet but would that give you enough time?
Well, that would give us a week more. So I'll take anything it can. OK? Thank
you. I want to make sure I understand too. It's not for a special council meeting. It's for council to change the voting
deadline. But did he say December 1st?
So the request, we set election day as the voting deadline for the historic district. Oh
yes!
The request is to change that to December 1st. That's the first meeting in December.
Got it got it thank you.
Okay yeah my request is to get it on the agenda right okay. Thank
You
Brian.
Okay next we have Robin Gerber then Leslie Rule and then Claire Grasdy I think
Hi, I'm Robin Gerber. My printer broke. Thank goodness for this open public forum part of our cherished democratic process and for the Brown Act which encourages transparency between the public and our elected officials. Last week, the mayor chose to explain her vote opposing money for the Ojai Family Shelter through social media in a video. I responded with a comment to that video and here it is.
Can Mayor Sticks do another video explaining why at the same meeting where she was the sole vote against the family shelter, she's also the sole vote against funding the Fire Safe Council, the Girls Empowerment Program in Ojai Red? In my humble opinion, good governance should not be used as an excuse for making tough decisions. In this case, good governance is what the rest of the council did.
in considering that for instance, the family shelter is pretty busy. Serving the needy without much time or staff to find and file for grants. This comment on social media was removed from the Mayor's Facebook page along with Councilwoman Francina's comments supporting my question. I was also blocked from the Mayor's Facebook page and I'm still waiting for an answer to my question I hope all council members now and in the future will choose to engage and not block or cancel honest critique or questions.
And rather than one-way posts on social media, I hope this Council will use these meetings to explain your positions. This is the forum that's on the record and open to all Many of your constituents don't use social media, and we all know how subject it is to manipulation. The best public square is in this room. We look to you to fully air your positions right here.
Come prepared. Engage with your colleagues. Listen to the public. And through this open process come to the best solutions for Ojai. Thank you.
Thank you, Robin. Next we have Leslie Rule and then Claire Grasdy and then Wayne Maynard. Good
evening. Thank you council members, Mayor Sticks. I'm here to remind folks about tomorrow's candidates forum at Oak Grove School at 530. I also wanted to briefly introduce myself as I will be there as a candidate. I am running for City Council for District 1 I am for a livable Ojai. And what that means to me on the grandest scale is a community that cherishes and protects its people and its place, including the flora, the fauna, and the land.
And in turn, that ecosystem nourishes the community. It's a relationship based on trust, respect, and reciprocity. There are two main issues that I want you to know, I will work on unceasingly. The first is the continuation of water sustainability. I intend to work diligently to ensure that Ojai has the water that it needs going into the future. Needless to say we need to address our future with climate change now.
The second is affordable housing. A livable Ojai, my livable Ojai provides affordable housing for people who serve the community Our city workers, nurses, teachers, first responders, service workers. They should be able to find affordable housing and live here if they so choose. It is an untold benefit to the community to have those who serve the community live in the community.
So thank you very much. And once again, I hope to see you at the Candidates Forum tomorrow 530 Oak Grove School where I will share more of my intentions as well all of those running and thank you very much. Thank you for listening. I hope to see you tomorrow. Good night.
Thank you Leslie. Next we have Claire Grasdy and then Wayne Maynard and then Valerie Freeman.
Good evening, my name is Claire Grasdy. I'm the Director of Public Transportation for the Ventura County Transportation Commission. Just wanted to promote our youth ride free program that allows anyone 18 and younger and those older than 18 enrolled in high school to allow and they can now ride any public transit bus for free anywhere anytime in Ventura County. Thank you so much for having the flyers. Of course I forgot that I have sent to the clerk though So just really wanted to promote that any operator, the Ojai Trolley Gold Coast Transit. You can take it to get to Santa Barbara and VCTC so really just wanted to just promote it hopefully let's give youth a good opportunity to get introduced to transit so feel free to take your kids out there and get them Thank you very much.
0:20 – 0:2816 turns
Could I ask Claire a quick question, please?
Quick
question. Claire could you and by the way, I've really enjoyed serving on the VCTC hearing showing your work, seeing your work and everything. Do you have the latest on how ridership has been recovering even before this in terms of post COVID?
Some better than others, Gold Coast doing quite a bit better there. I think anything that has to do with like more commuters doing a little bit worse so like Metrolink not quite as good but the Valley Express and Piru and the Piru route in particular but service in Fillmore has been doing well so kind of getting there But I think this program will
help.
Yeah, after this month, I think we'll have a we'll really know but I've heard Gold Coast they've just had a huge increase in passengers so I really hope this makes a difference and you know just gets people used to the bus and you know it's been hopefully a great program for everyone. So thank you so much for having me.
Thank you so much. Thanks Claire. Next wave Wayne Maynard then Valerie Freeman then Anson Williams
Good evening, my name is Wayne Maynard. I'm a resident in town and I'm here tonight to express my concern over the action taken last night at the Building Appeals Board or maybe more appropriately their inaction. They were charged last night to review the city's adopted ordinance for the new building code which needs to be completed by January 1st. Actually, the ordinance needs to be done probably by November 30th because it has to be around for thirty days.
They decided they needed additional time to review the documents and my biggest concern is that probably 80 percent of what they were reviewing is already in the City Municipal Code. There's just a few provisions with regards to structural hardening that are the new requirements that they're proposing or that the city staff has I guess developed so If we don't follow the time frames what's going to happen is we're gonna have a lapse in our building code. And what does that mean? That means that during the period following January 1st when we don' have a city building code and we have to enforce the minimum standards of the state, we will lose a lot of ground that we picked up on over the years such as requiring class A roofs.
Also, requiring modifications to homes in the wildland interface to harden not just new structures what the building standards code requires. And then the class A roof covering we also lose that so I think it's important and I encourage the city later in your meeting when you have an opportunity to set your future agendas is to direct staff To put the proposed ordinance developed by the city on the agenda so that it's adopted, so that the building code does not lapse and that we have an ordinance in effect on January 1st.
I think that you could probably direct staff and apply wouldn't be too hard for them to present it Thank you Wayne.
I want to make sure the public understands, and you correct me if I'm misunderstanding. My understanding is the state building code automatically goes into effect January 1st period.
The state building code goes into effect January 1st, which means the previous state building code and any ordinances adopted by jurisdictions adopting the previous code are no longer enforceable. Right
but it doesn't lapse it's just that the over above and beyond state building code with anything that we haven't already incorporated in our code locally would not be in effect.
Correct. What lapses are the amendments that we've worked for for many years now to try to build the fire safety in our community. Those go away until the city adopts their new code.
I just didn't want anyone to have the impression that we were lapsing the core state. I made that impression it's not my intent. OK thank you.
Thank you Wayne. Next we have Valerie Freeman and then Renee Roth.
I am Valerie Freeman, Ojai resident and newly appointed Arts Commissioner and assigned to Literary Arts. Ohaiku for Peace. Ojai Peace Poem Competition. It's time to write and do your submission now to win peace haiku. Launching on I should have put my glasses on before I came up here. Launching on Ojai Valley Peace Day, September 18th, Ohaiku represents the beginning of a new series in the literary arts supported and promoted by the Ojai Arts Commission where the entire Ojai community is invited to participate.
The haiku-themed competition begins in our very own international city of peace with the inspirational public art Peace and Man's Hand, which is here. And by Ojai artist Ted Gall. It's located in the back courtyard of the Ojai Art Center and the sculpture crowns the top of a six foot tall peace pole So the piece is about this big, but it's this high up if you go back and you're looking for a giant hand. It's epic!
What does peace mean to you? Submit your original Ohaiku entry by October 31st, either by email or mail. Haiku is a Japanese poem of 17 syllables and 3 lines, 5 syllables, 7 syllables and 5 syllables traditionally evoking images of the natural world. Please include your name and contact info on your entries. Being anonymous is welcome too. The winner receives the Fall for Peace Ojai Coot $50 prize.
And also, Ojai Creates is also a sponsor they donated two prizes also so That was fun and great. The competition is for all ages, and be inspired by the public art sculpture by Ted Gall. Write your haiku in the haiku format, and by submitting a poem to our contest you accept that your poem may appear online and in print. Submit your original Ohaiku entry by October 31st, and the email is ohaiku4peace at gmail.com or mail it to City Hall here at attention Ohaiku.
The judges are high school students because I feel that they are creating the vision for the future for peace. And on another note, Ojai Studio Artist Tour is coming up. It's October 8th through the 10th.
Thank you Valerie. Next we have Renee Roth.
0:28 – 0:4023 turns
Good evening members of the city council mayor sticks the staff for the city. I am here to just announce that I recently had the pleasure of attending what was called the localizing California waters event that was at the Ojai Valley in last week we've got members of the audience who were there Bill Wyrick, Ray Powers other members of the community were there.
And that was an event where Regina Hirsch and others were able to document ways that we can increase our water supplies and increase the flow of rivers Our waters that are going into the Ventura River watershed 25 projects came out of a two plus million dollar grant. That where they identified 25 areas in the watershed for enhancement of our water supplies.
I just, I believe this is really significant. This is really important a set of tools that it's called the toolkit were result the result of that grant project and I would encourage the city and the building appeals board and the planning commission to all get on board and have Regina Hirsch and Asia of her staff talk about how we can adopt those into the city code. These are going to be significant for residential water users to help benefit their landscapes right now I've been door knocking because I'm running for Ojai City Council I see everybody's landscape is dry dry to the bone. I mean, it is really amazing how much water people are saving in our community and especially landscape water use where most of our water goes but I think we can do things to help recharge, to help reuse and to help recycle cycle water into our landscapes We don't have to talk about how we don't have water.
We do get water every year, we don't know how much but that is our water supply and get used to it. Get used to figuring out how we can use it and how we can benefit from that water use in our landscapes. Thank you. Here's some of the rainwater harvesting and I think Sousa has some others may want to just grab one and take a copy It's also on my website, reneeroth.org. Thank you.
Thank you, Renee.
Well actually, you're not allowed to comment on public comment. Any comments online, Gail? Okay, we have two more. Pamela Grau or just one more? Pamela Grau.
Hi everyone. Pamela Grau. I'm an art commissioner here in town and many of you are aware of the Ojai Studio Artists. This is our 39th year. How many of you on council have actually been on the tour? Great. Okay, well we have 70 over 70 artists this year on the tour and for three days our studios will be open it's free to the public in the past we have charged 40 50 dollars a ticket this year it's free usually the money goes to Any comments online, Gail? If there's anyone in the Zoom queue who would like to speak during public communications please use the raise hand function now.
Okay. All right, thank you very much. We will move on to the consent calendar. Is there a motion to approve?
I'll move to approve the consent calendar.
Second. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? No? Okay, great. Thank you. We will move on to discussion item number two, the Arts Commission Strategic Planning Consultant James, our staff report?
Very brief. Thank you. Just to introduce this item was on the agenda last meeting at that time we had put it on consent and so we hadn't invited anybody from the Arts Commission to speak and so the council had some questions and so we've relayed those to the Arts Commission and they have designated I believe it's going to be Christine Steiner from the Arts Commission to speak So I'm just introducing Christine Steiner to speak to thank you request. And
here I am. Thank you Mayor Sticks and members of the council. I'll be brief so as James explained you had asked the Arts Commission to appear before you to further describe this request. The arts commission provided a memo which is in your agenda materials. It describes the background of the process and the need for a selected facilitator to lead the process for the development of the long overdue five year plan.
I'll make just three points and I welcome your questions. The first point, this process has been more than a year in the making. It was initiated by the former commission and continued with the present commission. Indeed, the last five-year plan which was in 2014 was guided by a facilitator. The second point this is not a request for new funds. It's a request to reallocate funds within the existing budget and I remind the council that this commission is hardly a spendthrift in fact it returned approximately seventy two hundred dollars from the last budget money that could have been devoted to this process had the timing allowed which it did not.
And a third point we recognize the importance of a process guided by a skilled and experienced facilitator. And we acknowledge that we do not have the skills or the experience to do this ourselves. And so like so many other nonprofits governmental entities community organizations and the like we seek this expertise. An analogy is that we cannot be both the coach and the players. We cannot be both the doctor and the patient.
We cannot lead the planning and simultaneously participate in it. And so, in conclusion, we're not spending this money on ourselves as had been earlier noted. We're not throwing a party. We're engaging in a deeply deliberative process In order to develop a plan that delivers our mission for you, the council and for the community. And that's it.
Thank you Christine questions from Council Bill and then Susan.
I think you know my question. I spoke with you already about one of my, actually my core concern and I spoke with one other commissioner about it and I'll bring up more about it after I get to answer your question when we get into deliberation but you mentioned deliberation. Yes, deliberation is a public process And would you object to making this procedure, this effort fully public? Which means not having private out-of-public sessions with individual commissioners.
My response is I'm not a facilitator, and I understand that there's a certain formulaic way of approaching it. So you and I had a one-on-one discussion. Yes. And what I understand... You're not surprised
by my question?
What I understand from this process is that the facilitator will have brief one-on one conversations with the five participants, and then we'll have a series Which we plan to be two full or two partial days so a long process that will be public. In fact much of our Arts Commission meetings had been devoted to how we can appropriately make this public if not in this tight little session for you're asking for
the one
I want to
continue privately.
What I'm saying is, I'm not sure it's our call. I think we need to trust the process and if a facilitator is of the view that there's a benefit to the one on one, it may make sense. And by the way, it would not violate the Brown Act or any other open meetings construct to have a one-on-one. That said, Essential to this council that we dispense with the one on one or rather that the one on one be also advertised and publicly available. I think we'll work out whatever process makes sense to get a facilitator to assist us to develop this long overdue plan that we want to bring back to you.
Thank you.
Susan?
Christine, my understanding is that the 2014 process was a half day for $500. And it was suggested or one of the questions that came up was do you feel that you need well, you must feel that you need two full days but could it be accomplished in less time and less expense and what are your thoughts on
that? Let me address first time and then expense So this is the 2014 plan. It's very short it addresses fixing the lighting in City Hall. It addresses In a number of instances City Hall gardens it doesn't go into the kind of detail that we the five members of this commission believe are important to catalyze the arts in this community. And so the facilitator believes and our vice chair in securing the facilitator believe that two half day processes make sense.
Next to the dollars. So the amount is twenty five hundred dollars it had initially been higher for this experienced facilitator but it was negotiated down I can tell you that I've participated in these. And I've also helped a client engage a facilitator, which was initially $30,000 negotiated down to $20,000. And so I know that that's market and I know equally that this facilitator is being more than generous for this public purpose that we have here.
While $500 may have been reasonable in 2014, I know my hourly rate was less than 2014. And it may well be that that's different and also it's a larger process.
I have one more question. What was the amount that you returned to the city? That the Arts Commission returned to the
city? I believe it was $7,200. Is that correct James? More than 7,000 and less than 7500. OK so. I don't have that information.
0:40 – 0:4622 turns
It's good to know, but it was quite a bit. I do
recall- It was, yeah and my point that we're not a spend thrift entity. We're really a very careful entity which you know based on how slender our overall budget is.
I think considering everything you've said plus the fact that you returned approximately $7000 is making
sense. Other questions Randy?
This is directed to the city attorney. I remember when Mayor Johnson was elected, he wanted to do a strategic planning session and we couldn't do it without it being a public engagement so how do we what's the workaround on this that they can do something in private whereas the council could not do it in private?
So as I understand the proposal from the Arts Commission, it is not to have all five commissioners sitting in the same room with a facilitator. That is prohibited outright and cannot happen. It's to have the facilitator meet in one-on-one conversations with the five commissioners, not relay information from any of... From one to one to one to one to one. Simply take it in and then bake it into their facilitation process without communicating any information from one commissioner to the other.
We would expect that the facilitator would comply with that requirement. So that's how they could do it. It's a five one-on-one conversations.
And then Christine, you don't have an outline as to what you're trying to achieve. Your outline will come after your interviewed? Who puts the outline together as to what you're going to be meeting on planning for and bringing to the public's attention? How does that process work in this? At the very end somewhere in the middle somewhere
Again, I don't know this facilitator though Smitty West has worked with her before and can identify how... I don't
need the
facilitator.
I need to know what your objective... What are you looking to achieve?
I'm looking to achieve precisely what the council has mandated as our job and that is to advise and make recommendations to you, the Council on the needs resources and opportunities in the arts. Other items as well but that's primarily it and for the five of us to put our Hearts and minds together to determine how best to identify those needs resources and opportunities. And to bring that back whether that happens in mid process or the end I think that's an iterative process.
And so why Mayor if I can and is this OK that I. OK. I'll come back and do deliberation, but we may have to bring Christine or it looks like the chair is here maybe have the chair come up too.
OK. Thank you very much Christine. Much appreciated. Gail any? We have no public comments here. Any online?
If there's anyone in the Zoom queue who would like to speak on this item please use the raised hand function now.
OK, we will move on to discussion.
The stated goal is to develop goals and priorities. I fully support that. I fully support the need to have this strategic plan done but goals and priorities is a vital public interest. And I just think it's important that we approve this with the stipulation that we're not going to have almost like a quasi-commissioner hired to talk to each individual commissioner. The commission is appointed to operate as a group, as a body, to develop goals and priorities as a body. And I have no problem with a facilitator helping with that process but it should be a public process I am remembering history that I want to share with everyone and that is that I was someone quite upset when I started my first term of the council to see that the city was paying for meals for the community development director to meet with planning commissioners privately outside of the public view for pre-meetings.
We stopped that. It was a bit of a debate, but it was not appropriate I thought then and I don't think any appearance of that kind of thing should be... we should not open the door for it. So again, I envision a facilitator having a public meeting for people interested in the arts and the community maybe having a round robin that the facilitator helps with in terms of the individual commissioners But I really do have some problem with the idea of individual sessions with the commissioners when this is supposed to be a commission public process in my opinion.
So with that taken out, I would support this.
Randy?
So again, in the fine print here it says that in actuality the budget for this is $5,000. And it looks like you've got a contribution from Sense Smart? Who's Sense Smart? Am I reading this wrong?
Yes.
Budget $2,500 in parentheses. $5,000 50% CentSmart contribution what is
it? If I may that's the discount from the facilitator so CentSmart is the facilitator the fee to the Commission to the city is 2,500 and she's eating the other 2,500 okay
0:46 – 0:5221 turns
Thank you, Christine for clarifying. It's a
nice contribution.
I have
Christine.
Susan?
Christine, can you come back? So I think Council Member Weirich's recommendation is worth discussing. I would actually be more comfortable with that myself. Do you have an objection to that because it does seem as I started to think about it that could be much more fruitful
My thought is first, it doesn't contravene the Brown Act. So that's the baseline. However, it does not contravened the Brown Act to have one. I just want to establish that. It may make again I'm not a facilitator so it's difficult for me to interpret the value of preliminary one on one meetings although I understand and assume it's to get a sense over the landscape to sort of tee up this session that's going to happen.
It may well be that it's important to have one on one sessions in which case perhaps those should simply be open but still one on one. I don't know if that would satisfy the council but if so and if it wouldn't be unduly. Difficult for staff to sort of set those up we could probably do it in that way. Again I'm speaking off the top of my head without consulting my colleagues but that may well make sense.
Can I ask the city attorney, so there is no what's the word prohibition legally if they have like perhaps briefer one-on-one sessions and then we have a public forum. Is there any reason why they can't do both?
Legally no, provided that the facilitator does not communicate information from one to the other, to the other, to the other. So the facilitator can keep it in their head and bake it into their process but they can't serve as a hub-and-spoke meeting? Communicate the information back and forth. With that caveat, it is legal but a policy question whether the council wants to pay for it.
Okay, well if it doesn't increase the price or anything that to me makes the more the most sense because then the facilitator has a sense of the landscape and then. Yeah we're just I didn't know that councilman. I hadn't even thought about that. I didn't know. I already assumed that it was an open meeting actually. I didn't know about the one on one so I'm just thinking on my feet yeah. So if I understood correctly you could have one on one sessions perhaps not as long because it wouldn't need to be as long And as long as the facilitator just keeps the information in her head and then as a basis or as a way for her to facilitate, it could be just part of the process and then go to the public meeting.
In the process I had been involved in before, it was a very brief telephone call between the facilitator and me. Just sort of an introduction, hello what do you see as some of the issues? Very brief. It wasn't the driver of the sessions at all and I expect that it would be the same here. In fact, I assumed it would even be a brief phone call but we're making it.
Could I ask a question? So how would the Arts Commission feel about a hybrid situation?
How would the commission feel about having the one-on-one sessions in public? It may well be that, and again...
Didn't you, Matt, say they could do one on one in private, right? And then to have a public session. Right.
That would be legal but it's up to the council whether the council
wants
to do
that or not. So my question is how does the Arts Commission feel about that?
The Arts Commission voted 4 to 1 and enthusiastically to support this proposal which included the one-on-one, presumably again very brief with the bulk of Session with a facilitator being in the public open to the public and welcoming to the public.
Thank you for clarifying much appreciate Randy.
So the first thing before us is the twenty five hundred dollars and then the second is the process. So, if they spent 500 I did talk to Christine golden too. And if they did spend $500 eight years ago, I can understand the cost of planning going up so I don't it first at the first glance I wasn't sure I wanted to support $2500 but I think it's, I think that's worthwhile. I would still like to see you can do the private discussion i'm a little opposed to that but as long as you the facilitator brings it back and asks the same questions publicly that they're asking in private.
That way the community is seeing the thought process and someone may not be left out or someone's thoughts may not be misrepresented, and I think that's the most important thing is that transparency and honesty.
0:52 – 0:5823 turns
Any other comments? Ready for a motion?
Yeah, so what's before us is it's a recommendation to authorize the Arts Commission to use $2,500 from its 22-23 budget to hire NASA. Is that Mao? M-A-A
L?
Noosa. What did I say? I'm sorry for mispronouncing that name. The other thing we want to throw into it though is that you do hold your private session and you bring it back and you do the same session in public, and we are not to exceed $2,500. Do we want to put any type of a time limit on this so that we can get this planning done? Would the chair like to speak to how long he thinks that it's going to take?
Hi, Nigel Chisholm on the chair of the Ojai Arts Commission. Great job Christine thanks very much and it's good to see the other commissioners up here speaking to you as well we want to be part of the community as much as we possibly can with regard to the time frame Randy this is three years behind schedule already right we want it done yesterday Um, and so the- this was put in Smitty's hands originally.
Christine is more than able to speak to it tonight which is why she's speaking tonight. We're a team we come as a group. We speak as one generally although we don't always march in lockstep but I think I can speak for everybody when I would say if the council is gracing up to pass this And we will certainly get on this as quickly as humanly possible. In previous conversations, if you check with the meetings that we've had, we were certainly looking to have this done by November or at some point in November. So certainly before the end of the year because it's absolutely critical to the functioning of the Arts Commission and for us to be able to adhere to our mandate.
Thank you. And one suggestion too is that we hold these public meetings in the evening and not midday or mid-morning, but with an opportunity for the community as a whole to be able to show up and ask and participate.
Mayor may I ask the maker of the motion?
Just with regard to that, nobody ever shows up at Arts Commission meetings. This has been true forever. One of the things we're trying to do is inculcate ourselves into the community more and invite people into the Arts Commission meeting so they can actually be aware of what we're doing. We have every intent to advertise this. We want people there being part of the process. This isn't anything that we try and do behind closed doors or behind people's backs.
We want to include ourselves and have the community included in the process. So, the more people there, the better it is for everybody and we'll be able to do our job much better at that point. I
wasn't implying what you're talking about. What I'm implying is that if we don't do it in a time that's appropriate for the community to be engaged, if you have no one showing up to your commission meetings, you'll have no one showing up to these.
Well, that may be true. But I think it's more related to how the Arts Commission functioned in the past than it is going to moving forward. But we're certainly happy to do this at the most convenient time to get the most amount of people there if that
answers your question. So you see this as a tit for tat but I'm not gonna throw the past art commissioners under the bus. I look forward to what you achieve.
Fantastic thank very much
Thank you so much, Nigel. So we have a motion...
Quick question on the maker. Sure. So as I understand it, the stipulation of the motion is that any content, any and all content that comes up in individual session will be part of group sessions? Yes. Okay, thank
you. And it can be Saturday or evening. It doesn't have to be evening.
Yeah, right. I'll second on that stipulation.
All in favor? I want to thank the Arts Commissioners, volunteers being of service making our community more beautiful. We are really grateful to you so thank you for coming and speaking and look forward to hearing about the workshop.
Just real quick Matt do we need a vote since it was to spend money?
Do you need a
roll call for voting money? Yes, that is correct.
Okay roll call please
Gail.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 · 1 under review
Show transcript
Okay, wonderful! All right thank you we will skip ahead to item number six request for me to adopt a resolution supporting a universal single-payer health care option at the state or federal level and I was contacted by our local doctor Helen Petroff Thank You Helen for being here who's a member of our local branch of Physicians for National Health Program This group would like Ojai to consider passing a Medicare for All resolution in support of universal single-payer Medicare for all.
And as we know, health care is a human right and every person in the city of Ojai deserves quality comprehensive health care This resolution would be a positive step forward to reaching the goal of universal health care by allowing Ojai to call on our state and federal legislatures, legislators to work towards the passage of the bill. And already Santa Barbara, Goleta and Carpinteria and 23 other cities in California have passed this resolution so there's no staff report I'm going to call on Dr. Petroff thank you Dr. Petroff for being here
0:58 – 1:0516 turns
Okay, thank you so much for inviting us to speak. Okay, so I'm Dr. Helen Petroff. I live here in Ojai and I've been a family doctor here since I finished my residency at UCLA 16 years ago and I've never looked back. Being a family doc is a great job. I love to get to know the families I take care of when something happens to one of my patients I get to be there for them and to help them through whatever's going on I love doing preventative care where I can work with my patients to identify and treat medical problems at an early stage, where we can make a difference to keep folks healthy.
However of course there are days when being a family doc is stressful and frustrating. By far the biggest source of frustration for me as it is for many doctors is dealing with insurance companies This is so bad that lots of docs are opting to not even accept insurance and to do what's called concierge medicine. I don't want to do that because I came here to take care of all my neighbors, not just the rich ones. So for that reason at our office we try to accept as many different insurances as we can.
So we have to pay a bunch of staff to do things like check people's insurance eligibility, collect copays request authorizations and argue with the insurance companies when they try to not pay us which happens all the time. And it breaks my heart when I'm in my office and I overhear upset people grumbling Both the patients and the staff in my front office, patients find that their insurance has mysteriously switched them to a different primary care office without their knowledge.
Or they have a copay or out-of-pocket deductible that they didn't know about, or that the referral was denied, and they are mad. And it is myself and my staff that get to deal with it. The worst frustration for me is when insurance companies tell me how to take care of my patients. which also happens every day. If I think someone needs an MRI of some part of their body, I have to beg permission from their insurance company. The fact that I have to justify myself to some bean counter at Blue Cross is super annoying.
Similarly if my HMO patients need to see a specialist then I have to have them come in for a visit just to get a mother may I from their insurance company. Sometimes my patients get mad about this and they think that I actually want to be the gatekeeper for all their care. I assure you I am not that much of an egomaniac. Also, the patients get mad when the specialist they want to see is not on their insurance company's panel of contracted doctors and so they can't see them. And they probably know that this is not actually my fault but I am the one in the room when they are upset so I get to deal with it.
But there is a light at the end of the tunnel. When my patients turn 65, they are finally eligible for Medicare. I love traditional Medicare. To be clear, this is as opposed to Medicare Advantage which is just handing your Medicare benefits over to some insurance company who goes on to torment your doctor as I've described. So traditional Medicare, with traditional Medicare I can order an MRI without approvals from anybody. I can call my patient and give them the phone number for the specialist that they want to see and they can make their own darn appointment.
Medicare pays us fairly for our work and is very efficient. I wish all my patients could magically just get traditional Medicare tomorrow. While I'm sure I would still have things to complain about at least insurance companies telling me what to do and making my patients miserable wouldn't be one of them. Thank you
Thank you, Helen. Any questions from council? Helen, do we have a question from council?
I'm sorry, I couldn't... I'm mostly gonna be able to just talk from my own personal perspective so I don't know how helpful I'll be.
I really do... Yeah, I'm Medicare now and yeah, I would never do the managed care option. Traditional is provides more Latitude for the doctor patient relationship and I think that's important. And so one of the questions I wanted to ask you because it potentially, I think could become a problem In terms of that doctor-patient relationship and having just one means of payment, is what's currently on Governor Newsom's desk. And I wanted to get your feeling about that.
AB 2098 which allows the Medical Board of California to revoke a doctor's license to practice medicine in the state for expressing an opinion quote Contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.
And I was not aware of that.
It's on it on the governor's desk right now.
OK yeah
and I remember you and I are old enough to remember when one of the standards of care accepted in Europe was thalidomide prescriptions
Oh yeah. All sorts of terrible things have been accepted
for a doctor to say I don't agree with that standard of care and to be threatened with revocation of your license if you question that standard of care or to get paid is a problem. And I just wanted to get your reaction to that particular legislation that's on the governor's desk right now It's not fair because you haven't seen it. I just quoted a description and that's not fair.
Yeah, I can see people bringing up that kind of stuff. I can just speak to the way it is currently basically to be a Medicare prescriber or prescriber provider means you get an NPI which is your national provider number and essentially you have to basically have You have to be a doctor in good standing, and yes you have to have a state license. But Medicare itself doesn't actually have anything to do with the licensure. It's all up to the states.
So if states want to make it difficult for doctors to practice in that state then I think those doctors are going to go to other states. But as it is now, Medicare doesn't really have anything to do with that part of it. You just have to have a license and you know not be whatever felon I guess. That's my understanding.
Thank you. Could we get Mr. City Attorney did you have a comment on this one?
No particular comment, I believe just for edification for the public who may not be aware of it. I believe that bill is not yet signed by Newsom but pending we'll see if he signs it. It's on the governor's desk. He may or may not sign it and I think the intent is something regarding the controversy that has arisen over COVID vaccinations but I'm not entirely sure. I'm quoting the bill.
That might be a motivation But the bill allows revocation of a doctor's license to practice medicine in the state for expressing an opinion, quote, contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care, end quote. General statement.
Gotcha. So yeah, so that's the bill and then we'll see what Newsom does. He has until the end of the month to make his decisions. There
is huge opposition to the bill. Any other questions? Randy you have a question?
1:05 – 1:118 turns
Just looking at this, it's like almost you're saying it's a no-brainer. The problem is we haven't been educated on any of this so it's not to deny you that you're smart and responsible and trustworthy I would probably if you live in Ojai I'd say that but I don't know enough about what you're trying to achieve But when someone says that universal health care is a right, you know along with that I would say that universal housing is a right. Universal affordable housing is a right so those are great phrases the problem is what's in the details?
So you're asking us to support a resolution as the mayor is asking us. And I'm not going to say no to it, but I am hesitant saying I don't have enough information just like the majority of people in this community and the majority of people in the United States don't have enough education on this, but the phrasing I can't. Who wouldn't want that?
Yeah, I totally agree with you that there's not enough education about this subject in
America. And my wife and I for years have just talked about why we need that insurance middleman. It just drives me crazy. I'm giving someone money to do what? To make money. It just drives me
nuts. We're still on questions. Any more questions from council? Okay. Thank you, Helen. We have three speakers, Christy Showald, Neil Jongensen and Larry Steingold.
Hello, I'm Christy Schold. I live at 611 Libby. I've lived in town for about 12 years. I've been practicing medicine in Ventura for 24 years. I work at the Ventura County Medical Center which is the trauma center and the medical residency education program so I do inpatient medicine and I deliver babies and I do outpatient medicine and it's awesome! I totally agree with everything Helen said and I support it 100%. One of my comments was only that, you know, I see patients because of where I work and what I do that have private insurance, that have public insurance called Medicare or Medicaid or Medi-Cal and then have no insurance.
And the people who suffer the most are the people obviously have no insurance, but also those people with insurance who are what we call underinsured. Which means they can't actually afford to use the healthcare that they're paying for whether they get it from their employer or they pay for it themselves. Their deductibles and copays are so high if 80% of their bill is covered but 20% is not and they have a cap of $18,000 per year for their family.
Unfortunately that leads to the number one cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States is medical bills. And so people really deserve to have better care than that, we are the richest planet in the world and the fact that our patients and the people of the country suffer because they can't access care which is available but what we want to provide is ridiculous. So I would like you to consider this resolution there's no financial obligation it's just a statement of trust that we feel like this is the right thing to do.
Thank you, Christy. Next we have Neil Jongensen and then Larry Steingall.
Well, you just heard from my wife. I'm Christy Schultz. You can probably hear the similar thing from me. I am also at Ventura County Medical Center and work with the residents. I have to say that one of my One of the sources of frustration is trying to teach the residents what they will be encountering when they get into practice. How do you figure out what's going to be covered, what to do when it's denied? I just had a talk to a resident about a patient of his who has multiple sclerosis.
It took about six months to get her authorized to have And then when they tried to get a ramp authorized, it was not covered benefit. So now she has a wheelchair but she can't get into her house. That's the kind of frustration we deal with every day and if she had Medicare it would still be a little bit of difficulty which there should be some difficulty you can't, Always get everything you want, but it wouldn't have been nearly the difficulty and she would have a ramp right now.
And I have to teach the residents, spend probably 30% of my time teaching residents How to deal with insurance companies, and I wish I could be teaching them how to deal with cervical cancer or prevent colon cancer or treat an ear infection or keep a baby healthy. So I think that The solution really is something like Medicare for all and I'd love to see my community supporting that.
I get my even though I teach health care and do health care in Ventura, I get my health care here and I would love to have that. And I know that my doctors would support this resolution also.
Thank you Neil. Next we have Larry Steingold.
1:11 – 1:166 turns
Good evening, Larry Steingold and this is my talking stick. People don't remember. First I'm appalled that only for example you know about the doctor and the communication. I knew about it because I'm retired and have nothing else better to do. The doctor doesn't even know about it. So, it's incumbent upon the council to call upon our state reps to tell us about all the laws that are up there. Why should we have to go hunt so then we find out that oh, there is this other group against this law or that law? No one knows about these laws but that's another issue but that has to be done I think.
The proposal I think is fine, except what does universal mean? Does that mean everybody now has to become part of the system? Does that mean all the income comes from the federal government? Doesn't that mean then everybody, all the medical facilities and all the doctors and all the nurses and all the hospitals now work for the government since there's no other carve-outs here.
I mean, if you want to put carve-outs and say, well establishing an insurance company for a Medicare for all. For those who can't get regular insurance or something. Isn't that what Obamacare was supposed to be? And all that's supposed to be? What is this? I mean it's nice but universal means it shouldn't be universal. And then you have option. Well, if it's a universal single payer Medicare for all type option does that mean people can opt out?
Then it's not universal. So if you would take out the word universal maybe you got a shot I think. Just so make it optional. People need a hand, but you can't take I don't want to lose my doctors. I don't want to have to go somewhere when the government says California has $40 billion in insurance payables and that's it. And now it starts to get rationed because there's only 40 billion been budgeted by federal government. Where is it going?
Okay? Right now, we're replenishing military stocks because we're shoveling else out the country. But that's beside the point. It's more important universal. Is it universal? Please don't make it-it's not mandatory and it's an option. Change this because it's contradictory. How do you establish a universal with an option? Thank you.
Thank you Larry. Any comments online? Gail?
If there is anyone in the Zoom queue who would like to speak on this item please use the raise hand function now And there's two people. The first one I'll bring in Alan Minst Mr. Minst you can speak if you're muted if you would please unmute yourself. You can go ahead. Mr. Minst are you there? Can you hear us? I'll go on to the second person and come back to him.
The next person is Bill Miley, Mr. Miley if you're there if you could please unmute yourself. There you go. If you can go ahead and talk.
Yeah hello can you hear me?
Yes we can.
Good okay for the record my name is Bill Miley retired public health educator. On the question of supporting a resolution I have these comments One, it certainly has been a key subject for discussion for many years. Two, it has certainly benefited millions of older folks and younger folks with special health conditions. Three, the national Medicaid program has helped many millions of folks.
Four, the National Affordable Care Act just helped millions more. The wish by some, number five, the wish by some to clear out private insurance for a national federal management system is worthy in some respects. In other respects what we have now is being adjusted, modified based on problem solving and difficult political compromise like 51-49 voting. Asking my city council to consider a resolution of support raises important questions about health coverage for folks who are residents of Ojai.
You represent us, right? Not the rest of the county. Questions. Are any folks without health coverage? What limits exist on such coverage? Which costs might be overburdening their household budgets What healthcare needs are unmet. How many families are without health care? Knowing the gaps in healthcare coverage for our citizens would give our city on the ground quote, on the ground data for deciding on such a resolution.
In my opinion without a city personalized response like a survey like this on the question of a resolution. If you don't do this, it comes down to the ideation you have and your political beliefs. And I don't think that's enough. So I only support this if we can do a local survey collecting some healthcare data on people that we and you represent. Thank you.
1:16 – 1:229 turns
And I'll go ahead and try the other person, Alan Mintz. One moment. Mr. Mintz? You can go ahead and speak.
Can you hear me now?
Yes we can.
As a physician with over 30 years medical experience, I'm a vascular surgeon. I wholeheartedly support this resolution Making Medicare available to everybody would be such a boon to our population. The majority of industrialized countries have universal health care. The cap for overhead or Blue Cross, Blue Shield, what have you is 20%. The cost of overhead for Medicare is in the range of 2% to 3%.
As a physician, please give me Medicare patients Trying to deal with patients whose care is limited by the insurance company that their employer has chosen to sign up with is just absolutely painful. So I wholeheartedly support that resolution.
Thank you, Dr. Minsk. All right, we will move on to discussion.
All right. Since you're looking at me, raise his hand. Do you want to go ahead? Okay, go ahead Susan. Well I support, I wholeheartedly support this resolution and I see that as a separate issue from that dreadful bill that's before Newsom which I strongly oppose and the way this opens up the first whereas is because healthcare It's a human right and every person in the city of Ojai deserves quality, comprehensive health care that allows patients free choice of physician and other clinician. And as I understand it there is no legal, this is an expression of support correct? And for that reason I support it.
I don't support anybody dictating to a doctor how they should practice. I am a big advocate of privacy between patient and doctor.
Bill? There is an old saying, I'm an economist by training. I'll just remind everybody about that. And one of the things that's drilled into us in being trained as economists is a sharp distinction between intent and results. There's not a whole lot of connection between the two. by simply the laudable and exemplary quality of intent doesn't translate into good results without details and understanding.
Let me give you an example of how this problem, I've studied this problem for decades. Yeah our system's broken for all the reasons that have been declared but I'll give you an example of why we continue to be broken. Legislation was passed by Congress saying that hospitals needed to disclose a prior-to-treatment pricing schedule so you knew what you were getting into before committing to the treatment, including if there are options. Last I looked, there was a study on this. The percentage of hospitals in compliance with this legislation is currently less than 25%.
In other words, reforms that we have done with good intent have not led to good results because the intent wasn't matched to result. And I think, uh, I would be okay with this if we clarified the language that this wasn't saying in other words, we're not supporting the, I think Medicare single payer should be an, a Medicare for all should be an option But not necessarily the only means of getting medical care.
So I would see what other people have to say, but I have some suggestions on clarifying the intent and leave it at that in terms of some of the language here. But I'll do that later after I talk and people understand my motivation for what I'm saying.
Anyone else? Randy?
You know, like I said it to me. It's a no brainer. It's a. I don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of it Bill. I don't. I don't have a sense that. That we have any say in it so it's at this point in time it's moved what this is? It's the resolution stating that we believe in health care as a human right and that every person in the city of Ojai deserves.
That respect and deserves that opportunity so I can't argue against that. My mother-in-law was in general practice, my brother-in law is in general practice, my daughter-in law's a nurse Like I said, we can do so much more in America than what we're doing right now regarding health care. Of all the things that you've brought forward in resolutions Mayor this is by far one of your better ones.
So I will support you in it because I believe in it and I believe that we can do better in healthcare in America.
1:22 – 1:4041 turns
Well, I agree with Susan Randy and thank you Randy. And yes clearly we the United States needs universal healthcare. We are behind and we need to take care of our doctors. We need to take care of our residents. We need to make things easier for people to get good healthcare. Yeah it is a no-brainer When Ojai gets behind this, as many other cities have, we are showing our support of excellent health care. So I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution declaring the city of Ojai's support of Medicare for All.
I'm going to ask for a amendment to your motion. I'll probably lose, but I'm going to make it that in the last on the now therefore be resolved that we change it towards instead of reading towards passage of a bill establishing a universal single payer Medicare-for-all type system that it simply say establishing a Medicare-for-all type system
OK, do we have a second for that? We'll see if there's a second. If
there's not, there's none. There might be. Could somebody clarify single payer simply means what?
Well I think I'm the one to ask the question of something like that.
Yeah, yeah, I'm asking you why you want that.
In some circles single payer says that's the only system that will pay for medical care under insurance in some circles. That's one of those devil in the details thing. So my motion would clarify support for a Medicare-for-all system as an option, without it necessarily being dictated to or in any way shape or form is the only system.
Oh I would consider that.
That's my motion.
We need a second
for that motion?
You know I think another reason I'm come this is the same wording may I ask Mr. City Manager City Attorney, this is the same wording that Santa Barbara Goleta Carpinteria has and their resolution it contains the universal single-payer Medicare wording
We did not compare this to those cities. We did not look at what Santa Barbara, Goleta and Carpinteria have adopted.
Perhaps could we ask Dr. Petroff why you prefer this language and this resolution?
I believe that the intent was to make it clear what it is that the city is trying to do. So rather than just expressing a general support for single payer Medicare for all, it was to support that the entities that are involved in actually making that legislation move that forward.
Thank you. Okay, well is there a second for Bill's motion?
Don't look at me!
Okay I made a motion to adopt the resolution.
Is that died for lack of a second then?
Yes so I made a motion to adopt the resolution is there a
second
okay um so all in favor aye
no
Okay, all right. Well thank you very much. Thank you doctors for coming much appreciated All right We will move on to the public hearing item number three consideration of a retroactive one-year time extension to September 27th 2023 for design review permit at 312 West Aliso Street or cottages among the flowers Do we have a staff report?
Yes, thank you.
Thank You James
So we have a, I think it's five slides and so we'll try to get through this in five
slides. Eric can I ask you a question? So we have two... The late
handouts will explain this first either before the staff report or after the staff report
Yeah, I'd prefer it before just to have a better understanding and clarity because if we move on this request are we still going to hold a public hearing? Has everyone had the opportunity to read these?
Maybe we need at some point a three-minute break because we've got a lot of material. I was already on my way here when it was sent.
Why don't we provide a brief explanation of it? Council can take a five minute recess perhaps, read the material and then go from there subject to council. So the materials that are provided simple one first it's a map It's a copy, an unofficial copy of the condo plan that was recorded on October 19th 2010 as a dock number. This is just for the record to 2010 1019 dash 00160785 and what it is is the condominium plan meaning the plan that divided the airspace into the 10 condo units that exist in space, not in reality at the Cottage Among the Flowers project at 312 West Aliso. What exists now on the ground are eight units, six individual units and one duplex with two units. The airspace condominium divides those into separate ownership and they are all separately mapped.
This condo map was recorded together with a track map so there's separate individual units in an airspace set of condominium units on a single condo project. The 10, the 9th and 10th units also exist in space but not in reality. They exist as airspace subdivided units but they're not...they don't exist on the ground because nothing has been built And all to the best of the city's knowledge as of now are in common ownership, all under the relevant the applicants LLC.
Ojai bungalows LP and second document is from Ohio bungaloes LP a letter from their counsel, Miss Beth Collins who's present along with Mr Becker and I believe others. And their letter asserts a variety of arguments that the project has vested rights and the city lacks the power to deny it, that the housing element policy and the replacement housing ordinance section 10-2-2009 do not apply.
And third, that the City Council should approve the project extension for various alleged good cause. They also ask for a one month continuance on the project, I'd recommend if the council has any interest in that that we perhaps take short recess to allow Council to review the material it's been provided to the applicant by personal delivery tour to his counsel and to the public in the lobby and then consider whether to continue the item first after receiving the staff report taking any public comment then consider whether to continue from there would be my recommendation
Thank you Matt. Council, would you like a five minute break to review the material?
I would but could I ask a question?
Sure.
Okay because I want to be clear and I want the public to be clear. This is on the agenda. I'm not aware of any council member request for this to be on the agenda. So I'm asking you as one of the primary responsible parties for agenda preparation, really fundamentally why this is on the agenda given the circumstances where the developer terminated negotiations on the development agreement prior to us finishing our deliberations on the question.
And I would think the normal procedure would be to start DeNova with a new application, so is the reason it's on the agenda basically a courtesy to the developer?
James you can jump in but from what I understand it was a request correct?
Yes, so the City Council and this is part of partly in the presentation the City Council had a pending Permit back in 2019 we worked through the development agreement process that development agreement has now been revoked and the developer has demanded an answer on the underlying permit. So that is why it's been
This is on the agenda at the request of the developer.
And one further clarification, the city did not end negotiations on the development agreement. The city per the council's prior... I didn't say that. No, I'm correcting the record, not yours but just to add to the manager's comments. The council directed that the ad hoc committee and staff work with a developer on further negotiating the development agreement. The ad hoc committee did so.
Unfortunately it was unsuccessful and the developers sent an email on... July 31st, 2022 declaring that the negotiations were done and asking for a decision on the permits. Thank you.
Okay thank you so we will take a five minute break and then we'll come back with presentation. All right, we're back. Could everyone please take a seat and... Ten. Take a seat and we will begin. Can we come to quiet please? Thank you. Okay, we will begin with a staff report from Mr. Vega. Thank you very much.
1:40 – 1:5411 turns
We'll pull up a, we have about a five slide PowerPoint. And so we'll be presenting that I did want to note just with the questions that came up right before we went to break the question about essentially why are we here today and we'll get into that a little bit more but Again, I just want to reiterate that it really boils down to there was a permit that had been approved by the Planning Commission in 2019, appealed by the City Council in 2019.
Then that was paused to negotiate the development agreement that we talked about back in July. When that development agreement was revoked, we now have to give the answer on the underlying permit.
By point of order, we haven't actually taken action On the development agreement. No action need be taken when I say action was taken to further discuss with the developer and the developer has the one that's terminated negotiations
yes the developers refused to negotiate further and further demanded a decision on the underlying permit And as always with permits there's there's time requirements. There's permit streamlining and all that so there there is a requirement from
The city to at some point give an answer to the underlying permit. So that's that's kind of in short why we're here today and is
there a date certain that they need to have an answer?
There is no definitive deadline. We had essentially agreed to toll the deadline to negotiate, and so it's really essentially as soon as possible is really the answer. Okay, and so again five slides. We're going through the history of a project that is years and years in the making so I will try not to belabor that too much but I think a lot of these questions show that that history is important to this project. The cottages among the flowers is at 312 West Aliso as shown on the map. I think most people are familiar with it at this point The cottages among the flowers, just some background is an eight unit development that is at 312 West Elisa that was built in 1929.
To go through the background I just talked about with a little more detail in November of 2007, a design review permit, a tentative tract map and a tree permit were approved by the then City Council. The permits were going to allow the eight units to be remodeled and refurbished, and allow for two additional units. So a total of ten units at the cottages. So again that permit was approved in 2007.
In 2009 the final tract map which was one piece of that was approved. But in 2011, 2016 and 2017 revisions and time extensions to the design review permit were considered and approved by the city. And so as you can see that's a decade there of time extensions.
Point of order City Manager. Those were approved by staff or by actions of the Planning Commission 11 16 and 17? By the Planning Commission. Okay thank
you. And so on April 2019, how we got here today is April 2019 the Planning Commission approved one more time extension after the permit would have expired on October 4th 2018. But the City Council to city council members called for an appeal of that decision and so on May 14th of 2019 the City Council Determined after reviewing the project that the project didn't meet the city's then current requirement to replace affordable housing units.
That requirement, as we'll get into in a moment was adopted by the city after the original adoption but before the time extension and so the City Council created the ad hoc committee to negotiate an agreement to get replacement affordable units From May of 2019 to July of 2022, the ad hoc committee worked with the applicant to determine whether a development agreement could be negotiated that would allow for those lost affordable housing units to be replaced.
And finally, the meeting most recently on July 12th, 2022, the City Council reviewed that agreement and requested revisions and further negotiation of that agreement. What may be news to some is that following that meeting, the applicant did rescind the offer and revoke the offer for a development agreement. And as stated a moment ago demanded the decision on the underlying permit and that is whether or not to approve the time extension from April 2019.
So that's the timeline for how we got here. We're going to go over, I'm going to try to keep it relatively brief and allow for questions but we're gonna go over the key requirements that the project has and then the next slide will be staffs analysis of whether those requirements are met which will lead to the recommendation that we are making. So the key requirements to consider are related to affordable housing replacement. In 2020, as part of all these discussions, the city received information from the owner of the property that indicated that seven of the eight existing units were occupied by a person who would qualify as a moderate income level of affordable housing The eighth unit was inhabited by a person that would qualify as a low-income level of affordable housing.
None of the units were deed restricted, but they were occupied by people that would have qualified for affordable housing. The city's perspective is that that means those units should be considered as affordable and replaced with affordable units I expect that's one area that the applicant disagrees with us, but that is the staff analysis of that requirement.
And so another key requirement for the City Council to consider whether to approve the time extension on its own. The City Council is supposed to base that decision on whether there have been any significant changes in the general plan, zoning regulations, the city code or the character of the area That would cause the approval to be injurious to the public convenience, health safety or general welfare. So that's when the City Council is deciding whether to approve a time extension. That's the question. Is there any major changes that caused this approval to now be injurious to the public in health safety or welfare?
The burden of proving that the extension doesn't cause those problems is on the property owner. They have the burden of proof and ultimately, the city adopted additional requirements via both the housing element and the city code that followed the initial approval in 2007 but predated the application for the time extension So by adopting ordinance number 828 in 2013, which included a new city code section 10-2904, which requires replacement housing to be provided at specified income affordability levels if an existing multifamily residential housing occupied by persons with very low or moderate incomes is subject to conversion or demolition.
And so you can see some of the phrases that we already used that would apply. We talked about the information we received showing that they were either low or moderate income occupants, and so our read would be that that ordinance would apply to the underlying project and that ordinance was adopted after the original adoption but would be applicable when considering a time extension.
And so those were the key requirements. This slide is focusing on applying those requirements to this project, to identify the staff recommendation and so just a couple of key points up front. The project as proposed at the cottages does not include any replacement affordable housing units now that the development agreement is not an option There are no affordable housing units in this project.
Because we recommend applying section 10-2904, which does require replacement housing to be provided. Our read is that we started with eight affordable units and we're getting zero that doesn't meet the requirement. The tract map has been approved as we talked about a few moments ago, which converted ownership form to condominium status. However, 10-2904 is still triggered here.
Staff's analysis shows that 10-2904 is still triggered here because the project still needs to be demolished, rehabilitated and reconstructed, which is the language in that code section. We also expect from some of our conversations that one argument may be that these are individual single family units and therefore, that code section doesn't apply. However, our read of that code section is it only applies to one house or one single-family residence. This is not a individual single-family residence, it's 10 unit condo project. So our read of our staff analysis is that that is required. The section 10 2 9 0 4 is applicable here.
We also just wanted to point out that both the 5th cycle and the 6th cycle current housing element both include requirements as well. Both were adopted since 2013 as well, and both of those include requirements for the replacement of affordable occupied housing that is demolished, removed or converted with comparable deed-restricted affordable housing. And so in short what we're saying with all of this is that the city adopted several rules since the original permit was issued that require affordable housing to be replaced with affordable housing and our analysis is this project is not exempt. Thank you James. Well I have one more slide but I don't know if you want to take questions now?
Sure, yeah. It's four bullet points so I'll just get through these four. So as stated a moment ago those are the reasons staff recommends denying the request for the additional time extension without any affordable housing units. Where does that leave us? What's next? There's a couple of options. The applicant could apply for a project anew and apply for a design review permit which would require them to show compliance with that affordable housing requirement we just discussed.
Alternatively, I do want the council and the community to be aware that the applicant could choose to litigate and challenge the city's findings. We've laid out via this presentation our analysis. I would expect that the applicants probably reading those requirements and has a different analysis so that might be something that would have to be litigated I just want everybody to go into this with open eyes, realizing that if that were to happen the costs would be substantial.
If the city loses could be ordered to pay the developers attorneys fees and so that is a major risk and a challenge for us. However, for all the reasons we stated our read of it is that requirement does apply. And so although not without risk, our recommendation based on the city's adopted requirements to protect its supply of affordable housing. Based on the city's commitment to do so and based on the fact that the City Council had adopted as a priority affordable housing as a priority we recommend not approving the time extension.
Mr. Summers you want to say something?
Very briefly, one further point on the resolution is drafted by staff and recommended. One or two minor typo fixes if I may in page five section two the Second sentence, there's the phrase because existing project site is occupied by low and moderate tenants. Low and moderate income tenants as it's clear from the context of the rest of the resolution. And then second, the second graph below section two time extension denied.
The sentence that reads, the proposed project due to the project's conflict with section 10-2904, replacement housing of the Ojai Municipal Code. The general plan and housing element in sections 10-23203 and 10-2215 governing extensive permits. What's missing is denied. The proposed project is denied due to the projects conflict. Two minor typos, thank you.
Thanks Matt. Bill? We're on questions from council?
1:54 – 2:0121 turns
Please correct me if I misstate. That's my question,
okay?
And that you know I think it is that my understanding and correct me if I'm wrong is that ordinance 828 10-2904 was adopted To be consistent with our general plan, the housing element of our general plan which is the only element at that time in 2013-14 submitted to an outside state agency for approval. Which is Housing Community Development and it was as part of the Land Use Constitution element as adopted in our general plan that that ordinance was adopted as part of consistency with that general plan element.
Yes and that three times in 2016 and 2017 and 2019 after Adoption of this ordinance, the Planning Commission nevertheless went ahead and approved the one-year extensions. Am I misstating anything? Yes, that's
correct. The Ordinance 828 which codified Section 102904 was adopted in 2013 based on the housing element also adopted in 2013 and the Planning Commission took those actions subsequent. Which I would note does not prevent this council from still enforcing 10 to 9 or 4.
Thank you thanks any other questions Randy
it's
just some more clear obviously the dates are important on all of this so I'm just again the same thing is correct me if I'm wrong and 2007 the permits
were approved. The, here precision is key because a vested right only exists for a building permit that authorizes substantial vertical construction. In 2007, a design review permit, a tentative track map and a tree permit were approved not a building permit. Okay when was the building permit approved? They pulled a building permit in 2012 for underground utilities. They have never pulled a building permit for vertical construction and that's why they have no vested right in staffs analysis.
Okay, because one of my questions is had they applied for that permit and had they started construction? Would our housing tenants that we voted on in 2014, the affordable housing, would they have had to have met them if they had already started construction?
If the applicant had pulled a building permit in 2007 or thereabouts and expended substantial sums of reliance on it and began construction, then they would not have to comply with the 2013 requirement because they would have pulled a building permit and physically begun the construction of the project.
At any point in time, do we know if when they were asking for extensions that they were made aware of the new affordable housing tenants that they would be required to meet? Do we know that or is that our responsibility or is that
their responsibility? I can't speak to the history of 10 years, 15 years of discussions between a variety of staff members and the developer. So I don't know exactly who said what when over those 15 years but generally everyone is obligated to know the law. Ignorance is no defense and the city has no particular obligation to inform them each time of that new requirement but I can't speak to what happened over those years with all those staff.
Thank you Matt. Other questions?
So if we had had these requirements to replace low income affordable housing back in the year 2000 for example when the evergreen cottages were demolished those would have been replaced because they built You know multimillion dollar condominiums but to the best of my knowledge there was never a replacement for all those little cottages where our gardeners are restaurant workers lived.
But if we had had this they would have been mandated to replace it.
They would have been required to replace the affordable units with affordable units.
One last question, Randy. So just coming back to this term affordable you're saying that Becker group brought to our attention in 2020 correct? That the eight units that are in question were all
If someone is if a structure is 80 years
old and isn't worth $2,000 a month to rent. Does that make it affordable because someone's renting it for $500? So how do we clarify those, that term and how is that applicable to what we're saying here. That we're saying now that those were affordable housing and therefore they have to replace them. At what point was that determination made? And at what point was that made clear to the Becker group?
Yeah and that was made in 2019 when the City Council was considering approving the time extension. At that point, that was the time where we know like we said we can't speak to the whole history and you know what staff said what 15 years in the past but That's where we know that the applicant was informed of that requirement. I think, like I said, it's fair to say I think the applicant disagrees with that requirement and disagrees with our reading of that code and that's fair but we had told them that was the city's reading of the code and that's what led to us trying to negotiate the development agreement as the quote-unquote compromise And so they were notified in 2019, as we noted because going through this timeframe that means this project are the initial DRP had been issued 12 years before.
But at the same time that is why there are time limits on permits and that is why you have to go back through the process.
Last question. I think that's what or to clarify this. I think it's just important that the community understands And from our prior discussions there's disagreements on how those
are read. But these are the city's positions.
2:01 – 2:122 turns
Okay, thank you. All right we will go ahead and open the public hearing and we will begin with Anita Cramm and then L Caldwell and then Larry Steingold.
Pardon me your mayor since were the applicant don't we have an opportunity to speak? Thank You OK. Hello mayor and council members I'm Beth Collins. I'm from Brownstein Hyatt and I'm a land use lawyer. I represent Becker the owner before us today by way of background my firm and I represent private developers and landowners like I'm doing today but I also represent public agencies so I've sat on both sides This discussion so to speak and I do so regularly in my work.
I submitted a letter which you all have. And as I explained I was very recently brought into this matter. I know some of you have dealt with this for years and years and years and years as we saw in the staff report. I only have days here. On this matter, some might say just in time. Some might say way too late But here I am So I'm still getting up to speed on this matter and for that reason Frankly out of the respect that I have for your city attorney And his firm which I have worked with over the years a number of times I asked that you all grant us one month One month for me to get up to speed and make sure that nobody here rushes into anything.
Yes, the developer asked for this meeting. I was not involved. I did not sign off on that request. And yes there's a lot of frustration. I can feel the frustration in the room. I can see their frustration around. And I acknowledge it may be just too late And you may ask, well why could a month make a difference? Well I would say and this may seem strange but two lawyers is better than one.
I know you might say two lawyers is too many, one lawyer's way too many but in my experience in the situation like this, two lawyers is better than one. You are more likely to have both sides Be receiving rational strong advice and really understand the pros and cons of the choices they're making. And it makes better decision making so based on my assessment I have dove into it you've seen my letter.
My team and I have have dove into this over the last few days I do believe that giving us this month will be the best chance to actually getting to a mutually agreeable solution here. I believe that all potential solutions that have been discussed could be on the table if we allowed that month. So, um, I really hope that this council opts. As I say, I represent public agencies. I represent applicants. I am a rational human and a very good lawyer and I'm very good at resolving things. Your council is the same. I think it would really help if we could just have Honest discussion that might help us come to a solution here.
If your council's not inclined to grant me that and honestly, your staff and my client at time I do have some comments but you're not surprised that I want to make for the record so I'll just make a few few comments for the record summer. You've seen the letter I won't repeat What's in there. I will say you know the letter lays out the vested rights argument which I heard some some comments regarding there is case law that it's not substantial vertical Construction is not necessarily the standard. There is case law, state law that it is substantial investment of time and money in reliance on the permits. Listen to your lawyer, that's your lawyer but there is case law that says something to the contrary and does not include vertical.
And separately, I think there are some good reasons here. Well honestly under the law, the extension should also be granted. And one of the main reasons is the Housing Accountability Act. This and I'm reading off my phone to say got this by email so I apologize. So the city council's proposed resolution in my opinion incorrectly finds that the project is not subject to the housing accountability act. That's the new one of the new state laws regarding housing The Housing Accountability Act actually applies to any project that creates new residential units, including the cottages.
When the project complies with applicable objective written development standards at the time the application was deemed complete. Notice that your council keeps pointing you to the time here when we're granting the extension under the housing accountability act is at the time the application was deemed complete. This DRP that's going to be granted is going to, well we hope would result in the construction of two brand new units in Ojai. The units in space without a DRP they're just units in space. They're not actually constructed housing okay?
This city itself has already found that development complies with your development standards multiple times Here, the project entitlements issued in 2007 plainly indicate that the city found the project consistent with all objective standards. In effect at the time the application was submitted because the final map was previously recorded so the subdivisions happened and it's already condoized. The approval before the city tonight is just the extension of the DRP and that's only to do with the design of the cottages This finding is underscored by the fact that the city of West Hollywood case I cited it in my letter. I'm sure you haven't looked up every case that I cited in there but the city of West Hollywood case was exactly this situation.
It was the county of L.A. had approved the condominiumization of some apartment units and the city of West Hollywood incorporated and then tried to apply their laws The court said no, it's too late. You already had a final map recorded so you can't... They have a vested right to those condo units. So that means we only have the development, the design of the project, the design permit up before you now. Under the Housing Accountability Act your city council may only deny a project If it can make findings that the project would have a specific adverse impact upon the health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. That's in the government code 65589.5J The city's denial of the extension would effectively deny the project given that it proposes to construct two new housing projects or units.
Accordingly, the city does not and cannot find that the design review permit does not comply with the applicable sections of Article 20 of your zoning code setting forth the design review permit requirements in essence Well I'll sum up in a second. The city has not identified any objective written design review standards applicable to the project or relevant to the design review permit further it cannot show that any violation of the city's design review permit standards would have a specific adverse impact on public health or safety that cannot be mitigated.
Moreover the city's findings to grant the extension cannot be applied if they're not objective. The Housing Accountability Act remember it was squelching public agencies ability to say no to projects and they said you have to say no under objective standards and you don't have any here so As such, should the City Council deny the project without complying with the Housing Accountability Act, Becker has the right to sue the project under the act and collect attorney's fees. You heard that already from your attorney.
So I don't want to sue you all. I mean that's just a sum up. And I'd rather... Just please give me a month. If we can't work this out then we'll be back here in a month and you can do what you'll do but I'd rather have a chance to see In this moment before the denial whether or not we can work something out. So thus I respectfully ask for the 30 days from this council to work things through.
I reserve the rest of my time for rebuttal and if you have any questions we're here for you.
2:12 – 2:1816 turns
Any questions from Council? I have a
question of Beth.
Okay, go ahead Suza.
So, Beth? Yes, hi. If we would you be able to promise that if we granted you a 30-day extension that after 30 days we still deny the project that you would not sue us?
Through the Mayor, Councilwoman, I deeply respect the question and really I do. Unfortunately that is not in my power. Any other questions?
You know Susie if you don't ask you don't receive. I love it So, Beth, I said it earlier. The goal here is not to litigate the gray. I'd be inclined to give you the 30-day to vote for a 30-day extension only if part of that discussion was the agreement that the two council members had originally worked on for 2 1⁄2 years was what you were looking at to come back to council with.
If you're thinking of doing something separate, different or they're not in agreement and they can whisper it in your ear tonight and say we're not going there. Then come back and tell us that but this is the second time in eight years that affordable housing has been before this community. And each time it's just been beaten down and it's been beaten down because a lack of education and lack of communication and lack of understanding of what we're trying to achieve.
Those two gentlemen over there worked their butts off and Mr. Becker worked his butt off for two-and-a-half years to come up with something that was doable. When it's all said and done, we're going to get back to the discussion about this in a minute, what would we end up with if we don't? Try and work through this, and I'm going to ask that when we get into the discussion because my gut says right now We're looking at in in the workable agreement was 24 affordable units It'll be interesting to see tonight. What's left? What's we're gonna get when this one the dust settles cuz it's not gonna be 24 It's not gonna be 25 units
Mayor, Council Member Haney to answer your question the question of what you'll get is definitely going to be part of any discussion that I would have over the next 30 days. It would be two smart rational lawyers talking through the strengths and weaknesses of each of the cases. What would each side get and how I mean frankly how can we each get to them fast the fastest way possible? And often litigating for a year and a half followed by a year in appeal isn't the fastest way for the city to get housing or the applicant to get a project so There is a, I mean there's a reason you've been talking for the amount of time that you've been talking because settlement is a path that if it's viable.
I think we'll know in 30 days and you can ask me in 30 days can we settle this? And I will have more better answer. I don't know right now but I know if you just say no we're in a different spot
Any other, Ryan you have a question?
James if we Based on our motion later tonight. If we cancel the council meetings that are on there When would our next meeting be that's a month after a month from now
So it would be if we adopted the schedule earlier It would be the first meeting in December would be
there isn't that when
we swear
on the new council? Mm-hmm. Yeah, so just so you know The ad hoc committee won't be here anymore and we've been working on this for a year and a half So it's it's I'm an attorney as well And I just by the way, I always think it's funny when attorneys say I'm a great attorney I've never had an attorney service stand up ago. I'm horrible attorney
The
There were some actual rational people in the room during those negotiations. I don't know if you know, we didn't rescind the offer. I'm disappointed we couldn't get where we wanted to with it with some of the support when the public but that's a different reason. I know that we're staring at probably two worse options and it'd be great to have a third but I don' how another month would even potentially end up in anything. There won't even be an ad hoc committee anymore, so unfortunately you may be a day late.
Even if we want to do it, it wouldn't make any sense and we just unfortunately continue this a little further than we wanted to. So I guess my question would be how would you plan to move forward understanding that if we gave you a month extension?
Understanding that first there are and I don't know your history of holding specials But there are is a possibility to hold special meeting that that isn't in the realm of possibility so So your schedule that you just cited maybe we could find us time for a special meeting in there Separately even Even without the ad hoc committee I think it would help with two lawyers on each side and mind you, I don't know the reams of work. Actually, I know that you spent many, many, many hours and then it would help to have the ad hoc committee for sure but I'm not convinced that there's not a path to solution.
Maybe it's not the exact solution that you were talking about before but they could be a solution other than just litigation Even without the ad hoc committee.
2:18 – 2:2831 turns
Go
ahead, Susan.
OK here's my other question. You said you just started to dive into this and you're aware that the last meeting we discussed all four properties together. So my question is if big if we granted you a 30 day extension could you guarantee that we would continue to discuss each project separately? Separately or together separately just like we're doing tonight so that the affordability is built into each project not 10 years of whatever many years it was on South Montgomery for example.
I can't, Council Member through the Mayor. I can guarantee that all scenarios will be considered by me and discussed with your council and whether it's looking at it separately what are the options that each of us can do by right? What are the litigation risks associated? I'm going to try to think about everything as your councils already done but I mean respectfully Sometimes having another side to speak with helps the analysis and so maybe Mr. Summers will have some new thoughts based on things that I say about strengths or weaknesses or new approaches or arguments, I might be able to come up with something that others haven't thought of before.
Thank you. I just have maybe this is for staff and not for you Beth But just to confirm those 20 moderate income units would be about $3,500 a month and the five low-income Units would be approximately twenty five hundred dollars a month 25 units
in the
development
agreement, is that
what you're referring to? It's 65 units. So we were talking about the development agreement. 40 market rate 20 moderate and I think the rent would be about $3500.00 I just wanted to confirm and five low income which the monthly rent would be approximately $2500 so I just wanted to confirm that
I think those sound about right. It's 20 moderate, 5 low. Okay
and just to confirm nothing for very low extremely low or acutely low income households? Correct yeah
that's correct
the
development agreement only had the 20 moderate and the five low nothing lower.
And the low would be approximately $2,500 a month. I
believe that's right but I don't have those precise figures in front of me
okay. I think
that's a good
question mayor um and i'd like to bring that back when we get into deliberation The getting back to Beth's comment about a special session, so the election is November 8th. The seating is the first week is the first meeting in November that's December. So we do have a November meeting and through November if we wanted to do a special session. So what's 30 days from today?
Well so if we were going to have a special session the proposed date was November 15th. I have
a question and procedurally Matt you know it's not it's not that we seat the council in the first meeting in December it's that that's the first meeting after the election generally. So if we have an election again do we not need to do we have to see the new council at our next meeting if it's a special meeting or do
we get to delay them? The requirement is that the term length is tied to the first meeting after certification of the election, which happens 30 days after the election. So this current five could very much meet in November at any point to consider the matter. The reorganization and the certification elections will happen on December 13th as scheduled. And just
lastly, the affordable units at the cottages Right. What under the information that we received from the developer what were what were those
levels? The our information is that cottages has current tenants as of January 2020 seven were moderate income tenants and one was a low income tenant. Thank you.
Okay. Thank you very much, Beth. Thank you. We will go ahead and open the public hearing now. First we have Anita Cram. Then we have Al Caldwell. And then Larry Steingold.
So I'm sure reasonable lawyers can discuss reasonably, but it will not change the fact that you have a housing element and that you would be evicting low income residents with no place to go in violation of your housing element. But I would like to thank city staff, Vega for their acknowledgement of the housing element and of being courageous enough to enact the housing element. Thank you.
So I would like to mention a couple other things. Page 3 of the administrative report for this public hearing states, the project applicant intends to keep the exterior of the existing dwelling units unchanged except for some minor paint and any necessary minor repairs but may renovate the units. Of course, they're tearing down walls and increasing the site. So this is inaccurate. And I would like to know why this persistent error continues in this document when it was also in the July 12 one?
There's a problem with that because it's based on inaccuracies and the previous documents want to seek exemption based on that inaccurate false Not factual information. So I would like to also talk about the conservation element of the City Council and also the biological resources in particular. Now, I submitted a detailed public comment. You may not have gotten it yet because it just came today. I did email it to Mayor Betsy so at least someone may have a chance to read it. This is an oak woodland habitat around the cottages among the flowers There are many species. It's a complex ecosystem, a complex community of birds that live there. I happen to have extensive background in birds biology, zoology, ornithology. I know what I'm talking about.
There are many organizations that have listed species that I personally have seen on this property as Threatened, near threatened, declining populations. We have no clue what we're delving into into this oak woodland habitat that extends from cottages to bungalows to the foothills to the Los Padres National Forest. It's a wildlife corridor. Ojai values this.
Open space fits into this also. Our community is a nature-oriented community. We don't want to encourage habitat encroachment, the biggest threat to birds today is habitat destruction degradation from development and disturbance so we need to make a stand as a community on our nature community The fellow citizens in trees and wildlife that live here and that we will support them. And there's also elements, you know the conservation element which sorely needs updating I think 1988 is the date on it.
And also the open spaces element. You're legally obligated to those just as well as you are to the housing element. So I would encourage City Council to vote no on this because these previous discussions, permits it's gone on and on ad nauseum. I've lived here since the beginning of it. Thank you. Thank you Anita. Okay
next we have Elle Caldwell, Larry Steingold and then Peggy Lacerra. I'm
one of those people that this is one of my worst fears But I've decided to come anyway, and hello. I'm grateful to have lived and worked in Ojai for 20 years. And I've lived at the Mallory Cottages for the better part of 15 years. The Mallory and Flower Cottages are one of the loveliest little micro-communities in Ojai. With the current extreme shortage of all affordable housing, and especially for low and very low income folks The people who could be displaced from these dwellings have no place to go in Ojai right now.
I hope you can understand the concern among many cottage residents and the community at large. Many of the cottage folks have invested and created lovely, if not rustic homes. The current housing crisis is at the basis of many of Ojai's problems The solution I see for affordable housing is to build it after all these years of essentially a moratorium on new building.
We need a strong group of moderate creative thinking community members willing to work cooperatively along with city officials to stand up and work for creating this housing We can't keep saying that we need affordable housing and then no part of the community lets this happen. This would not be such a fraught situation if there were other options for people to live.
There's an abundance of possible solutions if we work together. The alternative is the continuing scarcity of housing, and the continuing escalation of prices What it really comes down to is what kind of community the community wants. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms.
Caldwell.
Next we have Larry Steingold then Peggy Lacerra and then Sabrina Venskas. Larry are you here? He had to leave. Oh okay. Peggy Lacerra?
2:28 – 2:344 turns
Hi, my name is Peggy Lucera. I've lived in the Ojai Valley for 22 years now. The landscape of this issue has shifted three times since I've walked in the door and so none of my prepared comments are going to work. I would like this community to take a step back and look through a broader lens at the kind of community we're cultivating with every decision that we make. I read the UN Sustainability Index for 2022 this week, and I don't know if any of you have seen that But the United States now ranks 41st. The Sustainability Index is a compilation of 17 indices that roughly equate, reflect the quality of life for ordinary people for plus or minus one standard deviation from the norm.
We rank 41st, we're between Cuba and Bulgaria And you know, we think of ourselves as being a wealthy country. We breed billionaires and we're really a hollow culture. In the last decade at at least in Ojai, I've seen this gradual degradation of the culture. One of the things that I think is lovely about Ojai is the art projects. The Art Commission has done a wonderful job of convincing the community to support public art and to take a percentage of every bit of building Construction of any kind in the city and we take a percentage of that to build Public art, and we've got a hardscape of public art all over the place The stuff is going to be here for a hundred years. Why can't we now make a decision? To shift that income to the city to affordable housing so we can finally meet the state's requirement for providing adequate housing for all of the citizens of Ojai.
There are, as Al Caldwell said, there are many things that we could be doing with and I appreciate the work of the ad hoc committee but the ad hoc committee are all land a gentry in Ojai. The citizens that are trying to stay in Ojai. Affordable housing is a problem that solves itself, we just leave if we can't afford to stay here and the problem never gets solved it's really time to make the solution to that problem the centerpiece of what's happening in this council Because it affects everything. We talk about education, public... I'm sorry, I'm going a little bit over my time but I'm gonna do it because we do have public schools that rank third, fourth and seventh.
Our high school ranks seven out of 10 in the state of California. The state of California the last time I checked was 27th in The nation and our country, it ranks somewhere below other third world countries. Thank you Peggy. Anyway- Thank you very much.
We need to do better. Thank you. Next we have Sabrina Venskas then Anita Hendricks and then Sharmila Mali. Okay, Anita Hendricks? How about Sharmilla? Oh, Anson-Williams. And then we have Deborah Leis.
Boy, I just kind of wrote this down quickly here. It's quite an event tonight, huh? Mayor Sticks, City Council members, yeah, I'm Anson Williams. I am not a lawyer and I'm not here to argue the law but I have to ask...I really gotta ask how the hell did we get here? I mean we went from eight affordable units at the cottages among the flowers to nothing! How do we get in that position to face expensive litigation? Come on, man. We can do better.
And honestly you just have there's an open door here for negotiation. There's an open door here to get back to where we were all right. We can make this work and we have to be logical open minded and rational common sense please Take these 30 days, for God's sakes open the door. It's right there for us and let's make it work. Let's get those eight cottages back maybe more but we have to connect and we have to collaborate all right? That's all I have to say thank
you. Next we have Debra Lise Martin Crawford. Anyone on oh sorry.
2:34 – 2:395 turns
Hi, my name is Deborah Lise Martan Crawford and I go by Lise. I wanted to thank you all for all the people who've worked on this over the years and the people who have worked on it since 2019. I've been in Ojai since 1995 I came here as an artist and became a healing arts therapist, as well. I work retail, too, so I see a lot of different constituents. I have a lot of artists' friends who are struggling to stay here, and that's one of the things that makes Ojai its seminal quality are the artists, healers and creatives.
So I was part of going to the negotiations about the condos that ended up next to the art center. And I really do encourage a consensus that's gonna bless everyone, excuse me with collaboration. I think even though we're not inclined to give 30 days and there may be some good legal reasons not to. I feel like intuitively, it's a good idea for us to do that and to strive to come to some kind of consensus that isn't even on the table yet.
I do feel like it's critical to Ojai to maintain its milieu and its creative intelligence to have really good affordable housing and perhaps this will plant a seed for something that's not even here yet So that's those are my thoughts and my sister too. We were both originally against giving any more time but Listening to all of this tonight has brought me to this other place. So let's be creative together. Thank you
Thank You lease next we have Jeffrey Stark weather I
I didn't intend to speak, partly because I didn't even figure out exactly what was supposed to be happening tonight until I saw the letter from the council for the backup group. I certainly support the idea of giving 30 days to try to work something out. I think the unfortunate thing we are here in part because there was an organized effort at disinformation about this whole development proposal The disinformation about the lack of water, the disinformation about traffic.
I would point out someone mentioned low and very low under the housing element. We're only talking about low because there were no very low initially. There's low and there's moderate. And I want to definitely support Ms. Campbell's Caldwell, sorry statement We can't solve this problem unless we build some housing. You can't go, the recent enrollment study by the school system showed that for 22 years we have not built a single multi-family complex in the city of Ojai.
Our schools have been losing students and they pointed out a trajectory of four options, and we're on the bottom one where we're going to end up with like 1,500 students and 271 at a high school. How can you function at a high school with 271 students? We have to actually... And to make something like this work best, you would also be building new units so that people If they get displaced for things to be fixed up have somewhere to go. They could come back, but if we don't do anything you know we're stuck in this situation I thought the original agreement was a step forward although I preferred it would have been a little stronger and affordable housing.
negotiating this and understand why they had it, they should have been speaking first. And maybe some of the speakers would've had a little knowledge on which to make their comments. So whether this can be worked out or not as a lawyer myself giving lawyers and clients time to work things out rather than forcing something on them. Think about the cost of litigation What do we gain? We get no affordable housing and we get litigation. I don't see why that's a very good option. Thank you.
Thank you, Jeffrey. Gail, any
comments online? If there is anyone in the Zoom queue who would like to speak on this item please use the raise hand function now and we've got
2:39 – 2:458 turns
Hi, my name is Robin Graham. And in my past I have worked for the City of Roseville California and the Housing and Redevelopment Division. The city of Roseville, I don't know if anybody's familiar but they have created more affordable housing in Roseville than in the whole SACOG which is Sacramento Area Council Government. And we had a staff that was extremely dynamic and up to date on what all the rules were.
The city of Ojai is a small town in comparison, and certainly cannot afford to hire the amount of people and the people who know how to address council and tell them how to proceed. So I think that basically as I'm an onlooker, I see this as a chess game. And you're put in this predicament today on purpose to have to vote for this for litigation purposes on behalf of the Becker Group and so on.
I have a question is to Beth. Is her last name Beth Wilson? No
Collins.
Collins OK all right and also you know I just think that it's funny that they decided not to come back and talk to you but now they're putting you in a position and it's not a very fair position and I don't know I just say shame on people If it doesn't pencil out for the developer, then it just doesn't pencil out and it's not the city's responsibility. So anyway I say if you're going to sue us as a community, shame on you!
You live amongst us. And that's all I have to say. Thank you for your
time. Thank you. Next we have Teal Rowe and then Ray Powers.
Good evening everybody. My name is Teal Rowe, Concerned Citizen I heard a new word tonight con-con-ciation? Was that a new word I just heard? It was just like you learn something new every day I am going to hold the course and ask that the council please follow staff's recommendation and not go with the extension. Whatever the dialogue that threw that off course, I would like to stay on course with that And if for any reason this project does go through, I ask for a current CEQA review.
Not a 15-year old one from when the permits were first pulled. Not five years ago. Not three years ago. I ask for the council to speak and take into your hearts when you leave Environmental impacts of this area, because I don't know if you guys understand the energy that comes down the canyon through that waterway. And there's energy that comes into Ojai and I don't think anybody has spoken to it.
So I would like to speak to the soul that comes from our environment and then we all take for granted every moment If this project for any reason goes through or if you decide to do the one month extension, I would like the council to remember the comments from the July 12th meeting, 14th whatever the date was meeting because those people some of those people will be displaced.
And I would like the council, even though some of you will be gone to speak and acknowledge those who will be displaced. I would like the council to acknowledge water security and the cumulative impacts on the environment which I've already mentioned environmental impact but there should be some kind of legal review that we can back up, be backed up by And the last thing I'd like to say is if, you know, like you're being threatened to be sued right now and it works. It works.
I think that the community will back you guys up because this is a really big deal.
Thank
you.
Thank you too. Next we have Ray Powers and then Fran.
2:45 – 2:546 turns
Hmm, Teal left this beautiful gigantic acorn on the podium. Which I'm aware of once they start falling and on the trees now means it's going to be a rainy season. So the trees tell us something about that. I wasn't going to speak, but as I've been accumulating and sitting with and processing everyone's comments, I wanted to come up. I do want to thank the ad hoc committee that was painstaking. I couldn't have done it.
And thank you for council and everyone who preceded you that's been discussing this particular development since 2007. I want to acknowledge that since 2007, a hell of a lot has happened. I mean we're still calling drought a drought but in reality there is aridification happening. We are turning into more of a desert climate It's just so, the data shows that. So we can call that misinformation that there is not enough water and blah blah blah right? But there are three to five years in the lake and if something doesn't happen and diversions don't happen and the Matilija Dam doesn't come down in time and people keep sinking new straws or sucking out of the straws that are in the wells at a groundwater basin You know, we need to be farsighted instead of short sighted because three to five years will go by in a blank.
And then where will we be? So I don't say there's not enough water I say there's plenty of water however our building ordinances And any new building, there aren't ordinances or policies that are demanding that if you build, you have to have gray water installed. You have to have rainwater harvesting. You have to have cisterns underground because that's the climate we're living in now.
So some things need to be put in place. I want to acknowledge the Becker Group Because you've built some beautiful things in town. I was on the planning commission when you built the breezeway development there and those businesses, they're beautiful. So they've done really good work here in the past. The state's qualifications of what the state says are affordable, look we all know at least I know that's pretty bogus those income levels How they came up with that, what that agenda was I don't really know. I wasn't in on those discussions but they're hardly affordable and $3,500 and $2,500 for the people that currently live in those buildings? That's not doable.
So how do we be super creative and, as Peggy said, think outside of the box in such ways to bring in new perspectives? Maybe some new kinds of buildings. Maybe some prefabs. Maybe some co-housing things. It's tough. Someone in the last meeting, Carol said hey it's private property he can build what he wants you know way that's kind of a point it is and he's the land certainly wasn't built not to turn a profit I mean, it's a business.
Now where values and ethics and community relief and generosity comes in, that's a whole kind of distinct conversation on as a whole what kind of community we do want to build which others before me spoke to. So my time is up. Thank you for listening.
Thank you Ray. Next we have Fran.
Hi. I'm just preparing something right now, so I might be a little nervous. I happen to live at the Mallory Way Cabins and I really love living there. It's one of the most beautiful places I've ever lived in between California, Michigan and New York And I know everyone at Mallory Cabins does consider the colleges our sister property. So, I'm feeling I'm speaking for everyone that lives there.
I work here in Ojai make that statement and I want to make clear the incomes who live at both properties. I happen to be very low income. And I know between the colleges and Mallory of others who also are very low with one or two extremely low seniors that live there. So it's extremely low, low income and very low income people. I'm not aware of anyone that's moderate because I believe moderate is $93,000 and above.
And I'm really not sure that anyone at both properties make that much money. That's really all I wanted to say and make clear is that we are a tight community as Elle has said, and we are making do here in Ojai. And I know many of us if we did not have that to live, we would have to leave Ojai. Thank you so much.
Thank You Fran Any comments online, Gail?
I see five speakers online. If there's anyone else in the Zoom queue who would like to speak on this item please use the raise hand function now and I'll call on Natana, no last name. Natana if you're there would you please unmute yourself? There, you can go ahead and speak.
Thank you. Thank you City Council Mayor Sticks and staff I agree with my neighbor Fran. I live at Cottages Among the Flowers and I would be there tonight, but I'm home with my child. And I believe there is disinformation and part of that is that there are moderate income residents here. I'm not sure where that information comes from, and I would like to know. I believe I'm low income and a lot of my neighbors are lower very low income here.
Also, the disinformation that cottages are falling apart. The two closest to West Aliso Street 312 West Aliso units A and B as we said at the July meeting we believe have been under strategic neglect they've been vacant for years despite So many people desperate for housing in Ojai. These two cottages have been vacant for years and falling apart. Those are the only two that are falling apart. I'm not sure if my living room, the photo of my living room is showing up on your screen as I'm speaking Sounds like it's not, okay.
Well our homes that we inhabit we take care of them and they are intact. They are in need of repairs that's very true and that's part of the request to restore and preserve the historic cottages built in 1929 yeah they are absolutely in need of repair but they're not falling apart. We are proud of our homes and they have a lot of beautiful and unique character Housing. Yes, yes, yes. Ojai needs way more housing. It doesn't mean that we need to change our historic buildings that add so much character.
And I know at one of the meetings we talked about an idea, I believe it might've been Haney who brought it up. Mr. Haney you mentioned looking at some properties where the city could either purchase or the city already owned land and looking at building some affordable housing. So an update on that would be much appreciated but this is not the only place that we can build affordable housing in Ojai Also the city.
I'm sorry, let me go through my notes here. We have seen residents Ojai residents get priced out and I know council members Francina you know this very well as you have been looking for housing. I did a search on Zillow tonight for places under 2500. In Ojai, zero possibilities showed up. It is a very tense climate here in our community as a whole and at Cottages Among the Flowers. We're really tired of being in limbo. We hope you will make a decision tonight to deny the permit request. Thank you.
2:54 – 3:0112 turns
Next we have Sabrina Venskas. I'll bring her in, Ms. Venskas if you can unmute yourself you can go ahead and speak. Yes we
can. Hello Council Members. Can you hear me okay? Yes we can. Great thank you. Sabrina Venskas. I know that you've heard from me before on the Becker Development Group developments and I am with Venskas & Associates, which is an environmental law firm. As you know we practice CEQA and other environmental on land use. I hope that you had a chance to receive and review our comment letter on tonight's agenda item. I wanted to just kind of give a little context. I did listen to the attorney for the Becker Development Group And I can say as somebody that's litigated against developers over the last 20 years, this kind of tactic that was proposed by The Becker Development Group's attorney is nothing new.
It is a strategy, and the strategy is to when you see the writing on the wall for denial of your project, you ask for an extension. Why do you ask for an extension? You ask so that you can pack the record as much as you can in order to set yourself up for litigation. I would highly recommend that you tonight take action. Do not allow for an extension. These people had years years to come to you with an attorney that said, I will come up with a solution. I would not give into this game. This is a strategy and it's a game by the developer.
Second, I wanna point out that the HAA Housing Accountability Act amendments of the Attorney for Becker Development Group is referring to did not even go into effect until after the October 2017 decision. Third, I just want to make a point. Here is Jeff Becker. He's made millions off this community and now he is refusing to comply with the city's affordable housing requirements? Why? That's wrong! We shouldn't be be giving him the benefit of an extension when in fact he should be giving the benefit to, of complying with affordable housing requirements that were passed by the city in the form of an ordinance that are to benefit the community. Why doesn't he want to benefit the community? Why is he threatening a lawsuit against the city instead of just simply complying with affordable housing requirements that are good for the community.
If he's a member of the community and he wants to make money off this community, he should be invested in the community and comply with affordable housing requirements. Thank you.
Thank you, Sabrina.
Next we have Leslie Hess. I'll bring her in. Ms. Hess, if you're there, you can go ahead and speak if you'd unmute yourself. There you go. Go ahead. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes.
Thank you. So Mr. Becker refused to renegotiate with the ad hoc committee, and now he wants a 30 day extension so that the lawyers can battle it out. And this I mean, I'm not a lawyer but this doesn't sound too transparent. Doesn't sound as if the community can be a part of it and you spoke. You were so insistent that the Arts Commission have transparency I think it's only reasonable for us to ask for transparency in the discussions about the cottages. And I ask that you do not award them a 30-day extension.
Thank you.
Thank you, Leslie.
Next we have Bill Miley. Mr. Miley, if you're there, you can go ahead and speak. If you'd please unmute yourself?
I am unmuting.
There you go. We
can hear
you.
I'm an advocate for affordable housing, as many of you know. These are my comments. One, it's sad that the Becker Group's four element development agreement fell apart which obviously the cottages is part of and so some of my comments are background on how we got here today. Two, the city loses the opportunity to benefit from 25 new affordable rental housing units needed for 55 years.
Three, on July 12th at the City Council meeting when they discussed the Becker Development public speaking comments and written email submittals were all worthy but many were irrelevant to the project For example, about 20 speakers focused on the shortage of water as a reason to deny. Did the planning department challenge that? No it didn't. The answer should have been Casitas Municipal Water District determines water allocations and state law says water cannot be denied to affordable housing without emergency declarations.
In my opinion, the city failed to take responsible positions to review each public comment and submit for relevancy and should then have made that public. Transparency was missed. In my opinion, the project met all state and federal laws. Six back to the agenda on July 12th I did not read or hear any comments about the cottages having to meet the requirement of a portable replacement because each was on a separate parcel. Now I read that a new interpretation has risen for one owner who has multiple parcels adjoining for rentals, has to meet that.
Why now and not in July? Thank you, Mr. Chair. was there no rentals because they're just not available. They're too expensive. And in conclusion, money to build units that remain affordable for years is what we need. Starting about 2015 I and others tried to get support for affordable developments. We had a 40 unit people self-help housing project that was shot down by the public Then they said, oh no, no. It's just the wrong place. They went silent. We now have no new developments.
We have some ADUs but there's no guarantee they're affordable. What we have this season is very sad for the public development benefit. Thank you.
3:01 – 3:1910 turns
We have one more, just a single name Anita. Anita I'll go ahead and bring you in if you would please unmute yourself you can go ahead and speak.
Hello it's Anita Hendricks yeah I wasn't able to activate the sound earlier well I had for a long time been an advocate of low-income very low extremely low income housing and at this point I mean we are way, way, way overdue for affordable housing. I have to give some credit to Mr. Becker for providing affordable housing for all these years but at this point I would like recommend that there be no extension. We have the municipal code he has decided not to comply with with the requirement and This can just drag on and on, so I say in my limited knowledge that we not extend this anymore.
And please council do whatever you can to get affordable housing for very low, lower moderate income people. Thank you. I also look at what would happen to these people if it went through? They would be displaced So
thank you. Thank you, Anita.
We have one more who's raised their hand. It just is three initials JQP. I'm going to bring you in. JQ P if you'd please unmute yourself and you can go ahead and speak. JQP if you can let us know your name and you can go ahead and speak. You're unmuted
I guess not okay all right thank you Gail we will go ahead and close the public hearing and move on to discussion and normally oh good
Hi, Beth Collins. Thank you mayor and council members just a brief rebuttal Okay First obviously I hope you grant the 30-day extension to be clear we did ask staff last week To postpone this hearing, to allow us time to talk to staff. We were told at that time that it was too late and that the hearing needed to go forward thus I'm here and my client's here some mentioned they thought it was bad taste to threaten litigation but to be clear my clients are actually requesting this extension to avoid litigation And in fact, they have been participating for years in a process with the city to try to avoid it.
If the discussions bear fruit, any entitlement granted by the city would be reviewed and vetted thoroughly. There'd be a fully public process so we wouldn't have to worry about anything being behind closed doors as far as any action by the city. And then one of the speakers mentioned the HAA. The HAA is in effect. At this time while you're taking your action the Housing Accountability Act and as your own city attorney also stated if the facts show that the project is vested we have a right right now to develop that project with no affordable units.
So why risk the city paying fees for its own attorney to litigate those issues for the next years? And then maybe also my fees, the city needing to pay my fees To represent the Becker group at the end of the case potentially when there is potentially a resolution to be found and we will know it. We'll know if there's potential in 30 days so that's all I ask for.
So I hope that you grant it. If not I understand you all have been through a lot on this. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Beth. And so now we will move on to discussion. Normally I speak last. I would like to speak first tonight. I do not think that we as a city should ever displace residents. We should not be evicting anyone. And we can say no here to evicting residents. There are no affordable units in this project, we're losing eight. The staff's recommendation is based on the city's commitment to protecting affordable housing and it is our responsibility as a City Council to withhold that and so I would definitely be in support of following staff's recommendation. The environmental impacts, it's been 15 years And we need to look at the CEQA issues, the water. Aridification is here and it's happening now.
And so I think to quote Ray, we need to be farsighted here and really look at what kind of community we want to be. Do we want to evict people or do we want to help people? And I think that's the bottom line here. And so I don't see any reason to extend for a month I think it's pretty clear that we need to deny this and go back to the beginning.
Is that your motion mayor?
Well, I'm ready to make a motion. Of course. I want to hear from my council members So yes, but I'm ready to make emotion to deny the request for one-year extension Okay, right
Well, I just want to say The city's not choosing to evict anyone and we can't stop people from being evicted That's not A thing we can do that's landlords evict people not cities. And again this is missing something that I think the public has missed and unfortunately we're going to have to talk about the development agreement on some level Because there's that backdrop of what's going on with the potential offer or whatever the heck is going on. But that included a plan, not only a very positive relocation plan that extends way past what the state law requires but it was phased in and multi-segments with the idea being that we did care and made sure that that was not gonna be an issue. The different parts of the different properties all had to work together in order to try and facilitate people who are leaving one area that was being rebuilt, to be able to have other housing available.
That's why the original plan had like a 10-year window of getting everything done where that was not something the developer really wanted to do but we wanted to make sure there was a reasonable way to be able to have people have places to go and have relocation and not do everything at once. But that being said, Frankly, I've worked with you guys, Vim and Jeff and Ms. Collins, thank you for adding on but you guys ripped up the development agreement and now are asking us to go back and wait for you to come back with either the same deal or maybe not as good a deal or a better deal?
It's not our decision that you took it off the table. Now our council didn't vote against it, regardless of what the newspaper might have seemingly said. Our council decided to engage in further negotiations. I understand why you guys said we're revoking the offer. I understand that's your legal right but there's something strange about us offering an opportunity to negotiate a couple months ago and you refusing and then coming back and asking us to renegotiate with you That is, I do have a real issue with that. You don't necessarily get two bites at Apple. We offered that as a council and you revoked the offer and refused to negotiate it.
So now you have an attorney who apparently told you guys something where he went oh, maybe we oughta get back in that room. And I've heard people say that we were afraid of litigation. Well let me make two things clear. One, this deal, this whole situation is not us deciding whether or not to allow the Becker Group to develop Mallory Way, Cottages Amongst the Flowers, or any of the other elements that we've spoken about in the development agreement. This was previously approved. This is not a situation where we're saying oh it's either do this or don't do it. It's either figure out a way to make this better than it was which is what Mr. Weirich and I spent years doing or get sued And we truly believe that that is going to be the end result.
The litigation is what I like to call mutual destruction. Just like when you talk about nuclear war, the war itself is the enemy. The enemy itself here is a situation where we all lose and that is what we're stuck with either massive litigation fees to defend and win and we may not still get as good of deal as development agreement because that's where the law is written even if we lose or excuse me even if we win Let me say it again. Even if we win, it may not be a better deal than the development agreement and cost us a lot of money. And if we lose, it's going to cost us a ton of money and we're not gonna have the luxury of having any money to spend I'm talking lots and lots of money. Our city budget's roughly $10 million. It could cost us a significant percentage of that annual budget if we pick this fight and lose, and that's why we have this deal.
That's why that deal came up. I said it in the last meeting. It's not the deal I wanted but you have to look at the options here. It better or two worse options? And now we're stuck with two worst options. Now when it comes to litigation Ms. Collins I appreciate and I assume you are a very good lawyer as you stated But Brownstein was also, Mr. Mayor Conner your colleague and he's retired 10 years ago came to Ojai and lectured us about how bad an idea it was to pass a bond to get rid of Golden State Water and told us how that litigation was going to go well I'm off the floor with them, we beat him in the appellate court. We have Golden State Water gone and we're pretty happy about it. So I don't sit here under any pretending nature of being afraid of the litigation or worried about it.
But again, the litigation is the enemy. The war is the enemy. So, I don' think we are necessarily going to lose but I don know for sure we are gonna win But I know that it is an alternative that is worse than working together and trying to find a solution that we've worked so hard to do. As soon as we got out of that last meeting, that there was no willingness to negotiate anymore or have another discussion means we pushed them as far as we could go. I truly believe Mr. Moira and I pushed as hard as we could.
I think we felt like we wanted more but I also think they were pretty upset about what they had to do in response. Anybody who's been in a really difficult negotiation it's supposed to end where both parties are right at that brink of where that edge is and that's where we ended up So again, this is not about displacing people or developing the town or getting rid of affordable housing. It's taking the hand we were dealt and trying to make the best out of it and I hope that everybody can understand that.
Because I don't really care about continuing for 30 more days. I've given it all, I don't believe there's going to be a resolution if...I don't think if the development agreement comes back up we're prepared to necessarily agree to it. I don't know for sure again we didn't vote on it before but the public was overwhelmingly not supportive of it I'm concerned about whether they were totally understanding of all the ins and outs so maybe there's an opportunity for it to change? I'm okay with that but I also know that we tried to renegotiate, we tried to go back to the drawing board and we were told it's off the table.
So i don't have a lot of faith that we're going to get anywhere with 30 more days and we're passing up against the deadline where it's going to be two new people doing it and I have all the respect for whoever takes the seats that we're in but I think it's going to be a steep learning curve to try and figure out all the ins and outs of how this works and all the different permutations of negotiating that we went through. Again, it is not an easy endeavor to ask someone who has a building permit that they believe is vested to have to acquire other property in the city to be able to hopefully build the affordable housing that we're requiring but at the same time I can't sit here today and say what anything different than the first meeting I had with the Becker group and everyone was that I don't think it's appropriate to allow this project to go through, regardless of whether it's vested or when it happened without affordable housing being replaced out of these units.
And we need to figure out a way to do it and the first round didn't go real well but we got to where we got too which was a substantial improvement to where we believe that that was the best we were going to do and it avoids the war that is the enemy so I'm telling you, this is not a good situation for the city to be in. But blame the council from however long ago. You know? Resurrect my dad! You can beat him up over it. He was on the council back then. You can beat up whoever else you want to. But I can't do anything about what they did. All I can do is try and make the best. These are the cards we were dealt.
But these ideas that we're going to send people out on the street or we are evicting them, or we have some choice. The reality is that they're gonna get evicted probably because that's their right as the property owners. They're going to be able to rebuild some of these whether we like it or not. Their affordable requirements are gonna be not as extensive as what we were trying to do and it's really saddening and I understand why so many people don't like it.
I lived in Mallory Way. I know how it helped me when I was going to law school to be that entry-level housing. I wish we could build real affordable units, but you know what? None of these people are saying where they're prepared to allow that to happen in Ojai. Nobody's coming up with an alternative plan. There's nothing. 22 years without a multi-dwelling building. The most affordable housing there is are apartment buildings. I don't want to overpopulate Ojai. I don't want to increase our water usage, but we have to make some decisions that are pretty tough And this is one where, heck it's kind of easy not because I like the whole deal but because the alternative is awful. It's again, it's the war that is the enemy and we have no choice now but war either way if we don't do something else to fix this.
So I don't know what 30 days is going to buy us. I'm always willing my practice I always tell everybody hey we'd always rather figure out a way than have to go down that last step towards really expensive litigation. But I do have a problem honoring that When it's the parties we're trying to work with who are the ones who remove themselves from that discussion.
And now we're up against a timeline that at least in the last couple months, we didn't create as far as... We had a meeting where we could have started that. We brought in people from Habitat for Humanity. We tried to have another discussion and there was nothing there. I don't feel like we risked litigation with removing the development agreement. You guys did.
But it's a lose for both of us, so I don't know if 30 days has any hope. Obviously we can't make a lot of promises. I hate saying this in some ways but i'm pretty much ready to rip the band-aid off and move on from this thing. I think we gave our best effort and I don' think it's going to get any better but I could tell you that if the development agreement was back on the table and the public understood it and there was more support for it I'd be hard pressed not to say that that or something a little bit better, which would be nice, would be palatable for our community. But I still don't know if our public would really support it no matter what we come up with or whatever you guys come up with and that leaves us in a pretty difficult spot so at the same time I do want The vitriol towards them back.
Jeff, you guys don't deserve that you guys have really come to the table on this people whatever you want to not like them for outside of this that's fine but They really worked with us and came to bat. And it may not be as good as everybody wants, but these two gentlemen worked with us in good faith and have really tried to figure something out that would work.
We weren't all friendly all the time. We put the screws to each other and we really wanted to see it happen. And they could have gone a different route that wasn't as beneficial as where we got. And I hope people appreciate that. I'm not going to vouch for everything else other than Transmission Brewery is beautiful, and I know you guys did that. But let's keep that in perspective, that this is not a situation of yes or no developing this. This is an alternative, and both the alternatives are worse. And I want to make sure everybody understands it. Talked too long anyway.
3:19 – 3:273 turns
So first I want to express my support for your comments and the comments from the public both written and at the podium in support of the staff recommendation. And I have some questions and concerns. Oh, and I want to also especially thank Anita Cran for bringing up that this is an old woodland habitat and the issues with the birds and the wildlife corridor. I'm familiar with the area, very familiar I was not on the City Council back in 2007 or whenever it was first brought before the City Council, but I did live on West Eucalyptus Street right next to the Becker bungalows, the Mallory Way bungalows for almost 12 years. So I know the area and I walk you know, I know the fields in between and all of that and I'm very familiar with the number of animals on these properties And the connection, you know with water and the mountains.
And so let me see if I can organize my thinking because I've been deeply listening to everyone but when at the beginning of the meeting James city manager James Vega you mentioned Criteria and one of them was changes in the character of the area and and Injuries, I just wrote injuries in jeer injurious to public health and safety now with that change That would not just be water Right. No include the fact that That we are in a housing crisis of an affordable housing crisis. The fact people are being displaced on a daily basis, the difference back in 2007 you could still drive down the street and see for rent signs as long ago as I rent my last house that I leased On North Ventura Street, I think it was 2014. The rent was $1,400 and it went up $50 a year which was all manageable but that no longer exists.
How to say this more strongly, but there is no replacement housing unless you're a single person without a pet willing to live in some kind of furnished studio or rent a room and that rent will be around 2000 if not more because The housing situation, the crisis is so bad, so dire that people can ask really anything they want. People will rent a garage and I think our city manager did at
one point with
his pig and his wife. So that and so into my way of thinking, if that's considered a change in the character of the area. That is injurious to public health and safety because it means that when people are displaced their entire life is interrupted. And as I recall, the plan There was some vague plan where people could go, but these people do not. I know lots of people who'd rather be homeless in Ojai including myself than rent a nice apartment in Oxnard or Ventura.
And that's a fact. That's the fact we love living here. We've many of us have lived here, you know since childhood or we were born here they're not leaving but they're living in pretty dire circumstances. Okay so that's one thing. The other thing I want to clarify for the public Is I want the public to understand what's actually proposed. I mean, some people might be imagining that the cottages will be preserved and there'll be some kind of a you know extension that will preserve the unit units that we have now but My understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, I always love when Bill says that.
Is that right now there is a beautiful canopy of oak trees that is exactly what we need for Ojai. We need housing that's underneath the canopy of oak trees in order for the developer To do his extension, as I recall there was at one point an approval to remove perhaps a dozen oak trees. It was a significant number even one in my mind would be significant And then the description I got from the historian Craig Walker, who we received an extensive testimony from Craig around 5.15 so I don't know if everyone has read it but he says and I quote from his letter Two sides of each unit will be demolished and removed. The units are being doubled in size, and their roofs significantly altered. They will no longer be in quote cottages at all, and certainly not reflect the size design and charm intended by the architect.
Am I correct, the mitigation is donating photos of the original buildings to the museum? That's considered a mitigation but it will not reduce the impact on the buildings below the level of significance. And this is not Craig's opinion but it's the conclusion of the historic consultant And so and Craig, Craig Walker longtime resident he knows the history of the area. He's a long time former historic commissioner. He also supports that the city revoked the mitigated negative declaration given to this project 15 years ago.
The city should send this project back to the drawing board and require a new environmental study that will accurately reflect the actual environmental impacts of this project, not to throw in a few, quote, mitigations and call it good without any evidence that CEQA requirements have been satisfied. And I want to thank the staff for their excellent detailed report. I hope that everyone concerned will read it because this is very, very important.
The low-income, the truly low income affordable housing in Ojai disappear one by one. This is the last of it as far as I know there may be just a few little units left on Bald. I know them all if they're in District 4. I know every house there and those are by the way going for over 2 000. They can nobody can even use their voucher Section 8 voucher for these. There's nothing there is nothing so what was my conclusion?
I lost my train of thought but yes, I'm definitely seconding your motion. I feel confident that the time has come to take a stand because what we're doing now What's before us is a decision
3:27 – 3:4218 turns
that should be evaluated in terms of each alternative on a risk-reward basis. I came into this meeting especially given the withdrawal of negotiation stance from the developers, frankly ready to say you know so I asked the question why this was even on the agenda Because the standard procedure in my mind was to deny the request and start de novo, start over.
But listening from a risk reward point of view very carefully to something new which is the developers council that spoke to us and what I heard was Maybe they, the attorneys are admitting the need to do a de novo evaluation of this entire situation. And maybe we need to at least afford a chance and I would ask my colleagues to think carefully about affording a chance from a risk-reward point of view For 30 days being a small price to pay for maybe something that could be positive.
We know it's going to be we know the risk reward I think pretty clearly for just a denial without giving a chance for the new council that has come in from the Becker group to interact with the city I think the risk-reward is not there to justify simply saying, no we're not going to have that anymore. You know 30 days is a reasonable risk-reward calculation to allow that communication to occur.
So I'm not exactly on the same page as my colleagues here obviously at least at the initial comments because I think we always have to be available to think about new information that's coming in. And I really do believe that what we've heard from the Becker Council is not what we were hearing from the Becker Group two months ago, and I think that we ought to at least see if it bears fruit.
We're not eliminating the option that I was frankly tending towards when I came into this meeting, but I like to learn and listen. Listen and learn of saying you know look you guys pulled out of talking of negotiation we have we think we're on solid ground with our general plan consistency. We think you should you know have a you should start over. But I do think that hearing everything and bringing everything to bear From a risk-reward standpoint, we should take that risk of 30 days to see what might bear fruit in terms of the discussion.
And so I could not support the mayor's motion because I think it's unnecessary risk given the fact that we seem to have a different stance Being presented to us by the developers council
and you.
So there's a lot that's been said. It seems, I keep hearing eviction versus litigation.
That's
what I'm hearing tonight. We can't let anyone be evicted and yet we don't want to get caught in any form of litigation. And I'll be honest with you, I lean to that. I just don't see us, I don't see any wind coming out of that period. The other thing that happened and it's hard to believe it was two months ago, but I think Eagles got in the way And not just the applicants. I think some eagles got bruised on this council and with the two months in between I think I Think taking a step back and recognizing that we achieve more by seeking solutions than Then we do by just saying no.
And I said that two months ago in fact, I'm the one who asked to bring this to do the extension. I'm the one that asks to go and try to renegotiate and I think you know I still feel that way. We have an affordable housing problem. This will affect a certain part of affordability in our community. It won't affect the very low and extremely low, but we have to recognize that going into it.
You know, my son rents here in town. And he's fortunate that he's found a place that's incredibly inexpensive. But like you said, Sousa, those are few and far between. The average is probably 25 to 35 to 45. So we have an issue, and I don't know if this is going to solve it. But if we have 30 days to listen And if we have 30 days to evaluate what I'm hearing is they would like to offer, you know, to negotiate again.
And I'd also like for us in the next 30 days that we should be able to evaluate every piece of city-owned land That we should be able to look at something comprehensive with one of the self-help agencies, with many manners, with anyone that builds affordable housing for low and low income people. And we need to be looking at that separate from this because we're not going to get that in this but we would get Matthew, I'll need your help on this. 55 years of deed restriction. Does that mean if I set the rate at $2,500 a month that it can only go up incrementally for 55 years? And let's say it's $100.
In 55 years do you think a house in Ojai is going to go for $2000 a month? It isn't! Let's lock ourselves into something good. And that's what we're not doing here. We're arguing over eviction, or we're arguing over oh my god the Becker needs to do more for our community, or-or-or. The reality is we have no very low, extremely low housing and we need that. Let's figure out how to do that and at least evaluate what we have I know I've talked with James about it, and I've talked to Bill Miley about it. I've talked to a number of people about our parcels.
Habitat for Humanity is not the person that we want to do these developments. We need... Where is it? How come Bill Miley's not here because he's... Here, I have his notes. Like I said, many manners, Cabril Development Company. Who's the agency in Ventura? The self-help. I'm just telling you guys, we can do better if we identify what the problem is and throwing up this thing that we're going to evict somebody, I think the plan that was put in place was 10 years to create some affordable housing for people to be able to move into. If we've got 10 years to look at our parcels in this community and develop low and extremely low housing, that's what we need to be doing in conjunction with housing that's at that $2,500-$3,500 level. We're willing to throw that out because we're afraid of someone being evicted.
I don't want to see anyone evicted Period. No one here does, and no one in the community does. But we've got a problem and we need to solve it. And it's real easy. We can say tonight, nope you don't get your 30 days. Pull the Band-Aid off the scab. Let's all bleed to death in litigation and not solve a problem. That's that's where we're at.
Sure, I'm just gonna have one thing this this was not approved three years ago because we didn't have the units and we still don't have the units so once again we should not approve this.
What units are you talking about?
Affordable units.
And why don't you think we have them?
Randy, we're having a discussion.
I know, I'm discussing it with you. Why don't you think we have them?
Why don't we have the affordable units? Well, we have a housing equity issue and I'm happy to talk to you at any time about that. We talked about the fact that we don't have any affordable housing in this community in three years. Let's stick to the agenda
item. That's pertinent to this discussion. Sousa? You want to sugarcoat it.
So Randy, Mayor Pro Tem Randy Haney I am in agreement with some of the things that you said. I'd be more inclined to be in agreement if you wouldn't shout because it does make sense to look at options but for tonight I want to focus on the matter the cottages among the flowers what could be a beautiful Credit to Ojai if they were appropriately restored, fair rent to help pay for the restoration and tenants that take pride.
People driving by there instead of seeing the strategic neglect that has gone on You know, when I go there, I can see in my mind's eye how beautiful it could be and so can the tenants. Now as far as the 30-day extension goes, I would be much more inclined to seriously consider that If the developer came to the podium and shared his thoughts, he doesn't legally have to speak with us. But if he wants us to trust that in addition to a profitable project they also have the community's best interests at heart, he could speak to that. He could speak. And if I've said things that aren't true He can still speak to that, am I right? Because I want to be fair and open.
But so far, I only know what I know which is that I think it's time to support the staff recommendation. We've heard ample public testimony and staff has laid it out very well. So I'm ready to support your motion however you want to word
Mr. City Attorney, you want to make a comment?
Briefly if I may building on Council Member Francina's comments staff wouldn't be opposed if the council were to ask the developer or his counsel we can't compel anybody to speak If they wanted to elaborate on their written request for 30-day extension Which was for additional information if they're open to negotiating or if they're making some sort of offer I know we're not cutting a deal tonight but if they're willing to offer something perhaps a commitment that there would be some affordable housing That might help the council consider whether to negotiate further or act tonight.
Thank you. And if I could just add, I think Councilmember Blattson, maybe Councilmember Weirich alluded to this but we were in the room the last time we had a conversation with the developer and it was no more negotiation period and we have reviewed the letter that was just sent before the meeting and it does not ask for a month to negotiate. It asked for a month for the attorney to learn more, to get more information and so I don't know if everybody else has heard the same thing, but I have not heard a commitment to negotiate. I've heard a request for 30 days for them to get more information So I do think it's fair to ask the developer for that commitment that it is 30 days to negotiate Otherwise, I don' think we're talking about the same requests that they are talking about so
Council members mayor Beth Collins again obviously. So I agree with council member Butts the reason that I asked for 30 days and I also agreed with Council Member Haney there has been a lot of history here and I think there are egos involved and hurt feelings and that will end. And I think as council member Blatt's was discussing people got pushed to the edge and that's what happens in a negotiation.
I also agree and the reason I've asked for the 30 days and pushed hard On my side for the 30 days is because litigation is mutually assured destruction and everybody in this room wants more affordable housing for Ojai. Everybody so the question is when where when's it appropriate that is that as a discussion and I can tell you to the question I will push to have everything on the table In discussions, okay?
Whether that comes to fruition I think is you know what ends up happening with that we will see but I will never know and no one else in this room will ever know if we don't give ourselves the 30 days. It's a Hail Mary say maybe it's an attempt without it we have nothing and we have mutually assured destruction. Thus that's why I am coming in at this point really recommending strongly to my client that it could be beneficial to spend the 30 days instead of just facing off.
3:42 – 3:4816 turns
May I ask you a question without the 30 days Why can you still not do what you're suggesting? There's nothing that prevents you from doing that with or without the 30 days.
It's a it's a good point there can always be negotiations after you vote but right now we have a pending application that provides an opportunity potentially in settlement that doesn't exist now The once the pending applications close then we're at a new application and there are different. It's a different procedural posture so that's one reason second a no vote you know any time in my experience when people get more dug in they get more dug in and so a pause gives everybody a moment here we are in a moment before there is any final action on the application before We lose these council members with decade is it can I say decades of experience? It feels like decades. It's cat ears or dog years of Experience where you know, we have a magic moment before we lose these council members and there's been massive investment by them personally And by the city in support of them in trying to work something out so you have institutional knowledge Now as a moment And you know, I don't see the con in the 30 days.
To me there are way more pros than running into the mutually assured destruction.
Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Collins. So one thing, Susan, just so you know the way it procedurally works is once there's a final decision by the council it starts a timeline that's very quick where they have to make a decision to litigate get the record together. It does change things very quickly. It's a very quick window, it's not like other litigations. Once that final determination by the council is made, it does change what they have to focus their time on. I have a question. Okay.
They're making the choice to litigate.
I agree.
That's their choice. They don't have to litigate. She can study this, she can read go back and listen to the videos and she can get a sense of the town She and the developer can discuss a way to make this work that's mutually beneficial. It may not be as profitable but it could be, as other speakers said at the last meeting, his legacy to Ojai Create something beautiful, affordable, historical. He can choose to do that.
The choice to litigate is solely yours and you would not have any pressure. There's no pressure! The people are living there. They're paying their rent. Life can go on. And if there is a pressure that I'm not aware of, such as financial pressure, he's got World University. It's been sitting there for a year. I keep looking. I haven't looked in the last few weeks but you're a developer and I say this respectfully. I don't mean any disrespect, not personally I've seen you walking. You know, I'm fine as a human being. We're two human beings in this world. I'm not trying to vilify but the fact is that he's got multiple projects going on that he can work on while you consider a way forward with the cottages that preserves the history, that preserves the beauty and the trees and all of that.
So Councilmember, through the Mayor. The problem is if there's a denial it triggers a very short statute of limitations off the top of my head I think it's night. A short set of what?
Statute of limitations. Hold on one second this is why I wanted to discuss with you and all that match up in your
side.
This is really
important to understand.
So it's
a 90-day statute of limitations generally to challenge a land use decision, which would include if the council were to approve or deny the requested extension for the cottages permits. Whoever would be unhappy with that decision would have 90 days to file that lawsuit. The city can enter into a tolling agreement with an identity... What? A what again? A tolling agreement.
Tolling?
Tolling agreement to pause the deadline if the potential plaintiff is willing to do so I haven't asked that question. I'm not sure if the potential plaintiff would or would not be willing to enter into a tolling agreement if the city were to deny The extension, enter into a tolling agreement and then figure out if a deal could be cut from there. I will pose that question to Mr. Becker and his team and Ms. Collins and her team.
They may or may not be willing to agree to it and I can't force them to but it is that's the pressure that they face is once a denial is made or once an approval is made whoever isn't happy with that decision has 90 days to file suit shorter 30 or 35 if they challenge it on CEQA grounds, which would not happen with a denial but would happen with an approval. Or could happen with an approval.
And I would add in my experience there's also a pivot in energy. If you think about each side once there's the non-denial and 90 day statute of limitation there is a pivot against. It makes it harder to make a resolution And that's why I'm asking if we just have a moment, white flag pause. Let's have a conversation now that there are two attorneys involved. Everybody on each side can be advised by an attorney about all aspects of it and then let's see if there is a resolution.
And you can always deny in 30 days if it didn't work out.
3:48 – 3:5512 turns
Bill?
I think that's the important point that has been brought up by Mr. Summers, and I'd ask my colleagues to seriously consider it. The act of denying given a changed stance that we're seeing from the Becker Groups Council means that It's a narrower choice set of discussion. It narrows what might be able to be discussed between the two councils who clearly both understand where the priorities of this council are. I mean, I'm the one that made the motion initially if you recall To be consistent with our general plan and deny the Planning Commission's approval because I was frankly outraged that the staff at the time wasn't even mentioning that part of our code.
So you understand where I'm coming from, but I do think that we ought to be open-minded enough to understand the reality That a denial narrows the scope of possibilities, of possible good possibilities. Nothing may come of it but the downside is the risk of 30 days is very low as opposed to what we know I think would be reduction in possible rewards if we go ahead and deny as opposed to allowing 30 days.
I'd just like to quickly say there is nothing new here and we've had years to work on this. And it's the same deal three years ago that we denied, and we're not getting more units so I did make a motion. We have a second. Randy do you want to say something?
Yeah, I just wanted to... I'm sorry if my raised voice scared you but it's a... Again, it's emotional. This is eight years of this and it's tiring. It's tiring every time there's an opportunity this community says they swat it down and they say not in my backyard or not that group of people or how dare you think you could put something here? And it's tiring, just tiring. And this may not, like I said, be the best deal for the very low, extremely low.
But it's an opportunity to get fixed housing in this community at a fixed rate for 55 years. You just can't throw that aside. Then the other part of it is. The fact that we haven't exhausted our own means, that we haven't looked at anything internally. And Mayor, that's what I was taking it back to you. You say we haven't done anything or nothing's changed in three years. Maybe I was misunderstanding you but what I was trying to say is of course nothing's changed in three years. Nothing's changed in eight years. Nothing's changed in 20 years and nothing's gonna change moving forward until this community decides It's in our best interest to take care of our people who don't make $100,000 or don't make $80,000 or don't even make $50,000.
We have to take care of them. We just passed a bill this evening about a standard of health that we should have in America and in Ojai. Well, where's the right for these people to have affordable housing in this community? Where is your right for affordable housing? But I'm just saying yeah, well because you're always saying that you're looking for affordable housing You're all the one always saying that. I'm on section 8 housing and I can't find someone that'll take
it Let's stay on topic because
I am I am staying
development agreement is off the table So
we're
talking about the cottages right now
Yeah, what we're talking about is affordable housing mayor That's what we're talking about so again We can call it what we want. We have an issue here, and we can say no tonight or we can try and work something out that might even be better than what we have.
Ryan? Thank you.
I just want to say this, and I'm with you. This is going to be a very difficult decision. I'm not going to lie. I still haven't made up my mind. The difference is, and this happens a lot, and I happen to be in this business that having a third party who's not you being part of the negotiation does change things. That's why mediation works, that's why having lawyers works or none of us would have a job.
So that does help. It is something that can't help. That is different. I will admit that's different. The other thing is I have been in many high level mediations and negotiations. And there does tend to be if there is this second bite at the apple kind of situation when there is a hard deadline everybody's probably heard about big labor negotiations or baseball strike.
Those things never get settled until either the last day or they continue it a couple extra days and that's when it gets settled. As a good friend of mine says, if we didn't have a deadline for Christmas, we'd open in presence in March. So I do think that there is some real value in that and I do hope that this is not an endeavor that we go on for no reason. I'll make it really clear that if it is supported, that we continue this you guys better come with your best foot forward quickly because if you're in that room with me, I'm not going to be screwing around. If it goes south and the report that comes out There was no there there, then you guys are going.
Litigation might be litigation but it's not gonna help right? Let's just put it that way. If you're asking us, if you're asking me I can't talk for everybody else to make a leap of good faith to continue our discussions. I would much rather have an opportunity and I think Mr. Weirich convinced me that maybe another crack at avoiding war is always worth it but I just want to make it very clear that better come along with some good faith that's above and beyond what we would normally expect.
3:55 – 4:1633 turns
Okay, well we have a motion and we have a second. All in favor? Aye.
Don't we have to have roll
call? I think for this one because litigation is certainly possible let's have a roll call just for clarity
sake.
Alright, roll call please Gail.
Roll-call vote 2–2 motion and we have a second. All in favor? Aye. Don't we have to have roll call? I think for this one because litigation is certainly possib · 1 under review
Show transcript
All right, well we have another motion. Bill?
Yeah I would like to make a motion to continue and Mr. Summers can correct my language that we continue this hearing
My recommendation would be to continue it to the October 25th council meeting with direction to the existing ad hoc committee to negotiate with the developer further in that space, to return with whatever may come out of the negotiations if successful. If nothing or if not then return with the item as it is now.
The point is continuing with the language you just said The staff recommendation is still part of the hearing that would be part of that continuation. Staff recommendation.
Yeah, we would bring the same
resolution. I'm going to make that motion.
Do we need to have a closed session that Do we should we have a closed session scheduled for that meeting? To be able to discuss
the ongoing negotiation session faster than that meeting to get some additional direction So it'll be the public hearing will be continued if approved to the 25th. Oh, that's gonna be okay And then we'll have a closed session either on the 11th or special meeting earlier subject to schedules
If it's helpful so October 25th is less than 30 days, I believe that
was two days less than 30 days The reason I said it is because it's a regular meeting.
I think we can shave two days
and I assume that
with its regular meetings
Let me let me leave it open maybe that depending on where we are We can decide whether we need to close session then and then a special meeting or the only other thing out and or or Regular meaning the only thing I wanted to add and let me ask you this Matt cuz now I didn't think we're gonna get here But I did write it down You said certifying the election, isn't it that they have to certify the election in 30 days but they don't have to wait 30 days.
They can certify the election much sooner I thought
The county can, they historically have not but they can.
Right I mean I remember one there was an election a few a number of years back in Ojai where it was four votes the county certified it very early before so I'm just saying that if we're legally required at the next meeting after the certification of the vote there could be a situation when the county certifies the vote prior to when we were thinking about like that November 15th date
That's theoretically possible, although this is I would have to double check. As I recall our code defines that council term lengths as the first meeting in December to the first meeting in December. Just want to make sure it's on our
radar in case we get jammed up trying to
get... It is possible and for what it's worth the county has more recently has not they've taken their full 30
days. Let's get back to my motion which is to continue to the October 25th meeting with the qualifiers mentioned by the city attorney
Okay, do we have a second?
I'll second that.
Okay roll call please Gail.
Roll-call vote Passed 3–2 motion which is to continue to the October 25th meeting with the qualifiers mentioned by the city attorney Okay, do we have a second? I'll s
Show transcript
All right thank you very much.
We will move on to item number four approval of city proposal for Soule Park programming partnership
Madam
Mayor, perhaps a brief recess. Okay let's do that all right we'll take a couple minute break Okay, we are back and we'll begin with item number four. Can we come to quiet please? It's the approval of the city proposal for Soule Park Programming Partnership. We have a staff report James? Thank you.
Yes thank you. Give me one second. We have a couple slides just to lay out the proposal. So as the staff report notes, the City Council several years ago authorized council members Haney and Weirich to have ongoing conversations with the county. Not years ago! with the County of Ventura to potentially partner on a, or develop some sort of partnership related to Sewell Park.
And so we've had some ongoing discussions related to those and those have really amplified recently as we talked about potentially partnering to improve the programming that we offer at that facility and to open it up for more community usage. So I will quickly walk through some of the details. I won't go through this line by line, but what most people probably know about Sewell Park is that Sewell Park is the county park that's located off Boardman Road. It includes a dog park, paddle ball courts, equestrian arena, softball field, children's playground, horseshoe pits and picnic structures.
But a lot of people that I talked to and myself included don't typically go to that park because the park has an entrance fee. The entrance fee is $2 per vehicle on a weekday, and $5 per vehicle on a weekend or holiday. So as we started to talk with the county, we started to talk about how to eliminate the potential barrier of the entrance fee to get more usage out of that park for the community. And so as a result of some ongoing conversation with the county, we worked with the county to propose a one-year pilot project, pilot partnership. The report says it's an MOU and a memorandum of understanding but we actually got a response from the county to the proposal yesterday I think it was.
Where the county said that they tentatively because like myself, they have to go to the Board of Supervisors to get approval. But they've tentatively agreed that they will recommend that partnership to the Board of Supervisors and so they came back with a couple of little tweaks from what the staff report says mostly about the formatting So instead of a memorandum of understanding, they propose a one-year Memorandum of Agreement which is the format they prefer. It doesn't change really any of the terms from what we put in the staff report but the agreement would allow the City of Ojai to have improved access to increased programming and use of Sewell Park Essentially, the county says that the gate entrance fees last year totaled $58,000. So the proposal would be that the city would provide a payment of $58 thousand annually to the county.
That payment would result in the county dropping their gate entrance fees. The county would no longer collect gate fees and the park would be open to the public. A couple of key items that were important to the county. We initially talked to them about being able to manage certain aspects of the park. The County Parks Department wants to continue to host the park and do all the host duties. They want to continue the execution of their CAL FIRE grant, which was the $577,000 grant for the tree removal and replacement so they were not willing Hand over management of that to the city at this point because they have a ongoing grant for that.
They also would want to continue to pursue grants and funding for the Ojai Valley Trail, and they also want to continue to manage the rentals of the group areas Horse Arena Paddle Ball Court and Ball Field. And so that's what they want to keep doing, but what they've offered to allow the city to do is a couple of things. One is, as I said before, drop the entrance fee. Second, the city would—as long as we rented the courts or the paddle ball courts, the ball fields for more than 30 days in a year through our REC program, which is something that we've talked about doing. They would recommend to the Board of Supervisors a 50% rate reduction for rental of those fields and so we have some of the rates and things but that would include if we wanted to rent the fields or the paddle ball courts for REC programming.
We now have another site that we could use for those and it's a reduced rate to allow us to keep our recreation fees low And the city can provide rec programming, we can receive fees for that programming. We would just be renting that space if we were using it for programming. And then the third big aspect to the proposal is that it would include an option to lease space for pickleball courts at Sewell Park We talked about the kind of general structure that we could have a lease for anywhere from 50 to 99 years, where the city pays $1 per year for the space for the courts.
With the requirement being that the city would then build the courts but we'd have that lease so they remain under the city's control. And so those are really the three big aspects of the proposal is dropping the entrance fee, being able to rent the fields for our rec programming at a reduced rate and potentially being able to have pickleball courts at Sewell Park that are under the city's control.
There's a couple other comments there, just that the agreement is one year and it would allow for amendments by mutual consent and those types of things. But those are really the major elements of the proposal. So again this slide shows the three elements. The $58,000 annual payment to eliminate the gate fee. Option to lease space for pickleball for one year and the 50% discount for the field rentals. So when we put this report together, we had submitted a tentative proposal noting that the full city council hadn't approved it yet but it was just to see if it was something the county would support. We wanted to come to the full city council to get ratification of that offer Like I said, since that time yesterday the county told us that the staff is willing to recommend to their board at one of their upcoming meetings to enter into this agreement.
So we are asking the City Council to provide that direction of whether or not to proceed and then the next step that we are recommending is that if the council determines that this proposal is acceptable That the council provide direction to staff to finalize the agreement with the county team. And we also are recommending at this point that the Parks and Recreation Commission be able to start discussing potential programming for the park, which that conversation has not yet started.
We had a slide that just showed some of the programming that we're rolling out and some of the programming that could happen at the park. I won't go through those in detail. The conversation about pickleball with that being an option at the park. There currently are three paddle ball courts and one pickleball court. This map shows that there's a large parking lot there, we went out and measured it and you could fit quite a few pickleball courts in that area. You could fit in excess of eight courts in that area.
We did do some rough estimate or get some rough estimates for constructing courts by overlaying the parking lot. We expect each court would cost about probably between twenty to thirty thousand dollars per court So some of the questions we have figure out is how many courts? We would want to build if that is something we want to do And then also what additional items such as shade structures lights, etc which are not included in the cost estimate estimate for just the Overlay and construction of the courts.
And So that again is another item that the council may wish to ask the Parks and Recreation Commission To work with staff more on to identify The potential of that project, but we did want to provide That information so and with that I will turn it back over to the City Council
4:16 – 4:2411 turns
Okay questions I have a question. I'm confused why didn't this go through Parks and Rec or why haven't they weighed in? I'm sorry, why hasn't the Parks and Rec Commission been part of this process? Isn't that why we appoint them to advise us about... Parks and Rec?
Can I offer an opinion on that? Sure. In my opinion, I think what we're doing here is a framework for parks to try to establish a framework with the ad hoc committee for parks and recreation to operate within in order to their job. We asked them to look at programming possibilities but we need to first establish a framework for them to do that within And right now, there is nothing. This is a broad framework that allows that.
So to me, that's the distinction. There's nothing for the Park and Recreation to operate within in terms of applying their expertise and their knowledge unless there's an overall framework for that to operate within. So that's why I think that's what this is. It's just a broad framework. And I think what's really important, and just as a question, is to clarify My understanding is the payment to drop the gate fees means that anybody can come to the park.
Without in the whole valley or the city etc. Our entire area of interest use the dog park hang out with their family on the weekend etc without having to pay an entry fee
yes that's our intent that's what we would expect as we work on the formalizing of the agreement
just but if we do Approve the proposal We would approve it without having gone through the Parks and Rec Commission, correct?
The council could approve the proposal Without going through the Parks and Rec Commission or it can be directed to the Parks and Rec Commission
Any other questions? Yeah, I have another question. So I support what Councilmember Bill Weirich just stated that you know that we move forward it's a framework and then involve the Park and Rec Commission so there's no further delays because this is so wonderful! It's a golden opportunity let's seize it, let's seize the moment But the issues that I mean, I think most people will be very happy to hear this news.
And then I want to have a separate conversation about the transportation issues that are going to come up And I'm more acutely aware of them because now one of my granddaughters goes to Fire Stick Pottery. If you want to have your life in your hands, try to park and get back on Ojai Avenue. My hope is that we not only will be successful in extending the bike trail But that we can get the trolley going to Soule Park, you know show there's demand and all of the other things that we want to do. Maybe there's a way to legally... I know it's a state highway but maybe there's ways to calm the traffic over that bridge and things like that so that's for the future.
We're still on questions so we'll get discussions later. Okay does anyone have any other questions? Okay, we will move on to public comment. So first we have Alan Greenberg then Brenda Kraut and then Tim Kraut
Thank you, I'm Alan Greenberg a citizen of Ojai A little history for you. There are four courts that were shown on the picture, three of them are paddle tennis courts not paddle ball courts. The fourth court is a pickleball court and during the past several years several pickleball players have come onto the paddle tennis courts despite the signage and they've modified the lines painted lines that are different Because the two sports use a court that's almost identical in size. Not exactly, but to the naked eye you can't tell the difference.
And the difference is inside the court, the way the lines are put is different for both of them. But when we play paddle tennis if someone wants to play pickleball on another court and nobody wants it you know go ahead and do it. We don't say wait a minute you can't play here but the history is that about 12 years ago two couples Larry and Heidi Rhodes Leslie and Philippe Gosch got together and decided they wanted to convert the two tennis courts that were there. They went to the county and spent a year-and-a-half getting approval.
The county gave them approval to do it, and gave them zero money. So these two couples along with my wife and I once we heard about the whole program put up the money and raised some money from Good Samaritans, and we had to repave the courts. We had to take out the tennis posts put in the smaller paddle tennis post in the nets and restripe everything. And so all the money was spent privately not by the county.
So the main reason I'm here is to let you know that we are hoping that those courts remain as paddle tennis courts There are no other paddle tennis courts in the entire valley at all. And the remnants of that original group is still there. I played with Larry Rhodes the other day at the courts. So, I just want you to be aware of that and I'm hoping that that is protected. There was some indication in the newspaper that those courts were gonna be converted to pickleball. A couple of things in here like I said there are not paddle ball courts. A paddle ball is an indoor sport that's played in a big enclosed room with a high ceiling just like handball I don't understand the fee arrangement. I'm hoping and assuming we wouldn't have to pay fees to play there like we always do.
I don' understand what the fees mean. Who's to pay the fees? Are the fees per person, per court? It's not clear what the fee structure indicates. I think it has to be made more clear.
Yeah, and I can respond to that real quick as I know
you're running out of time. So I'm in favor of the whole plan. I think it would be better if the county put some money in with it they can well more afforded than the city of Ojai can so for us to pay the whole 50-some thousand and to me it doesn't make sense because everyone in the county could come there and use it take advantage of the no gate fee so thank you for your attention
And just to clarify in case there is confusion the the fees would be if the city was going to rent Facilities for its own rec programming. So it's there's there's no fees proposed for individual users
4:24 – 4:2911 turns
If we program it
The fees would be for the city to rent this rent those facilities from the county and
Thank you very much.
Mayor and staff, I want to commend the council for pursuing additional recreation facilities for Valley residents. Maximizing the use of underutilized public properties is a very good thing and I would hope the council would extend this mindset to the underutilized courts at Libbey Park. Public facilities owned and maintained with public funds should be utilized to their fullest for the benefit of the majority of the public, not for a minor sector of the public.
Converting a couple of the courts at Libby to multi-use courts with blended lines for pickleball would not cost the city anything and would open Libbey Park up to being utilized by a broader group of the public instead of the select few that utilize it at this point. So I really wish you luck in working with the county on this agreement. I think it would be a good thing for the city's park and rec department, but we need more courts now. Thank you.
Thank You Brenda next we have Tim Kraut then Greg Doss and then Gavel Childress Gail okay
Good evening Council, Madam Mayor and staff. I'm glad that the council is looking into agreement with the county to benefit recreation opportunities in Ojai. I do hope that the council will remember that you already have full control of public parks within the city and would be able to immediately expand recreational activities for a large segment of the public by converting a couple of underutilized courts at Libbey Park into multiple use courts Having more pickleball courts would provide the rec department the opportunity to offer youth and adult pickleball programs. Now increased recreational opportunities for Valley residents is a positive thing we need this especially for our youth in the valley. Thank you
thank you Tim. Next we have Greg Doss then Gail Childress and then Leslie rule
Thanks for being here. Thanks for your time. I'm Greg Dawes, I play pickleball, I play tennis, I play whatever I can. I am a multi-sport enthusiast and really excited about Soule Park. I also ride a bike so really excited about the possibility of extending the bike trail all the way to Soule Park seems like a no brainer. I understand people do not want their paddle tennis courts taken.
I know that tennis players don't want Libbey Park taken for Pickleball right. So it just seems like a no brainer and I for one is part of the pickleball community as part of that I consider myself part of the tennis community we want to work with the city with the county whatever it takes to make as much recreation as we can possibly get so thanks for your time.
Thank you Greg. Next Gail Childress and then Leslie Rule
Thank you. I wasn't prepared to talk, but I really feel passionate about the pickleball thing. I would really like to see Libbey Park. You can go and play tennis anytime you want without a fee. You just go and you can play. And that's when I was a tennis player. Now I'm a pickleball player, and I want the same freedom and the same no fees. Just go to Libbey Park. It's middle of town.
More and two courts is all we could ask for. I mean, I think you could. I'm not sure Tim how many courts could we make out of two tennis courts? We could make eight courts out of two tennis courts the lower courts it's perfect. I am afraid that if you decide on the county and the recreation department Having fees and fees to use the tennis court, I'm opposed to that. But I really like the idea of the bike trail going to this county park and even further all the way up to Bocali so I can ride my bike safely on Ojai Avenue into town.
But right now, we need more courts and also we need more time at our one and only court that we have here. So thank you very much.
Thank you Gail. Next we have Leslie Rule.
4:29 – 4:3813 turns
Thank you council, thank you mayor. I just wanted to thank Sousa for advocating for You know more biking paths to Seoul I think that the development of Seoul has great potential and I look forward to seeing it as it develops Really? That's all I have to say. Thank you
Thank You Leslie next we have Dale Hanson
I'm really happy to hear about the Soule Park arrangement and thank you Bill for working so long and hard on it. What I would hope is that if you consider the tennis, the lower tennis courts that you consider the people who live there that hear the noise of these people over here with this noise aggravation it is to the folks who live there. And I just hope that we get Soule Park going and we close this down, and I hope you do not extend it into Libbey Park. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Dale. Any speakers online?
If there's anyone in the Zoom queue who would like to speak on this item please use the raise hand function now and there's two people. The first is Bill Miley I'll bring him in Mr. Miley if you would please unmute yourself you can go ahead and speak. Mr. Miley if you're there if you could unmute yourself. I'll come back to him And next we have Kat Schmidt. I'll go ahead and bring her in.
Kat Schmidt if you're there, okay you've unmuted yourself you can go ahead and speak.
Hi thank you this is Katrina Schmidt and i agree with Dale Hanson. I'm very excited that the city Potentially going into this agreement with the county. What a wonderful idea to expand Pickleball there, some friends and I were very excited to hear about this and we think that we can get a group of people who would help support even the funding of this have a party out there.
have a pickleball paradise party and help, you know, fundraise to get these pickleball courts out at Soule Park and put an end to the idea of pickleball going to Libbey Park. It is in the middle of town yes and that's exactly why you don't want pickleball there at Libbey Park because it's in the center of town. It is loud and if you look on an aerial map You will see that the Libbey Park courts are just on the other side of the houses, that the City Hall court is basically equidistant. And so the noise is still going to be an issue at Libby.
Plus they're beautiful courts, they're well used by the tennis players and it would be great to have a pickleball paradise Close to town, Soule Park is very close to town. And the idea of extending the bike trail is wonderful. I think this is such a great program or a great framework for having this type of programming. So I applaud Council Member Wyrick's efforts on this and I fully support that. Thank you so much.
Thank you, Katrina. All right. That's it, Gail?
No we have Mr. Miley again but there is another hand has gone up and this is just three initials JQP and I'll bring this person in. JQ P if you could please unmute yourself you can go ahead and speak.
Hi thanks for staying late. I won't take much of your time. Just listening about the fees for the sole part. If you remove them completely you might see a huge inundation of not just out-of-towners but Potential abusers of the free space. I don't want to go into detail on the scenarios, but I can see quite a few already and some that may even threaten the family you know children unattended.
The idea of having an annual reduced rate kind of a membership that supports year-round needs for the park i think is a great idea maybe even one that gives a heavier discount for the locals But one that, you know, does help to finance. And then as well maybe the idea that... What was the other idea? Well I'll just leave it with that. I just think that there's a potential for abuse with a space that's so big.
I think just there may be a huge traffic increase for the neighbors. That's the other thought I had. That's all thank you.
Thank you, JQP.
And Mr. Miley, I will try him one more time. Mr. Miley if you're there, if you would please unmute yourself and you can go ahead and speak.
I have done that thank you. Okay hello. I've looked over the administrative report from the Park and Recreation Department. The site map was wrong obviously with Sarzotti. Have you changed that? One, it's very worthy our city is getting close to a contract with the county on recreational use. Two, the statement for county management of areas one and six when I read the report including Pattable seems to limit the city options for creating new pickable courts.
It seems ambiguous what does that report mean? It's very confusing. Three, there is nothing stated about capital expenditures for such as new Pickleball Courts which has been a major reason for adding Soule Park for added recreation. Four, county expenditures on the LA Trail is mentioned. Nothing is said about the extension of the LA Trail to Soule Park. This was a key part of creating options for accessing our new recreational activities. There's needs to be added.
There's a section on cost per court use, per hour and per day. What does that mean? Just how does that fit into the desire of the city to make a pickleball play a key part of this new recreation area? Six, my understanding of Libbey Park Tennis Courts is they are free to play on if not reserved. And when you have to use lighting, use a coin meter. So what's next?
Create enough permanent pickleball courts should be a top priority, at least enough for 32 players. Shade and lights. Also, all pickleball players' use of salt parks should continue without a day charge similar to livable court use. I want to talk a little bit about the Parks and Recreation Commission First of all, pickleball is a very noisy sport for anyone within four to 500 feet.
It doesn't fit tennis courts at all. We need that. It's a continuous intrusion. It's repetitive sound. I've gone to all the recent Park and Recreation Commission meetings When you recommended they do this, it was in February. They still haven't gotten around to doing it in almost October. Very slow. That's I guess about it. Their ad hoc committee did recommend not to sound test Salt Park because they didn't want to spend city money on county property. But the Pickleball Association, as I see it, they don't wanna go to Salt Park and it turns out that one member of the Ad Hoc Committee is the treasurer of the Pickleball Association. Thank
you. Thank you Bill. Next we have Bob McPaul.
4:38 – 4:4611 turns
Thank you very much Madam Mayor, members of Council. Certainly appreciate the time you're dealing with these issues and I know this evening was not intended and shouldn't have turned into a referendum on the virtues or non-virtues of pickleball I applaud and so appreciate that the city is taking a look at expanding public services as a former Parks and Recreation Director and City Manager. That's exactly what our obligation in this valley, we should be looking to maximize all the recreation facilities and other facilities to make them available to the community. In saying that though, unfortunately this evening part of this evening has turned into what seems to be a referendum on pickleball. And I know that the council is not here to make a decision about pickleball but is looking at different options for a whole variety of opportunities.
I would just like to express that I think the Parks and Recreation Commission has been doing an admirable job of really digging into the issue of pickleball there's no conclusions that have been met I'm confident the council isn't reaching any conclusions to it, but that the ultimate solution with Pickleball could be a whole variety of different locations. Whether it be Libbey Park, the existing very beautiful facilities that are here that the city is spending money on to do a sound study on let's let the process take place outcomes happen and then make conclusions that are in the best overall interest of the community. That would be my desire and I think that's exactly the track the councils on Just based on looking at the potential agreement with the county right now for expansion and expanded use of facilities.
Very much appreciate your time and consideration in this.
Thank you, Bob. All right that's it Gail? All right let's move on to discussion.
First of all, I want everybody to understand that Councilman Haney and myself were partners in this. We put a lot of time into it so... Well it all
depends what side of the ball you're
on. It's a framework. It's a framework to give us options. I think all this discussion of what should be done with the framework shouldn't defeat getting the framework in place, and I really feel like we're talking about so much more than pickleball. We're talking about open up new leagues for ball fields. Again if there is an issue with too much use Well, the beauty of this is how amenable it is. It's not locking anybody in.
It's a beginning framework where yes, you know, it could be more of this or it could be more of that but this was the beginning framework that we could get with county to get going with and I just think it's important to look at it that way. Another option for resources for park and recreation to look at and I just really think we oughta approve it tonight.
We're just talk to the fact that I've been here 28 years and one of the reasons I don't go to Seoul Park is I don't want to pay to enter a park that I it's in my community. And I hear that from almost everyone I talked to regarding this facility 28 years here, and one of the reasons I don't go to that facility is I'm not going to pay $2 or $5. And the majority of the people that I talk to don't want to pay $2 or $5 either. They resent the fact that they have to pay for a facility that's in their backyard.
So we went back and forth on the fee structures. We came up. We think this is the best deal. It's for a year. We evaluate it, we see what the win is. We see if the recreation department can program it properly. The girls softball program has died in this community because they don't have a facility to use. The last time it was in play was at San Antonio and I don't know if any of you've ever walked those fields but I wouldn't let my children play on those fields.
So we've got a good thing here. Let's see what happens and one of the good things about it, Councilman Wyrick said is you know we can look at the Equestrian Center do we feel like that we want to offer that in a program then we can come back and negotiate that? Regarding pickleball I just think we need to be clear on that that I personally don't ever see this court being closed down ever There's just been too much money, too much sweat equity put into it.
It may be reduced in how many people use it based on other facilities opening up in our community but this is a beautiful court and in fact Pickleball is being branded in this community based on that court All the articles that I've read regarding pickleball and tennis. They're saying they're synergistic, they're saying that you can have a great tennis town and a great pickleball town. We just need to figure out how to work together if we're going to do that to do it but I think part of the Recreation Department's job is going to be look at the site, evaluate the same parking lot that we looked at.
Look at some monetary values and how we could actually do something there if we choose to do something there. But we're a long way off on doing any type of a pickleball court there.
So wait a minute.
Not necessarily. Why would you say that? Not necessarily.
Let's bring it back through the chair.
I just, I mean, I don't know. I grew up using Soule Park a whole bunch. It was never an issue. I'm a little confused. There's part of it that's a little strange to me that we'd spend $58,000 of the city's money to subsidize everybody on the planet to use Soule Park and we could build two plus pickleball courts with that money. This isn't going to add any pickleball. This is the only thing this deal does other than give us some access, which I don't really know that that was.
It just seems kind of strange that we're subsidizing all the use whatever it potentially is for the park and not really I'm not sure if the county is still running it. They're collecting money anyway for the big events that are there. Are those now free still as well? Because there's a lot of large events that are there. You know, I'm all for opening up rec space but this is a lot of money that's not going to go towards recreation it's gonna go towards making sure anybody who wants to go to the park can go there for free.
I have, I agree with you Ryan. It does seem like a lot of money and it's also the questions that you asked would be answered by the Parks and Rec Commission so it's odd that this has not been in front of them yet because that's their specialty and they're volunteers and out of respect to them because I know they've done a lot of research about this seems as if they should have weighed in at this point So I'd be interested in having them weigh in on this. I think it's great though, potentially the potential out in Soule Park is amazing with the equestrian center and the dog park and the fields and pickleball and all the opportunities at recreation.
I do think though in terms of good governance, I would like to know what the Parks and Rec Commission thinks about this at this point.
4:46 – 4:4813 turns
Yeah, I think to answer the comments by the two of you. Think about if we set up programming for the softball for the, you know, to be able to launch that again. Think about, you know, we set up the programming. Luis does a good job setting up that programming. We still have to when people come to play in the leagues they still have to pay an entrance fee? It doesn't work.
It doesn't work in terms of trying to expand the recreational opportunities, providing a framework. I disagree that the commission should decide on a framework. They should be weighing in on how. It would be like saying whether we're going to provide a resource or not for Park and Rec to work with. And with that all, I mean, I think it's time to make a decision here. I think this is a great opportunity for expanded recreational opportunities in so many ways and so many possibilities. It's very amenable on not locking us into anything long term. So I'm going to make a motion and see where it goes to approve the proposal for the partnership as presented.
Okay, all in favor? Do we need a roll call? We don't
need a roll call.
It
involves money,
we should roll call. Yes, you're right. Okay, roll call please
Roll-call vote Passed 2–1 motion and see where it goes to approve the proposal for the partnership as presented. Okay, all in favor? Do we need a roll call? We don't
Show transcript
because I really want the Parks and Rec Department Commission to weigh in on this. Council Member Weirich? All right, thank you very much.
We will move on to item number five, the Winter City Council meeting schedule.
Mayor, can I just quickly... It's
way after 1030.
Yeah, I'll note two things. One is just as a reminder for everybody, so that was approving the proposal, so it will take some time to now work with the county and get that locked in, just so people don't run to the park tomorrow thinking it's free. It's going to take some time. Second a second see the okay because it is after 1030 We'd recommend continuing the Okay,
we will continue this so we're gonna adjourn tonight. Thank you very much and We're
adjourned