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 – 0:0715 turns
Call to order we have a quorum. May we have the roll call, please Weston?
Roll call, called by Weston Montgomery
Show transcript
Thank You Weston welcome to the January 10th 2023 meeting of the Ojai City Council James we see that say the pledge for us today
Thank you, James. And tonight we're going to have a special section, a storm report and I just want to say a big thank you to James and city staff for taking such good care of us and responding to all the issues.
Yeah, thank you Mayor and so obviously we've had a heck of a storm over the last 48 hours And I wanted to start by saying thank you to three kind of key departments, the police department and Police Chief Rivera who were actually out helping people evacuate from down in the Foster Park area yesterday. The fire chief, Chief Parker who I think is not here because he's out responding to some of those calls. And then also our public works crew who were on standby and storm patrol all last night and the night before clearing storm drains.
Our response here in the city we were very fortunate that we did not have any major issues. We had some clogged storm drains things like that That we handled. There are a couple of AT&T lines that are still in line to be repaired by AT& T that we have some road closures where the roads are closed to the through traffic but open to the residents, but all in all as a city for that level of rain we're pretty happy with what happened. But obviously the big impact I think a lot of us felt was valley-wide there was some major impacts and Chief Rivera and the Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works Department were kind of out trying to help with all those things so As of now for that level of storm, we're pretty happy with how it turned out within the city.
And we're staying in communication with Caltrans, the police department and the fire department on those valley-wide impacts and when we'll get all the roads back open. Chief, I think I had heard that the 101 was completely reopened but I'm not sure if you heard the same?
As of this afternoon when I came in, the northbound lanes were closed but the southbound lanes were open. I have since been told that both sides have been opened.
Okay thank you Chief and thank you again and did you want to add anything? Just yeah I know you were probably knee-deep in it yesterday.
I was speaker card so I'll stand up and speak just a minute.
And that's it, thank you Mayor.
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled, click to expand
All right Thank You James, Thank You Chief Approval of the agenda. Motion to approve? I'll move to approve it. OK, I'll second. All right, all in favor? Aye. Wonderful. And we have no
commission reports today, James?
No commission reports. There is one item that we'll have a commission speaking on but no Commission reports Okay,
we will move on to public communication and just a reminder These are items not on the agenda and because they are not on the agenda We cannot discuss them when you make a comment. We're not ignoring you We appreciate your viewpoint in participation And we can agendize for the future and a public comment reminders three minutes and at the end of the three minutes You will hear a gentle chime so At that moment, please stop talking and respect each other's time in the spirit of equity.
Yes? Is the presentation canceled? Oh yes, I'm sorry, yes. Chris Stanch couldn't make it.
Yes, and I think several people were kind of... Was it out by Matillaha Canyon? I think we had some people who are still being evacuated, and I believe Chris is one of those people so he's not here tonight.
Okay. All right, thank you. We'll begin with Ron Salazano then Chief Jose Rivera and then Anson Williams.
All right. Thank you, members of council. I hope everybody in here and out there has been staying safe and dry. We've been doing the best we can over at the library with that. So my name is Ron Solorzano. I am the regional librarian for the Ojai Valley. Just to give a little bit of quick context, I oversee the libraries in the Oak View Miner's Oaks and here in Ojai.
In addition to being beloved local institutions with a vibrant and dedicated Friends of the Library group, these libraries benefit from being part of the Ventura County library system. Among other things this gives our local customers access to thousands of additional books, DVDs and other media as well as digital resources, a mobile library and an ever-growing library of things.
Tonight though I wanted to give you a quick update on some of the programming that we have specifically going on at the Ojai Library this month. First, this coming Saturday January 14th historian and writer Vincent Burns and professor of journalism Stephen Bates are going to visit the Ojai Library to speak about their book Rincon Point in a presentation called A History of Rincon Point in Photographs Burns and Bates both have deep roots in the area and are excited to share their knowledge of the area's history, early settlers, and surfing tradition.
Next on Saturday, January 28th, local Ojai author Cynthia Louise Greer will visit the library to deliver a talk titled Magic or Medicine? Grimoires and Healing Amulets in the Muse of Freedom. Greer who writes under the nom de plume of Jules Laramore will share a bit of the history of Renaissance France that is the backdrop of her novel along with examples of healing devices that were often thought to be magic.
These special events are offered in addition to all of our usual library programs, which include a weekly story time on Wednesday mornings for children age zero to five. A ukulele club on Monday mornings for all ages. Parent and child together classes that we offer in collaboration with First 5 Ventura County on Tuesdays and Thursdays Poetry readings, fiber art activities and much much more.
For information about any of these or any of our other library programs please don't hesitate to reach out to me or our library team. Thank you so much for your time and I hope you have a wonderful evening.
Thank You Ron next Chief Rivera then Anson Williams and then Jeffrey Starkweather
0:07 – 0:146 turns
Good evening Mayor, Councilmembers and staff members. I just wanted to take a few moments to, I think James kind of touched on the rainstorms that hit us the last few days But we've had several storms that have hit us for quite a while now, the last month or so. And the saturation level was pretty high in a lot of the areas. The city fared really well. I drove around a lot yesterday making sure that things were in order and other than a few downed trees, we did really good and I think that's a big thanks to our public works And also our council for those decisions that are made throughout the city to keep our city running.
Hardest hit areas were in the county areas in the valley. I do want to thank our fire department, my deputies. Our entire day shift ended up staying over because of the volume of calls we received. I know fire had an increase of calls just yesterday which was well over 100% of their normal calls for service. I believe they handled 1,300 calls for service and 80 of those were actual rescues.
I was personally involved in a rescue of four individuals down at Camp Chaffee. We had a gal who was hanging by a tree in the river her vehicle got stuck became started going underwater and she had to climb out broke a window out and how to climb out on the bed over truck and eventually had to hang onto a tree While we were responding to find her, we came across two other vehicles that had been swept by the mud debris and into the bank of the creek. And they were stuck. One of my deputies went in there. He was probably waist deep in mud but was able to pull all three of them out of the vehicle.
So I just want to thank My deputies, the fire department. Also our Caltrans workers in public works. They were out all night last night trying to clear our roads and at one point we had 150 going into Santa Paula that was closed. The 33 is closed and that's probably gonna be closed you know going up northbound on the 33. That's probably gonna be closed for a few weeks I was up there this afternoon to look at the debris, and it's Matilla Hall Canyon. There's probably about three to four feet of mud going across the road. It's gonna take quite a while to dig out of that.
So a big thank you to all the responders that were working last night, the road workers keeping our 33 clear for people to come in and out. A big thank you to everybody. The the good thing and I thank God for this that we didn't have any loss of lives so Very minor injuries, but no loss alive. So a big thank you to everybody. Thank you very much
Thank You chief much appreciated next wave Anson Williams then Jeffrey Starkweather and then Sean Sharon Mahari, sorry
Well hey there, I'm Anson Williams. Of course I live in the city of Ojai and first I'd like to congratulate Mayor Sticks as well as new council members Leslie Rule, Rachel Lang and Andy Whitman. And thank God you're still here Sousa! It was a close hard-fought election and I'd like to thank my amazing campaign team and the 1,782 citizens who voted for me. And I assure them I won't stop fighting for the issues you care about disaster preparedness water sustainability climate initiatives manageable tourism and affordable housing But I have to say I'm troubled by what's happening in our city since the final results were tallied.
Two lawsuits? Two lawsuits have been filed against our city, by a tiny group of people called simply Ojai. The same group of people who ran or many of the same group ran the mayor's campaign. The same group won a half million dollar fire grant without any qualifying fire prevention experience. Simply Ojai followers have also filed petitions for referendums, all designed to overturn the decisions made by your elected representatives.
All designed to make our city council irrelevant. Is that the way you want it to govern? Hmm? Is that what we want? I don't think so. I don't think we want a privileged coterie of the mayor's close associates to negate any council decisions she doesn't agree with. Who is this so-called nonprofit and what do they stand for? As far as I can see, their main mission is obstruction.
Obstruction of the Becker Project that will bring the largest number of deed restricted affordable units to our city in decades. Obstruction of valet parking which is critical to the success of the Al Roblar Hotel and the millions and millions of dollars it will bring into our community. This campaign of obstruction will potentially cost the Ojai taxpayers thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.
It could subject us to the same fate as a city... I don't know if you heard, Mammoth Lakes was recently filed for bankruptcy because of a $43 million judgment awarded against them. This can happen to us. But for some reason, the privileged few, the few at Simply Ojai are willing to take that risk at our community's peril I say we're not willing, ever. We need our streets paved. We need affordable housing. We need to protect the tenants at the cottages of Mallory Way. We have $50 million in deferred maintenance that we need to attend to. I think you see during this rain our roads. The votes have been counted on the cottages and valet parking. It is over!
Do not risk, do not obey the demands of Simply Ojai Elites to put all of us at risk by overturning the well-considered greatly debated decisions our former council city has
made. Thank you
Anson, thank
you. Next we have Jeffrey Starkweather then Sharon Mahari and then Clay Creasy.
0:14 – 0:215 turns
Question, can you reset the clock please?
First of all I'd like to congratulate our new City Council members in hard-fought elections and I also want to congratulate everybody that ran for office. In my view from what I observed everybody ran issue based Clean campaigns. People can't control what some of their social media supporters do, as someone who ran myself and was attacked on social media I didn't even consider it part of a negative campaign so I'm proud of that.
And the other thing that I think was great about this election that pretty much everybody agreed on the issues that we needed to tackle affordable housing water of business diversity, so forth. I could go on and on but you know there may be some differences in how we tackle those but I think everybody wanted to do those together. I would point out that and of course as was just pointed out that there is no actual mandate based on this election. The mayor got 47.5% of the people that voted a 42-point margin. That is not a mandate doing basically we had a tight election So what do we do?
I think the mayor and Rachel Lang said it best in their campaign statements. The mayor made a point of, we need collaboration. In fact in her speech at Oak Grove she said it three times in her first three minutes. We need to bring people together for the common good and that makes my heart sing. Rachel stated Our community needs to come together to tackle, I can't even read my own writing, but tackle our problems that we face.
If we can't sit and come together and leave our egos behind and work towards a sustainable solution for the future. And she also mentioned collaboration and leadership with a heart, I guess it was passion. Anyway, very similar comments and I agree with them. And so that's why I handed out the stuff about collaboration. I won't go into details of what that means. I think we all do know what it means but I want to work with you in a collaborative fashion. I think if we're talking about forming housing Task force or a climate change task force are dealing with these problems that we need to have them be collaborative, which means we bring all stakeholders together to sit in the room and talk each other and listen.
And unfortunately, we're off to a bad start in terms of litigation but I'm hoping that We can move together with these issues and start actually working collaboratively. Thank
you, Jeffrey. Next we have Sharon Mahari then Clay Creasy and then Bob Kemper.
Hi, congratulations everybody. Glad you were able to make it through the weather. My name is Sharon Meharry I live and own a business in Ojai and I'm very concerned about the lawsuits that have been filed against our city and effectively against us the taxpayers as a real estate broker and not a developer I'm especially frustrated with wrong-headed ideologues who think that blocking any new housing, even deed restricted affordable housing will somehow benefit the people who have lived here for many years.
It's gentrification they say. Well if Ojai is becoming gentrified it's precisely because of the no growth policies of the past and the demands of groups like Simply Ojai. It is truly simple to understand scarcity makes the prices higher Higher prices limit diversity and damage the character of the community. The artists, musicians and seekers are being pushed out.
It's becoming an enclave of vacation homes for the rich and famous. I see it in my practice every day. And what about investors? Are landlords who have paid $1,200 per square foot for a rental house downtown going to rent it out at 1,200 per month? No way! It'll be more like 5,000. And what's the renter supposed to do? There is nothing else available, right Susan?
So, either she has to pay up or leave town. Ojai's no-growthers have created a vicious cycle of ever increasing home prices and rents with no end in sight. And rent control? It is well documented that rent control can lead to disrepair, neglect and blight. Here is the thing. No one wants skyscrapers or three story buildings or any more strip malls in Ojai. But we do have room for improvement. We have space to house our seniors living on fixed incomes and long-time residents with extremely low incomes, but the total solution won't come from profit driven developers even ones like Jeff Becker who's agreed to build twice the number of affordable units in his project than the state demands. We need a commission, as Rachel suggested with experts like Bill Miley on it to address and evaluate our needs and apply for government grants.
But first we need to leave the Becker Project Agreement in place where years from its completion and even more years away from these government subsidies will need to do more. How long do the people of Ojai have to wait to bring balance to our community? I say, let's not wait any longer. Do not overturn the previous council's vote tonight. Vote for a kinder city with a heart for the less fortunate and a mind to do something about it. Thank you.
Thank You Sharon next we have Clay Creasy then Bob Kemper then Kim Barnes
0:21 – 0:3115 turns
Thank you, Mayor. I'm Clay Creasy. I live in Ojai. I've lived here for four years. Born in Southern California, Bakersfield. Grew up and worked most of my life in California. My dad actually drilled oil wells in the Cespe Wilderness back in the old days but he hasn't done that recently. I am happy to report. Anyhow just wanted to briefly give you some insight with regard to your budget and the potential vote on the ordinance that the petition has now asked you to consider.
I'm an accountant by trade, I read numbers because it's something I like to do. Page 149 of your budget which Mr. Vega put together and by the way I have to say it's a heck of a detailed and very useful budget You have this year $49,000 earmarked to spend on a pickleball tennis sound study. You studied it a couple years ago and you studied it last year I don't know if the sounds have changed that much or not but forty nine thousand dollars will pay for several elections so if you're at all hesitant to decide this current issue of the referendum Based on the economics of having to pay for an election versus getting the final chance to hear the word of all citizens of Ojai, I'm here to tell you that you're in great shape. You can afford this election many times over.
Mr. Vega in his budget many times points out how conservative it is put forth as a accountant who works for a large organization, I can tell you I admire your conservatism and I guarantee you you're in good shape financially if you choose to go ahead and have the election. Thank you very much
Thank you, Clay.
Do you think that everyone knows that the agenda was revised to add item three? Because we're getting comments on an item that's on the agenda. The project referendum was not on the original... I just didn't know if everyone was aware.
Maybe a suggestion would be for the people who have turned in public comment cards for items not on the agenda, we can announce now that if you are speaking on the referendum when we call your name, if you can say that you want your card held until the third item three which was added to an amended agenda on Thursday when the county clerk certified. Bob, are you speaking
on Item 3? No, I'm not.
Hi, my name is Bob Kemper. I live in Ojai and have for approximately 25 years. I am going to reference item three but it's not why I'm here. I'm appalled that simply Ojai has filed the lawsuit to overturn a lawful decision by the former city council. I am not in the least bit surprised given the conflict of interest which appears to exist between the mayor and this organization, and Mindful Citizen as well. I respectfully request that the mayor recuse herself from any and all votes and or discussions related to the above named nonprofits. There is much to lead to the perception of a conflict not the least of which is her campaign manager Tom Francis threatening the city council on 10-18-22 with a lawsuit in the event that the Becker project was approved It was approved by a four to one vote.
And here we are, Mr Francis has made good upon his threat. It is not a good look for the City of Ojai for the Mayor to lose a vote and then appear to coordinate a lawsuit with her closely affiliated non-profits. The lawsuit filed by Simply Ojai shows a Ms. Leslie Hess as an officer of Simply Ojai and Mindful Citizen, and a signatory to the lawsuit. Ms. Hess is also treasurer of the mayor's mayoral campaign. If this does not demonstrate a conflict of interest then I don't know what does.
Further, the mayor and Mr. Francis have been seen together on numerous occasions at Mallory Way collecting signatures in an attempt to convince residents to reject the project. The cooperative efforts of the mayor with these two non-profits to defeat the will of the community and democracy itself I might add is beyond concerning. Not only are her efforts setting up the city for hundreds of thousands of dollars legal fees To defend itself in the event that the project is declined, a lawsuit that the city will lose ultimately because of existing grandfather and entitlements on some of the properties. Her potential conflicts of interest will give your attorneys yet another legitimate reason to sue.
I implore the mayor to set aside her personal ideology make this difficult decision for the benefit of the community If she is unwilling to do so, I request the city attorney to conduct a thorough investigation into whether or not she should be forced to recuse herself for the protection of the City of Ojai. Thank you.
Thank you, Bob. And just to set the record straight I did not collect any signatures at Mallory Way and I certainly do want to follow the law and so Mr. City Attorney could you respond to those questions?
I was under the impression that general comments did not, we don't engage in conversation about them. Are we going to do that here? If if if we need to set the record straight...
The council can provide a brief response to general public comment but not debate by the council To that end, I have analyzed questions have been received regarding the similar issues related to the mayor and simply Ojai and Ms. Leslie Hess and Mr. Francis. I have taken a look at them into the best of my current knowledge there's no law that requires recusal Recusal is required if an official has a personal interest in the matter above very specific thresholds and different than the public generally, or if the official has a conflicting legal or professional duty. For example, a lawyer who has clients that have conflicting duties and goals and obligations than their counsel duty. Here to the best of my current knowledge, the mayor has no personal financial interest in Simply Ojai nor its leadership.
She may have given the money as I believe has been reported publicly but that does not generate recusal requirements because it was money that left her and there's no contract of which I'm aware that would require repayment. A straight up donation by a council member to a non-profit without the possibility of money returning to the council i.e., not a seed money loan or a deposit or something that has a reimbursement component doesn't create a financial interest in that nonprofit Board membership can create conflicts subject to various exceptions, but I'm also not aware that the mayor or any council member is on the board of Simply Ojai. I've reviewed the state's filings, their recent non-profit state filings and I saw no evidence that the mayor nor any council member was on their board of directors.
The fact that their campaign personnel sit on the board does not generate a huge requirement as the campaign personnel are separate people from the council members. So, last I'll note that the FEBC's vote in November that SB 1439's expansion of the Levine Act rule to council members does not apply to contributions before January 1st, 2023 means that any contributions by simply Ojai's parent board members and leadership to the mayor and several other council members campaigns also does not require recusal. Donations after January 1st that are above $250 would require further analysis but to the best of my knowledge given the election timing there were no donations above $250 from the relevant people to any council members campaigns after January 1 2023.
If the FPPC does not confirm their initial opinion, they cancel their December meeting. If they don't confirm their opinion in the January meeting obviously we'll revisit that but that's the state of the law as of today. Last, the other potential source of recusal is the common law. Common law bias due to personal professional duties here does not arise because the mayor is not a licensed profession, not a lawyer and not an accountant with Clients whose duties could conflict with the council and the council role.
Last I'll note, ideological alignment between one side of a debate and a council member does not require recusal when one or the other side sues the city. People can support a council member to achieve a goal they can support achieving those goals via lawsuits that's just the American way so i've analyzed the questions based on previous requests and you'll wonder how do I have all this prepared? The answer is the city manager asked me to analyze these questions when a variety of public comment emails were sent in, raising the issues. We looked at them and the answer is I do not see a basis to require recusal on the facts as I understand them now, as I have recited them. Different facts may require different advice. Thank you.
Thank you Matt. May I quickly? We don't
allow...
Just one second. Council?
It's fine with me. It's fine with
me. Thank you very much. Actually sent a letter in back in December and I appreciate you following up on that. Perception is everything, okay? There really doesn't have to be a conflict for there to be a perception of a conflict and when you have a perception of a conflict it hinders your ability to govern because you lose the credibility of the office and you lose the credibility within the community So, unfortunately Mayor Sticks you are unknowingly or otherwise damaging your ability to govern. You've lost the support of the community at least a large portion of the community because of these perceptions of a conflict of interest thank you.
Thank you Bob next we have Kim Barnes and then Kathy Nolan
0:31 – 0:388 turns
Hi, my name's Kim Barnes and I live in Ojai. And I'm reading this for Robin Gerber who can't be here tonight if that's okay. Congratulations to the newly elected council members our reelected mayor and welcome back Councilwoman Francina. The question before you is about process as well as substance perhaps you don't agree on with the four-to-one decision of the last council to approve the Becker Development Agreement But as the people we have elected to represent us, to do the hard work of understanding complex issues such as this.
And listening to the public outpourings on this issue, as was done. And relying on our very able planning commission's input, as was done. You need to ask yourselves what does your role as representative leaders mean if when you make a decision by a super majority vote, as is the case, it can be tossed aside by a small minority of voters? Because if you agree to rescind the prior vote, that is what you're saying to our community.
Don't rely too much on our work and wisdom because a few determined people hiding behind a shadowy nonprofit with multiple names and no members can bully us into submission. I hope you're made of sterner stuff because if you're not, you can look forward to more such attacks on representative government by a minority intent on winning at any cost. We've already seen this nonprofit Mindful Citizen, which also uses the names Simply Ojai and Fuel Reduction Works.
And people closely tied to it bring both a lawsuit and referendum to save us from the horrors of valet parking as well as a second lawsuit on this development agreement in addition to the referendum being discussed. I believe deeply in our system of representative government embodied by you. I hope you will protect it. And I would echo these sentiments myself. This was from Robin Gerber.
Thank you. Thank you, Kim. Thank you, Robin. Next we have Kathy Nolan.
Good evening, Kathy Nolan I'm here representing the Ojai Valley Green Coalition. We're a local non-profit and I just came to introduce us some of you may know the green coalition but I want to welcome the new council members and I did want to say that last year we were awarded a community service grant to actually do community engagement or stakeholder engagement with the general public in regards to the eight acre City Hall campus And last Saturday we had our first engagement.
Council Member Francina was actually there and joined us, and it was very successful. We had a lot of people turn out and I just wanted to throw out an invitation that on—and this is to everyone in the community in addition to the council—January 28th which is a Saturday, we're going to be having another site tour to do a walk and then March 22nd, and in April, in June, and I'll give you our website.
We are having three World Cafe tables to further engage the public so I just want to let everyone know. And if it is okay we'd like to reach out to each individual council member and just maybe have a little chat and just let you know what we're up to and what we're doing. Our website is OjaiValleyGreenCoalition.org and if you go on to that, the opening page will be the community engagement project so it's easy to get to and I forgot to mention we actually have a survey as well. So opening that up to the community as well and we'll be gathering all that information and bringing that back to the city at the September 1st. That's the end of our term for the grant.
Thank you, Kathy. Weston are there any public comments on Zoom?
Yes Mayor we have two remote participants with raised hands first we'll have Stephen Colame followed by Elle Codwell. Stephen do you have
the floor? Sure. Hi Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and newly elected council members welcome. My name is Steve Nkolome and I'm a Ojai resident. I have some good news to report to start this new year on an issue that our city has been monitoring. Some of you may know that the fleet of local postal delivery vehicles that park behind the post office and adjacent to Libbey Park are operating well past their useful design life Speaking with our local postal master, our vehicles are figuratively being held together with duct tape and bubble gum at this stage.
This time last year the US Postal Service was preparing to replace the aging nationwide fleet with only 10% of the next generation vehicles being zero emission and the remainder were going to use antiquated technology Our city manager sent letters to our congressional and Senate representatives asking that Ojai's allocation be electric. The good news is that at the end of last year, the Postal Service nudged by information that their plan was based on faulty economic and environmental analysis as well as legal action by several states. The Postal Board of Governors adjusted their plans so that 50% of the initial tranche of new vehicles will be battery electric and by 2026 100% of new postal delivery vehicles will be zero emission We should continue monitoring progress and reaffirm our request for clean vehicles, though we do not have any direct authority in that decision.
My hope is that we can plan a community celebration along with state and federal officials when we welcome in a brand new fleet of replacement clean vehicles at our post office. Our postal carriers will thank us as the new designs have better ergonomic features and important for Ojai, the carriers will have air conditioning. Thank you.
Thank you Steve.
Next we have Elle Caldwell.
0:38 – 0:4720 turns
Okay go switch and I'll put this down.
Oh no here I am.
Pardon the wait.
For some reason, I can't seem to unmute.
You are unmuted.
Oh great! All right, I'm new to this format. I want to begin by saying good evening to all of you all and I wanted to say my support for a Citizens Housing Committee. We need a group We need a group representing our diverse community, researching and recommending the best and most expeditious ways to move forward on solving our housing issues. So I hope that's already in the works or will be soon. I also have a request for a public workshop on housing in Ojai with an emphasis on low and very low housing which is our greatest housing need I would like to see presentations by knowledgeable people to educate us on past projects that have been completed or defeated, and also educating us on the resources that exist such as state and federal assistance and nonprofit builders.
I don't know who is best to organize this but such a forum could get the community moving on solving our housing shortage. Thank you.
Thank you Al. Is that it Weston?
Yes, no more raised hands.
Okay
thank you very much we will move on to the consent calendar we have one public comment on item F Wayne Maynard
Council my name is Wayne Maynard. I'm a resident of Ojai, and I just wanted to Read into the agenda. I saw this item on annual attendance report for commissioners. I just think that's a really good idea Volunteers we have in our community to make sure that they're you know fulfilling their responsibilities Going through it. I noticed one issue that I'm not sure is being accounted for and that is when a A commission meeting is canceled. I experienced one earlier this year, the August 18th Arts Commission meeting was canceled and the notice of cancellation said a special meeting the following week was going to be rescheduled so cancel the 18, reschedule on 25th.
My assumption was that probably they didn't have a quorum for their meeting, okay? But I look at the report and that kind of information doesn't indicate if somebody wasn't available because the whole meeting got canceled. So if that's something the staff could look into sometime in the future for their report next time, I think that would be a good way to do it.
Second issue kinda related is that I believe when a notice of cancellation is issued for either a council meeting or Any of the commission meetings, it would be nice to have a reason stated. Lack of a quorum or whatever reason we had to cancel it would be nice and transparent for the community to know why that happens. So thank you very much.
Thank you Wayne. All right is there a motion to approve the consent calendar?
I'll
move to approve.
A second? I'll second. Okay all in favor? All right, let's move on to discussion item number two the proposed local downtown historic district nomination results James you have a staff report
Just a very brief introduction and then I'll turn it over to To our commissioners to talk a little bit more about it Just as far as why is this on the agenda tonight the city about a year ago, the City Council gave the HPC the ability to include on their agenda An item and a committee of HPC members who would work on determining whether there was property owner support for the formation of a local downtown district.
Directed staff to send out a one page letter with information to the 56 property owners within the local downtown historic district. And at that time set a deadline for the nomination forms to be received by November 8th. That date ended up being extended to December 1st. And so those tallies, those votes have been, our nomination forms have been collected.
We then set this meeting January 10th as the date that the nomination forms would be reported out and that the public would have the opportunity to discuss it. It's on the agenda for that reason. The staff report included the vote totals. I will note we've had two people, two property owners contact us this week asking to change their vote. It's the Ojai Valley Women's Club and David and Mary Trudeau have asked to change their vote from a yes to a no so the current vote is slightly different from what's reported It is out of 56 nomination forms we've received 37 responses, 14 in support and 23 opposing.
To move forward the we have to receive more than a majority which means we have to receive 29 votes to move forward So the staff report mentions council has a few options at this time, either to allow more time for the vote to move forward. To remove the item from future commission meetings and not provide additional staff support. And there's some other options that can be discussed as desired.
But I did want to start with an opportunity for the commission to provide some information on the work that they've done. So, I believe it's Commissioner McCatton or is it Commissioner Convery? Okay so it's Commissioner Convery.
May I ask a question? What was the original rationalization for putting a time constraint on an item that's really a longer process, which I did not grasp. I may have been one of the council members voting for the time constraint but since I've been educated more and have thought about it, I don't understand what the rationale was because there's no time sensitivity
Is there. I think, I don't know that we really stated it but just kind of in the context from the council discussions is this is a potential action to people's property that Hanging out there. And so there's not necessarily a Hard deadline or there's not a date that we have to take action but I think we had heard from property owners who had asked for a decision to be made sooner rather than later because They're hearing about this and not knowing is it gonna happen? Is it not gonna happen? Yeah, so there is you know There are property owners and there are property owners who support it and there's property owners who oppose it right now As we said with the report, there's a majority that oppose. But I think that was one of the ideas with the deadline.
The other... We'll leave it with that.
But in actuality, nothing actually
happens. As we noted in the report, the reason I think this one is confusing is that it's being led by the commission and so that's where it's sort of a city action and that's where we got all these questions from property owners about what's the city doing? Why isn't it being talked about at council? But as we noted in the report, anybody can come forward and nominate a historic district and can go out and try to get more than 50% of property owners to support it.
And so I think the question really tonight is does the council authorize the commission to continue to spend commission time? If I could put a further point on that last point. If the council decides tonight to not have the current effort led by the Council's commission continue,
0:47 – 0:5614 turns
It does not mean the members, the people who are those commissioners cannot continue to move a historic district forward. However they cannot do so if so ordered by the council would not do so in their commission capacity. They would do so in their individual capacity without any staff support and not the city would not do anything until they completed nomination package was received with the minimum property ownership in support nothing else would happen but it doesn't prohibit from that from happening If the proponents were able to do so. Thank
you. Thank
you.
Hi, I'm Cindy Convery. I'm the vice chair of Historic Preservation Commission and I wanted to first say address what James and Suze's question was is that I think when this process started we as a commission and you as a council have never worked together to create something like this So I think there was you know lack of of understanding about how to proceed with it and how much time it would take in the communication and the due process that we were under with government Brown Act restrictions. So I think that's probably why there were some loose dates just, you know, to try to get it moving forward but those dates were put in place without understanding that we did have Brown Act restrictions We meet once a month. You know, we have a very limited commission so time It's very hard to get you know time moving forward and that with those restrictions Which is kind of what I want to talk about tonight?
I wanted to bring the new council members a little bit up to speed on the process that we went through here Firstly I want to point out that 33% of property owners in downtown Ojai still have not weighed in on this That's a pretty big number And my main request here is to ask that we respect those property owners and give them more time, and I'm gonna talk about why. I believe they haven't weighed in.
And just to let you know, Ojai is already designated as a state historic district. The goal in creating the local designation was to create a little bit more control for the city and part to streamline approval process, lower fees And generally make the development process more owner friendly and less dependent on state requirements. As part of nominating a local district, each owner has one vote and James pointed out that we need I think 29 votes or more than 50%.
Actually had lunch with David Trudeau today, and he didn't change his vote Mary Trudeau was called out by another property owner and David said that that property only Bullied Mary into calling the city and David did not agree with it. And he's not changing so just saying he'll call you tomorrow We
don't get involved in
here that we received an email same about It's all over the place. But each owner has one vote So as you said James a year ago, we met and we as a joint meeting We agreed, you know to move forward with these kind of deadlines to get things moving along And it's new council members You're all learning in real time about the Brown Act and about public meeting and about transparency we as a commission meet once a month and That's not a lot of time to move things forward.
If we have a couple commissioners who are out, our meetings are canceled. Also the previous City Council had reduced the commissions from seven members to five which meant our ad hoc committee is now limited to two members because we can't meet in a majority without having a public meeting. So our work outside of any council meetings is really limited by that reduction, which I think creates more work for staff because rather than having commissions ad hoc committees doing work and research and development it falls on the staff.
So those were some of the challenges that we were looking at in the past year in developing the information packet that would go out to property owners Right after the City Council meeting with us that joint meeting the newspaper ran an article That had not correct information by a long shot and several of the property owners Decided they were opposed to it and started you know, kind of a grapevine of information. That wasn't also correct so We were restricted in talking to property owners until we had an approved information packet and approved by the city attorney. And that took maybe six months? I don't know, it took quite a while.
You know just because of the process no one's fault you know everyone is doing their work it's just because of the process So as a result, 33% of property owners either have not received information. They haven't processed the information. I spoke with six property owners in the past week who want to weigh in and they either didn't get anything in the mail it was mailed to them You know there were no e-mails, there were no phone calls.
I spoke to two property owners who are told to change their votes or you know inspired to change their votes for various reasons which is questionable and I also wanted to point out that after approximately six months when we were given approval to do the outreach into the community We were given property owners' names and addresses, no emails, no phones. So that's like knocking on doors, you know? And Googling people and trying to find their cellphones and whatnot so a lot of that has been a real challenge in getting in touch with people And the property owners that I've met with personally, after two or three months of trying to find time for us to get together have invariably supported the downtown designation because they learned some information that I felt resonated with them.
I got an email this morning from somebody who owns a landmark property saying he never received anything in mail, never received any information and would really look forward to meeting with me. About learning more about this. So my request to this council is as Sousa pointed out there's no pressing Reason to push this through I Question why a couple of property owners are really urging this through? I don't know what that motivation would be I have 33% of owners who are out there. I have half a dozen people asking me for more information, and I would like to respect their ability to weigh in on this. These are property owners in Ojai and it's a big number.
So that's really what you know, I wanted to walk you through here It's just that the process was cumbersome and that's what government can do. It can be a cumbersome process And I'd you know, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have about how we arrived here Thank You Cindy
any questions from Council?
I Just want to comment that I was not one of the council members who wanted to reduce your commission seven to five I've fought for Vehemently and advocated for the seven. Yeah, yeah the workload you have
Well that this is very interesting because this exact situation was what one of the fears I had in reducing the commissions It's resulted in more staff time less Commission work You know we we work for free Why would anyone tell people who want to work for free to go home? And there's a lot of work to be done I don't know But I'm hoping that maybe in the future you'll consider expanding our commissions back to seven as they've been since day one. Thank you
I do have a question, if I may. Didn't you start this process during COVID? Maybe that was another factor?
That was another factor. We weren't able to meet with the council. That was pushed back several times. You know, the COVID restrictions were coming and going. We weren't able to meet with property owners in real time. We weren't able make Zoom meetings with them without having email contacts. So yeah, it was a lot going on. Thank you.
Any other questions?
I have a question. And I was not involved in this early on, but I was wondering about the merchants who rent the locations. I would imagine that they would be affected In a similar way that property owners were, have they been taken into consideration through this
process? Yes. One of our former commissioners she just left historic preservation last month due to family issues She is a merchant she has three businesses downtown And she spoke with, you know she's part of the chamber. So she spoke with the chamber and she brought a lot of information to the merchants and encouraged them to call their landlords and weigh in on how they felt. So there was a lot of outreach to the merchants.
0:56 – 1:038 turns
Well formally, the city at this time has only asked for nomination forms from the property owners and has only received nomination forms from property owners. So as far as formally we have not received any feedback.
And the reason for that is because the code standard tests it against only property owners not tenants?
Thank you. Yeah, but I think property owners would like to consider what their tenants want You know It's a good conversation to have and that was the direction that we were going was that if you if you have an interest in Supporting or not supporting this let your landlord know so that they know your feeling, you know All
right, thank you so much Cindy We will move on to public comment week first. We have Gina McCattin then Craig Walker and then Barbara Bowman
Hello, I'm Gina McCatton. I'm on the HPC. We have been officially working on the downtown historic district since given our go ahead when I did my slideshow presentation. We left with a 4-1 vote of support during our joint council. It was January of 22 so one year. The following months we continued our work to understand the area and its history, to begin to reach out to property owners. We believed as we continued our due diligence that we would have proper time to reach out for roundtable workshops, for public forums and other actions to widen the conversation.
We have grant money earmarked for just that purpose that has been untouched. At the same time as having our first contact with property owners, our intention was to work with planning to allow, to follow other cities in California and the nation. To make being in a local historic district, to have solid financial benefits and to slimline processes to actually be a time saver. These are not new ideas.
Following other historic downtowns in similar cities, we would work to come to agreements like combining the four overlays in the downtown to make one. To make the process less cumbersome, to reduce and eliminate fees, to offer tax savings through the Mills Act and to our contributing properties so they would be earmarked for repairs and upkeep of their historic buildings Those funds would ensure proper upkeep without additional out-of-pocket expenses so you could keep good tenants without raising their rents and to cover their repair costs. This is a win-win, none of this is controversial, none of this is unusual but after speaking with state and federal officials it was confirmed that our two vote system actually is very unusual because the intention of the first vote would be to get a temperature reading It is to see how much work was ahead of us with communication with property owners, to listen, to educate and to make compromises.
To make being a part of the local district not only important to the community but to make sure that we could offer those benefits to our property owners. This form was never intended to be black or white or yes or no which is why we are here today This undertaking of researching a local downtown historic district takes time and I'm not saying more staff time.
There is no nomination here from the HPC there's nothing being held over property owners heads we are simply still in stage one and hopefully soon to begin the nuts and bolts work of slim lining and simplifying the process Please let us continue this work. So when and if the HPC puts forward a nomination for a local downtown historic district, the property owners and merchants, the stakeholders in the residence will have a clear and transparent understanding of what that means. Thank you. Next
question. OK, next we have Craig Walker than Barbara Bowman and then John Drucker. Can I ask For the audience to be quiet because there's a lot of ambient noise up here and sometimes it's challenging to hear So, thank you. Appreciate that
Good evening My name is Craig Walker and I'm here to ask you to please allow the HPC study of a local downtown history Historic district to move forward following the detailed process spelled out in the city's municipal code The HPC's work is still in phase one, investigating whether a historic district makes sense for Ojai, then preparing a formal nomination. This involves researching the buildings, defining boundaries, identifying character-defining features Working out procedures and talking with property owners. This phase doesn't have a timeline associated with it in the City Code, this is because it takes time to do a study like this and it shouldn't be rushed.
Also the HPC has been working during a pandemic and has had to contend with the Brown Act which limits decisions to the Commission's formal monthly meetings. At this time, the HPC has not yet nominated the district. There are only tentative boundaries which change as the ad hoc committee does its work. It's even possible some of those voting against the district won't be located in the final map.
The guidelines and parameters of the district still have to be determined along with any necessary changes in the historic code. Once the district is nominated, there is a detailed procedure in the Municipal Code for evaluating the nomination and then sending it to the Council for your review and approval. Last September, the City scheduled a vote before the proposal was fully developed or a nomination submitted. This was done, in my view arbitrarily without any input from the HPC Unfortunately, it's short-circuited the process and laid out in the city code.
The state of California has listed downtown Ojai on the California Register of Historic Places It's certainly worth the time and effort to come up with a proper nomination at least that will define a local district that addresses people's concerns That's what the HPC is trying to do. Please let them do their job The time for decisions will come after there is a formal nomination and when everyone knows what they are voting for Thank you.
Thank you Craig next we have Barbara Bowman then John Drucker
1:03 – 1:1313 turns
When Barbara's done I do want to ask our city attorney was everything Craig said factual about the code
Barbara Bowman, property owner. I want to point out that everybody has come from the HPC that have talked to you, have talked about how grueling it is because of how often they can meet. This is a really important point. How often can the City Council meet? How often can planning meet? And then if you have an HPC historical designated district, they meet. So let's say you have to get approval from all three groups. What does that do to your project? Every time they can only meet because of a Brown Act so you have to wait for them to for planning to meet, and for City Council to meet. That point is very important. That is like adding another layer to property owners.
Also don't you think that the City Council and the Planning Department have done a good job? For 100 years this town has really not changed that much. The arcade is the arcade. The little buildings across from it are still the little buildings across from it. I want to Any city planning or any council approving three-story buildings downtown, anywhere? And this was thrown out. This is why you should let them go on and on. And they said talk about somebody badgering and bullying somebody? They are going around to every single person who has voted no and trying to convince them to say yes. However they guise this, however they dress it up in ornaments. It is they want a long time to go to every property owner and convince them. No one to this day has thrown around and given me one fact of what tax advantage it is to me.
A little building like mine has no tax advantage. None whatsoever. Are my property taxes going to go down with this? No! Is anybody else's property taxes? And the historical buildings that do exist, the actual historical buildings like the theater. He's already gone through the process. That was a big one. Dean Vadenais, who controls the post office. The post office has gone through and no one's going to paint it orange green or red.
And you also have the El Robler Hotel which is going to be better than it's ever been. Those are the three cornerstone fabulous things in downtown Ojai. The rest of us are just little shops. So we would have to go through three layers of approval. You wonder why someone who's got skin in the game would not want it? And why they don't tell you, okay your property tax is going to go down 25% when you sign up for it. Of course they're not! I'm not going to have any advantage. My disadvantage is that I'm going to have to go through three layers no matter what I do, and that's not an advantage. And the City Council has done a great job along with planning. This town looks great! Nothing has changed. Why do we need them? They're an advisory council, they should stay an advisory council...
Thank you Barbara. Next we have John Drucker
I think there was a mistake. I'll be speaking on item number
3-1. Weston, any comments online?
No raised hands online.
Okay thank you all right we will move on to council discussion Susan, you want to
start? I would like a little more information on this three layers of approval. How that works.
Yeah thank you. I actually was going to raise my hand and answer that so thanks for asking. You know, we kind of heard from both the proponents and opponents about whether or not this changes anything and what does change and what doesn't. So I just want to give some facts to that, not advocating or opposing but the current process Trying to keep this simple, but the current process right now at the HPC is that if a property is landmarked and we have I think it's about 20 Is it 29 landmarks in the city?
So for property is landmarked and they want to do work on their property They typically either have to get a major work permit or a minor work permit through the Historic Preservation Commission Both major and minor work permits both take about one to three months depending on how complex the project is. That's kind of the standard timing but the minor work permit costs a little less it's a It's billed at typically four hundred fifty dollars an hour plus two hundred twenty-five dollars an hour for staff time so minor work permits usually covered in that initial cost about six hundred seventy five dollars a major work permit Typically is higher in the 1500 to $2,000 range. So just factually you know what does this mean?
Properties that would be in the historic district that currently are not landmarked and currently don't have to get a historic permit would have to go through that process. So there is potentially a cost if they're looking to do work that would require the work permits. Additionally, I think when they say three layers of review what is being referred to as several projects Receive either either and Either or both Planning Commission review and they can be appealed to the City Council a Landmarked property or a property that would be part of the historic district would also receive Historic Preservation Commission review so potentially somebody coming in to do a project could have to go before the Historic Preservation Commission the Planning Commission and the City Council and And so I don't think that would be the standard.
I don't think it would be Typical that they would go through all three, but that's I think what was being referred to
and if I could jump in with two further points One under the current code Ordinary repair and maintenance sort of like-for-like repair and maintenance not changing visualist visual elements on a non contributing structure in a historic district would not require even a minor work permit. That would just need a regular planning permit, but if it were more than that it probably would require a minor work permit. And the council in adopting a historic district could set rules varying slightly from the code regarding when the triggers are. So, the council could set rules that contributing structures are subject to these, non-contributing structures subject to that.
Modifications could be made in the course of approving a district but generally there are these additional levels of review through the Historic Preservation Commission or the director and that's the other point to note Minor work permits are a director level decision subject to appeal. Major work permits are a commission level decision, and then of course subject to appeal to council.
And both of those like we said the estimate based on the last few permits that we've issued is both of those there the processes are a little bit different but they take between one to three months I think we all know when people come in with projects a lot of time there's a sense of urgency People do not like being told that they have to go through that process. That's fairly standard We talked a little bit about the pros and cons and and pros and cons of Mills acting and to that point The pro is that the city does have that additional from the city's perspective as the city does have that additional layer of review Also, some of that saved property tax revenue is required to be spent towards maintaining properties. So the properties are maintained typically at a higher level.
The negative that we listed in the report that I just have to remind everybody, well, we do have a saying whenever people say there's free money somebody's paying for it and the free money comes out of the city's property tax revenue. If every property in the historic district were to qualify for a Mills Act agreement It would reduce property tax at over $100,000 a year for the city. Also that reduces property tax for other agencies like the school district So so just these are again just the facts there's pros to this project There's also some negatives and some costs to it.
I Thank you, James.
Susan? So I want to be really clear if the council does approve that they can continue with their work it's with the understanding that even if you put another two years into this and you get people on board we still have the final decision and You know that we're going to look at all the pros and cons once more so whatever We decide tonight it's not like we're, it's neutral. It's not for or against. It's simply allowing if we decide allowing you to continue the process that's correct?
1:13 – 1:2123 turns
What I would expect from a decision would be whether to continue the process or not
Thank you.
A couple of points and questions. I know that our staff is overwhelmed as it stands now, and I'm wondering what about the use of staff? Is that something that you can use more judiciously Because as this goes on two years, it just simply is just a resource that is a scarce resource as it stands now. Yes please?
The reason we came originally to redo it and structure this in a way where it wouldn't cost anything for the city as far as anchoring all of the landmarks, trying to look at the infill of what's contributing and not contributing was a way to do it very inexpensively. And everything that we think of is how to do it inexpensively And one way that you would do that is we are, you know, a free body and we like to volunteer our time because we love the city. So that doesn't cost us money but the only time that we would use staff hours is this meeting with planning that we want to do So if we have a joint meeting with planning that time to set that up would take the time. But once that was an ad hoc and we were trying to work this out with them because all their negatives of the three people, the three layers you have to go through, that's current code what we want to do is change that so that would be an ad hoc with maybe a couple of property owners planning A commissioner or two from HPC.
And that time, that ad hoc time just like my ad hoc time with Brian and Craig doesn't cost the city anything because we're doing it outside of Brown Act because it's one member of each and we're just trying to do workshops. We want to widen that to hear more voices and not just hear our little echo chamber of the three of us and get more voices and make these changes. So when Matthew Summers and James, when they talk about the cons now it's current code cons Those, when it comes back to you those are the changes that we want to have the time to see what we can do to make it worthwhile for their property owners. So that is something that we would work on our own time. It's just getting that initial meeting with planning I can't think of any other time that we would need staff in the near future where kind of we have property owners names.
We just need time and that's our time not your time and we would be really mindful of that as well
Thank you, Gina.
I did have... I'm sorry, I had one follow-up question. Did I misunderstand that if the petition were to go through that there would be a certain group of buildings that would require a third review that do not now require a third review? Did I understand that? That's
correct, so properties that are not currently landmarked but would become part of the historic district.
So there is a group of properties that would have an additional review with this that they do not now have? Correct under
the current code Commissioner McCadden's comment I think to expand that is if the County Commission and Council were to modify the city's codes then that, the answer to that question could be made different. But under the current codes there if the district were adopted there are some properties that do not currently require historic review that would require historic review.
And that could be one two three months? Is that what we're...
Somewhere between yeah one to three months but more if there's an appeal and as we know appeals are common
Okay. Thank you.
Can I just comment as well? So, I do appreciate actually very much so the comment about staff time. I would say we are whelmed but not overly so. I
hope I didn't say overly. Did I?
I apologize. But I do think that is a key concern for us. You know, we're looking at the City Council priority list and getting it ready for the priority setting session And talking about, you know how much staff time to a lot to each project. So I do think That would be a key issue moving forward would be making that very clear How much staff time is expected to be dedicated? I think there's been because of the way it's like kind of a city project But it's kind of not a city project It's been very confusing to the public and to the Commission and to staff even what are we supposed to do? What are you doing? so I think Moving moving forward if it were to move forward making that very clear would be
helpful
Actually, I had the same question Leslie did about the staff time But I also wanted to just find out right now in the current code And I understand that what we're talking about is really a matter of giving them more time or not giving them more time But I'm wondering if there is a differentiation between exterior with these landmark properties or the contributing properties, or if we were to designate this as an historic district.
Would property owners be allowed to make changes in the interior that wouldn't affect the overall look? Could we rewrite that in a way that would give them a little bit more agency?
Yes, so under the current codes for a contributing structure in a historic district or any landmark treated the same interior work that requires a minor work permit if it's not a character defining element. It requires a major work permit if it's a character defining element and what is there is not a character defining element is stated in the resolution that approves the landmarking. So I'll use an example. The building we're in now as a landmark was landmarked by the council A couple years back that fireplace is a character defining element, even though it's interior so if the city wherever we're not going to don't worry but if we ever do modify that fireplace. That would require a major work permit, but modifying the copy room behind it is not a character defining element, so that would be only a minor work permit, the same would be true for a contributing structure.
And I would expect that for most of the contributing structures, the designation for the district would not call out interior features as character-defining elements. So it may only be the case that it's interior—that it would be minor work permits on the interior side. For interior work for non-contributing structures, they would not—that should not require a historic review because they're non-contributing.
And then the last point there is all of that would depend in part on how the council structured the district if approved.
Okay,
thank you.
Thank you Andy
Please Microphone Yeah, we can write our own rules so that the scope of our review And the level of scrutiny, we can handcraft that to make it as least intrusive as possible or as highly scrutinized as possible.
Generally, yes. The bounds are the usual bounds of rational basis reason and as to anything that's subject to the Mills Act state law does require a certain level of review for exterior features or for character-defining interior features for a Mills Act property.
1:21 – 1:3130 turns
Just following up the, so there's not like a overarching state rule that controls what we
have to have in? No. The state doesn't set of rules that controls how historic district permits are reviewed. That's up to the cities to decide.
Leslie. So if we were, so basically it would be up to the council planning the Historic Preservation Commission all together to decide what would count as what? I mean how would we make that determination from very strict
to very loose? It would be up to the council to set the rule not the commissions.
Okay, so
the council could take input from the commissions and I would expect the commission's will have their input, but the council alone sets policy.
So we would be acting as content experts in a way that we are not?
More accurately, I mean. That's a fair way to put it. Another way to put it is the elected City Council would be writing the law that governs the city. The commissions are not elected. They have no power to write the law. They can make a recommendation and they do have a role as was done the last time the Historic Preservation Code was rewritten. The commission worked on that extensively in making a recommendation to the council but the council is the elected body that has to adopt the law.
Yes, okay. But there would be... There is also interior, correct? I mean, I just want to make that very clear that it's not just exterior but it is also interior and it is... No, it's not interior. Okay.
Interior for any landmark that has a interior character defining element again my example is the fireplace here. Hold on.
Sorry.
Fireplace, in this example is a character defining element for this landmark. Some landmarks have no interior character defining elements because the landmark's interior shot not worth preserving so it depends on the interior question depends on how the landmark is designated or for a district, how the district is designated. I would expect that for this district there may not be much in the way of interior features that make up the district so that may not be much of an issue for the district but that again would depend in part on how it is adopted by the council.
But it is not de facto? No interior?
No, it's not automatically no. It's subject to how it's structured.
Okay thank you. Cindy? Landmark home the interior details or character-defining details. They are protected This is a landmark home being used as a City Council the landmark downtown historic district is exterior only Historic downtowns are exterior only just like Carmel. Thank you within that district You can have Landmark that's designated with the interior specifically But it's written in but the overview is it's not the interior and we don't have to worry about that.
Okay,
thank you I'm gonna make one comment. I just think the key issue here as Sousa said is that we're not agreeing to this We are agreeing to allow HPC to work on this You know volunteers in your own time And I think your point about staff time not taking any staff time is really key, so we need that commitment. And we understand of course the issues with timing and the Brown Act and COVID and it's been challenging. So Andy?
Yeah, just for the commissioners. I think I heard you saying that you're working on ways to make the review process less intrusive and You want to be able to take that to? potential Owners within the district to say it's not going to be as onerous as you think and
Well, we would like to do that. I have two examples. One is we had a property owner that wanted to paint several of the facades in the arcade. They had to make an appointment with HPC to have the paint colors reviewed. The paint colors are pre-approved by Dunn-Edwards. They're historic paint colors. Several years ago, Dunn Edwards changed all the names of the paint colors so they weren't listed as approved paint colors. They were the same paint colors but with different names.
My suggestion during that meeting was that we have all the paint colors approved in advance so that if somebody comes in and says I want to paint my door this historic blue, they don't need to get approval. It's done. It is a pre-approved process for minor work permits essentially. It has never been done before. It is really simple and that is the kind of thing that we want to do. That doesn't have anything to do with the local downtown district. That is something we can do automatically through time The local district is more about taking More control over the district than just referring back to the state, you know And being having an option to waive fees for Mills Act filings and things like that. And that's all to be determined It's all down the road so these are the things
I Don't know but I'm having trouble hearing with side conversations. So could we have silence in the room? Thank you
Yeah, so it's a bigger picture but you know local designation does allow the city of Ojai to have more control I think and more ability to waive fees and not be as restricted by a state designation. It's a big, complicated issue. Historic preservation always has been. I'm a member of the Council to the National Trust for Historic Preservation. I work with the board and I travel around with the president of the national trust. I've been involved for about 25 years so I have a lot of expertise.
And it is a big issue, you know But it does create a massive amount of property value. It protects I mean Thousand Oaks This thousand oaks because it never had a historic downtown Camarillo had a historic downtown and now it's Camarillo You know, it's tricky and we're lucky because we're ringed in in a valley so we can't have that kind of expansion but there's no guarantee To the public comment that said, hey everything's been fine so far so why do we need to change? I heard that in the 90s about global warming. You know things happen and you can't guarantee that we could just count on luck to protect what we have
Thank You Cindy Rachel,
um, can I ask how much time are you do you think you'll need for this? Um,
I would like to have all the property owners weigh in that's I mean I think talking about local designation and landmarks and all that isn't really the agenda item tonight And maybe that's something we can look forward to in the future to talk to this council about historic preservation in general because it is a big subject and But I would like to see the 33% of the owners who have not been able to weigh in for various reasons, I think it would be a respectful item to allow them to have the time they need. One woman was out of town for four months with a family issue. She doesn't use email. She asked me to meet with her next week. You know, it's that kind of thing.
So it's what's the rush in a way? I mean, it does. It's not there's nothing holding over anyone and I'm particularly working on my own just an outreach. I'm not working within any kind of staff time or historic preservation time
Yeah
What I see is if you don't have time constraints there's going to be less staff time because you're not under pressure to complete. Yeah, thank you. But we could ask you to come back and give a report that's fair at that point if we want to put a time restraint in we could Just leave it
and if you did it during a city council meeting I can't I can't see that That's going to take up staff time. That would be me doing how you could do or our commission. Yeah,
yeah so If discussions over I'll make a motion To allow the Historic Commission to continue their process with the understanding that Staff time is very limited And what else do I need to
add? One question would be whether or not we're committing commission time to it, as in having it as an agenda item on the HPC commissions for the Commission to talk about. Or is it purely their ad hoc committee working on it?
I think that I trust them enough to use good judgment. You know, we'll monitor them and if we feel like they're talking too much about that and neglecting something else and perhaps some great day in the future you'll go back to having seven commissioners. That could happen down the road not today. So okay? Is that okay? Yeah, we have a motion and a second.
1:31 – 1:396 turns
All in favor? Aye. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for your dedication.
We will move on to item number three. Ventura County Clerk's Signature Verification Certificate for the petition entailed a referendum against the ordinance passed by the City Council approving a 67-unit development agreement at Cottages Among the Flowers, Mallory Way Bungalows World University and 304 South Montgomery. And before we begin I would like to make a motion or I plan to make a motion for a continuance To January 24th because as we all know this is extremely complicated issue and I feel that We all need a little more time to think about it. It'll give us two more weeks Especially particularly for the new council members So with that said Is there a staff report?
Yes, thank you mayor. I'll turn it over to our city attorney in a moment but I just wanted to explain. I'm sure people are maybe confused we had an agenda come out and then amended agenda come out with this item on it. I just wanted to give the background on that. The county clerk is the person who's responsible for certifying these petitions And shortly after we posted literally, I think taping the agenda to the door. We got the email that the county clerk had certified the referendum by law, we are required to get it on the next agenda as long as there's 72 hours prior to that agenda so quickly amended the agenda to do that.
One of the options that council has tonight, which was alluded to is because of that process it's not uncommon to continue the item to a future meeting to give some time to think really so with that I will hand it over to city attorney to give some more background
Thank you. So Mayor Council, what we have before us is a referendum as we're I think all well aware the City Council approved an ordinance on October 25th that ordinance number 934 which approved the development agreement between the city and Ojai Bungalows LP and Greenhawk LLC for a multi-family housing project totaling 67 units of those 20 units de-restricted 55 years at moderate income, 6 de-restricted for 55 years at low income and 1 de-restricted for 55 years at very low income. At four properties 312 West Aliso, 107 North Ventura, 304 South Montgomery and 412 Mallory Way with associated tenant protections, zoning map amendment for 107 North Montgomery shifting it from public limited PL to village mixed use VMU and a CEQA exemption determination.
That ordinance is an ordinance it is legislative and thus subject to referendum on October 28th the city clerk's office was presented with a referendum petition that Rather, a letter and petition requesting the summary. I wrote as required by the Elections Code an impartial summary of the ordinance, presented that to the proponents on November 14th. They began to gather signatures the next day in compliance with the Elections Code. On December 12th, the petitioners submitted their signed petition with 633 raw signatures. That's 633 total count.
unverified, unreviewed. That met the minimum requirement of 538 signatures so the city clerk's office then submitted it to the county clerk's office County Clerk Recorder to verify the signatures as being signatures of registered Ohio voters this county clerk's office has completed that process and found 607 signatures to be valid signatures or persons registered to vote in the City of Ojai.
That is a sufficient number it exceeds the requirement of 538 and that requirement is set as 10% of the number of registered voters within the city at the time of the county's last report of registered voters to the Secretary of State. So valid petition received with enough signatures, that does two things one it suspends the effective date of the ordinance as of the date of this county clerk certification They're actually suspended at the beginning of the process, but completes the suspension as of the county clerk certification last week. And now it comes to the City Council. The City Council has two options.
Repeal the ordinance as requested by the petitioners and if so repealed, the City Council cannot enact a substantially similar ordinance for one year. Or two, submit the ordinance to the voters and allow the voters to decide whether or not to approve the ordinance. If the council submits it to the voters there's a sub choice there. It can be either at the next regular election which will be the general election in November 2024 or it could be a special election that meets the timing requirements for a special election.
Either is legal. The council can also continue the matter and not decided tonight as noted by the mayor. It can be decided at the next meeting For those who will recall the last time the council considered a referendum, it did that. It received the certification in 2017 for the referendum against the Ohio Tourism Improvement District first night and then continued and made a decision on the second night so that is within our last recent history of referenda And the last thing I'll note is if the council elects to submit it to the voters, staff would recommend an adjustment to the resolution that does so and this would be draft resolution attachment D which is page 3-164 in the packet. The recommended adjustment would be to provide for simplicity in the election that the ballot question would be shall ordinance, and I'll read it in full.
Shall ordinance number 934 approving a development agreement and zoning map amendment in California Environmental Equality Act exemptions totaling 67 units with 20 units deed restricted for 55 years at a moderate income level six units deed restricted for 55 years at a low-income level and one unit deed restricted for 55 years at a very low income level at four sites in the city be approved.
The present draft reads shall ordinance be repealed if the council flips that then the vote is clear a yes is to approve the ordinance and to approve the project, a no is to disapprove the ordinance and disapprove the project and staff would recommend that change for voter simplicity and clarity avoiding the situation where one has to vote no to vote yes or vice versa So with that, that's the conclusion of our presentation on the staff report. I will take obviously any questions along with staff. The other point to note is for in terms of tonight's process, I believe the applicant for the project has a representatives present and has a brief presentation as they did in the prior hearings. I would recommend taking that and then taking public comment.
Okay, but quite any questions from Council at this point
or I clarify one thing. I'm sorry we wrote this report very quickly because of the Certification coming in and I think we all know this but I just want the record to be clear under fiscal impact We said there are limited costs incurred by the city to repeal the resolution Which we were clearly saying you know as far as like staff time and effort goes it would you know? There's limited costs But I do, somebody pointed out to me that I'm not being clear about the fact that we would expect litigation to arise if that were the case. So I just want to point that out. I think we all know that but just so the record's clear.
1:39 – 1:5411 turns
Questions for staff?
I mean, I want to be transparent. I came prepared to put forth putting this to the voters. The only thing I wanted a continuation on was the date because I'm undecided about the pros and cons of sooner rather than later. I'm a little bit concerned about the continuance that you've made up your mind that you're going to ask for that because we don't know what's going to come forward from the public. So, we always have to first, I think listen and then you might Validly want to have a continuation. I want to be respectful of their time They've already waited an hour and a half to speak. I don't know who's coming back on January 24th So whatever is said tonight if we do continue it, which I'm not inclined to do a complete continuance That doesn't mean that we have a, what does that mean?
A continuance that we have another public hearing or we just have time to mull it over and then we simply put it on the agenda and we vote. Right
well and I said I was thinking that and I just thought it would be good to say that up front Because it's just a lot of information and this it's a complicated issue Yes, and I feel that especially for the new council members two more weeks would be helpful
So any okay Leslie yes, so I Just want to say that I sat through three six-hour Council meetings about this. So I feel a little bit ready to go but I also I also wanted to mention that in thinking about this is a very complicated question. And the first thing I did when I was elected, I went to take a look at what are the applied ethics of those who sit in this seat? And the Makula Center for Applied Ethics gave me a very good sort of list of things. And I think they're really important, particularly for this case because... Yeah? But we're still at questions.
Well, okay. We'll come back. Okay. Sounds good. All right. We have a presentation from... Yep.
And, I believe James Hahn if you can... I think we have the presentation if you can pull that up. Thank you.
Good evening Mayor, City Council members. My name is Matt Carlson and I've been working with Beth Collins on this matter on behalf of Ojai Bungalows LLP and Greenhawk LLC So I'm a new face but I've been around in the background And it's great to see all the new faces on the council this evening I'm here to hopefully give you a little more background and hope simplify this decision-making process for you so that we can move forward tonight without a continuance With that said, at the outset I'd like to reserve a little bit of time at the end to address any questions that you may have if you're willing to do so.
First and foremost, I want to emphasize that our clients want this to move to a special election as soon as possible In order to get this development agreement moving. It's been delayed far too long as we've heard from members of the public and council members, and we're ready to start building this affordable housing so with that I want to keep going with the presentation if we can
move to the next slide So first I just wanted to start by giving you a little bit of the update since the last series of meetings or including the last meeting that was on October 25th, 2022 when this council, when the council at the time approved the development agreement four-to-one and at that meeting added additional tenant protections including 180 days notice to relocate as well as a one year freeze on rents for those in the cottages and Mallory projects.
The council, with the benefit of the city attorney also clarified certain aspects of the development agreement at that time. Following that Council's approval there were challenges to the City's approval filed by the Simply Ojai versus a lawsuit that was filed on December 1st 2022 as well as the referendum petition before you tonight I'll touch base a little bit more on these later, but I wanted to highlight here that Ojai Bungalows our client has also submitted two SB 330 preliminary applications for the Montgomery and World University sites. And I'll explain why we did so later on in this presentation. I also want to highlight that the prior City Council readopted a revised 2021-2029 housing element, and that occurred on December 13th after we submitted those preliminary applications.
And my understanding is that that housing element is currently being reviewed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. If we can
move to the next slide? So I wanted to start, again, just kind of framing what some of these issues are in terms of the housing crisis. And I think the public commenters earlier today did a much better job than I could ever do in framing that crisis. But as stated by those commenters and in the city's housing element that it recently approved, there is issues with substandard units, overcrowding of rental units, inefficient and older rental stock, as well as high rents that are non-deed restricted.
And there's also insufficient new units of all income types to meet the demand. So what is, how did this housing element seek to address that goals? And I want to hone in on this one here. H-5 that says the city shall actively seek and formulate partnerships with for profit and nonprofit developers to produce affordable housing and provide assistance in support of project applications to achieve these development objectives. That's exactly what the prior council did through this development agreement.
Next slide please. So again, just a high level overview for I know many of you have been following this for multiple six hour meetings. But at high level just for review since it's been a couple months here the development agreement provides 27 deed restrictive affordable units and those units are to be rented at affordable rates for 55 years. It creates 67 total new units that are efficient, updated and include both the affordable units and some market rate housing.
Those units meet over half of the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment numbers that the City plans for in its housing element. The development agreement also includes a robust phasing and tenant relocation plan that is not available as it goes beyond what any anywhere else in state law or in the city's code. And so when some of the proposed units associated with the development agreement constitute 40 percent of those units are deed restricted, and the other 60 percent are market rate with protections for existing tenants that go far beyond state law requirements.
And to provide, if we could go to the next slide. I just want to kind of orient the council to the extent that you're not already familiar with these matters, right? These are all infill sites within the city limits of the City of Ojai. There are four sites throughout the city that will help the city become more resilient and sustainable by supporting infill residential development. That allows the affordable units to be occupied by people that can live and work within the city limits without needing to travel from out of, out of the valley or from far away in order to provide services to the city.
So if we could switch to the next slide I also want to highlight how in some ways that the referendum proponents and the related CEQA lawsuits seek to assert that the alternative, no development agreement better protects the city, preserves the environment and supports residents. Those allegations are simply unfounded. Infill housing reduces commuting as I've mentioned The project increases the number of trees within the city. It results in a net fire reduction risk by improving these homes.
It provides housing that's been proposed within the city since 1997, and the 1997 housing element that has not yet been constructed. It creates deed-restrictive affordable units with significant tenant protections. And again it helps preserve Ojai and improves the quality of life of Ojai residents by making affordable units and market rate units affordable for residents.
So the next slide here I'm going to spend a little bit of time on, so bear with me. This is hopefully where I will clarify why we set up the difference here between what your action on the development agreement really means and I want to highlight that saying no or repealing the development agreement does not mean that there's never going to be any development on these sites Ojai Bungalows has committed and invested significant time and resources into this development agreement, and they believe it's the best path forward. It's a private-public partnership consistent with the city's housing element goals.
But they're not naive that they are gonna waste the significant investment and all their resources they've invested proposing these projects in never developing or changing these sites. So to that end, we wanna make sure that your council is aware that even without the development agreement our clients still have pending extension applications for the approved cottages and Mallory projects which are subject to the Housing Accountability Act which is a state law that constrains the ability of cities to deny projects based on later enacted zoning standards and general plan standards, and also basically for any other reasons outside of specific adverse impacts to public health and safety.
that cannot be mitigated. And as far as we can tell, there is no evidence that the City Council can generate about those potential impacts. So what does that mean? No development agreement. Our clients are going to request that your city council reconsider those extensions. You're gonna be significantly constrained in whether you can deny those extensions and face risks associated with those denials, right? So that means, and if those are approved You're moving forward with those, the client's moving forward with those projects without the tenant protections and without the low-income units.
Second, with respect to the Montgomery & World University projects our clients have submitted SB 330 preliminary applications. You may be familiar and heard stories out of Santa Monica but the Housing Accountability Act combined with these SB 330 preliminary applications has been used, leveraged in Santa Monica under this theory or so-called builder's remedy to move forward with housing projects that don't necessarily comply with the local agency's zoning and land use designations. And the city can't use that theory of noncompliance as a basis to deny the project So again, this is the other avenue that the client can pursue to move forward with these substantially similar projects absent the development agreement and absent those tenant protections.
So for those reasons, our client is still supportive of the development agreement. There's been a lot of work. We think this is the best path forward. It provides tenant protections. It provides more affordable units and it gives the city more discretion and the client more certainty over the project moving forward. Those are all benefits for both parties. That said, our client is not going to be pressured by certain groups to ignore the development potential of these properties absent the development agreement.
So finally I want to turn just briefly here to give you some more context on what we see the referendum and CEQA lawsuit doing in the next slide. Again, this is really an effort to say no and delay affordable housing as would a continuance be. And as with setting this item for the general election it would delay moving forward with affordable housing on these sites for years. And our client isn't as far as I'm aware not willing to do that any longer.
It's undermines the city's process right. The city has had a process where It developed affordable housing goals. It invested a long, significant amount of time through a long public process with city council members and ad hoc committee staff, multiple public meetings to craft this development agreement and it throws that out the window based on a threat of a referendum in a lawsuit from a small subset of the community.
And also would jeopardize tenant protections and not prevent the overall development of the property. So, what would supporting the development agreement and sending it to a special election do? It would help the city address the housing crisis. It would protect existing tenants. It would provide a deed restricted affordable units. It would create climate resilient infill development and it would reduce overall water use again.
The tactics here are merely delaying a project. They're not adding any other benefits, they're not proposing a new affordable housing solution. It's delaying an approved project and with that I'll turn to the last slide and ask that you support the development agreement and let voters decide whether this is the right choice for Ojai at a special election and not delay any longer this decision. There's been too many delays already. We're ready to move forward and break ground.
Thank you, Matt. Any questions from Council?
Susan? Well the question I always have the same question can we clarify what kind of protections that the tenants have as we go through assuming the process of letting the voters decide? I think the public wants to know that and it's good to clarify.
1:54 – 2:0832 turns
As proposed If the matter is submitted to the ballot, the protections that tenants would have will be only those under state law. Under the 2019 Tenant Protection Act which is this limitation on certain limits on rent increases but no further protections. The development agreements protections would only exist if the voters approved a development agreement which would only happen after at the election plus 10-day certification unless the developer were to agree in the interim to provide additional protections voluntarily
Voluntarily.
In terms of the 20 moderate units, what is the monthly rent range for those?
I don't have all of the numbers before me. We could certainly pull those up. The moderate rent range for the affordable units would be based on the median income of Ventura County that's published by Housing and Community Development Department as modified based on the number of bedrooms in the household size.
I know we've seen those numbers before and I recall it was about $3,500 but maybe James you have this? Well
I didn't remember the rent amount. I think it's in that range too but the income level I believe for a family of four and moderate is $102,000
so... And then the restricted rent amount is that income cut by 1 third divided by 12. So it's something about that because the moderate income standard is 120% of median income and then it gets set out by household size, and then a third of that is the max rent minus utilities
allowance. So those 20 moderate units are around $3500 a month? In that range. Roughly. The five low-income units are about $2500 a month if I recall. And the one very low income unit is $1500 a month? ** The lowest
income unit is $1,800 a month. The five
very low are 25 and the 20 moderate are 35. Correct?
Give or take
through the mayor. I would ask that, you know, on behalf of my clients I would ask that we focus on the desk. I asked that you would focus on the decision before you. That is whether or not to repeal the ordinance now are submitted to the voters. and not necessarily. And so the key distinction there, right? Is do we have this development agreement that provides those units at those affordability or do we have the developer pursuing the alternative option with similar projects but with fewer affordable units overall?
I just think it's important that we all understand the definitions of affordable and how much that is.
Sure. Absolutely. It's important to understand those definitions under state law.
OK. All right. Leslie next and then Okay, Suze already spoke so
yeah I mean III agree that we should stay focused on what the actual question is But I also think it's important to acknowledge That these are not Amounts that you have come up with these are state dictated amounts based on Ventura Salaries median income, whatever you want to call it. It's not something that we have control over or that we can dictate the amount and it's just really important that we understand that is not something that we have control over it We just don't and and so we can say that You know, that sounds outrageous for moderate income and maybe it is.
But it is what it is and you either have that or you have it for $6000 a month.
Rachel? I just want to clarify and with staff and also just for the general public, anyone watching this that the issue really is that we're caught in between two different lawsuits. That there's a lawsuit against this development agreement The question is that and that there's the potential of litigation from the Becker group.
Yes, there's at least two different
lawsuits. Right now we have been existing lawsuits simply Ojai has sued the city to challenge the approval of the development agreement under CEQA and the city's own codes and planning zoning laws. And arguing that in some, the development agreement cannot be approved for a variety of reasons. That lawsuit exists now and challenges its approval. Obviously if it's rescinded, that lawsuit would be rendered moot. If it's submitted to the voters, it will depend on whether the voters approve it or not.
If the council rescinds The development agreement, that lawsuit goes away. However I expect the developer will then as stated they'll apply for permits one way or another for all four sites and if any of those are then denied by the city after appropriate public hearings in process then though developer is sure to sue to challenge those as well
And what if the voters, can you give us a view of what would happen if the voters approve it or if the voters deny
it? Sure. If the voters approve the ordinance thus approving the development agreement I expect that point simply Ohio will then press forward with their lawsuit challenging its approval unless they make an independent decision not to But I would assume that their concerns they have now about the project will probably still exist then, even after the voters have approved it. So they may still continue their lawsuit challenging the approval at that point subject to council direction. The city would defend the lawsuit and defend the approval and the city's fees under the development agreement would then be paid by the developer.
and will be paid, will be owed by the developer for any lawsuit challenging its approval even if not yet approved. If the voters disapprove the ordinance and do not approve the project then I expect we're in the same situation we would be if the council rescinds it this evening or at a future meeting. The developer will apply for permits to build it another way. If those permits are approved Simply Ojai or others may still file a lawsuit to challenge that approval If those permits are not approved, if the council at that point after appropriate notice and public process and a public hearing or several hearings then rejects the development projects then the developer's certain to sue to challenge that. So in sum there is no path that doesn't have a lawsuit.
The question is who sues us and for what? And what are the chances of success on that suit as the council has been advised before? And who pays the fees if owed?
Thanks, Matt. Okay any final questions?
Yeah So we have an ordinance that Regulates replacement Housing when it's determined to be affordable if you're going to remove that unit We have a set of rules Does the development agreement comply with with our replacement housing rules.
As determined by the prior City Council, it does. That is itself a policy question. The new city council may take a different view. The prior city council's determination was that the provision in Ojai Municipal Code section 10-2904, that allows for alternative methods to provide affordable housing was sufficient to allow the development agreement to be approved.
It is in dispute whether or not the underlying numbers are in dispute as was stated in the 18 hours of prior hearings. My opinion is that it is the prior council's decision is legal although I realize that's a policy choice and thus it's up to the council
But a prior city council decided that there should be a complete replacement, meaning as many units as are being removed and that those units that are replaced Would need to be at the income levels that the current occupants are I'm screwing up the language on that
Current tenants. All right Yes, the private City Council did make that decision The same prior city council also provided for an alternative compliance process and the prior immediately prior City Council elected to use that process
Right so if we rescind The ordinance, we go back to this replacement ordinance would then be the law unless we decide to change it. Is that correct?
If the City Council rescinds the development agreement and the developer continues his applications as he stated he will for the extensions for Cottage and Mallory, the council will then have the same question before it. How to enforce OI Municipal Code section 102904? Whether it requires strict compliance or whether to allow an alternative compliance method. There are two sub-questions there. One is what does strict compliance mean? It is in dispute as to the income levels of the current tenants.
However, OI Municipal Code 10294 subsection I forget the subsection has a default The default requirement is that if there is not credible information regarding the tenant's income levels or if the developer cannot provide it, then there is a default level of affordability that must be provided. And the default level of affordability is tied to the City's RENA requirements. RENA is the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Process through the State and I have those numbers if that would be helpful.
The RHNA default standards under the current housing element process are for that the project have approximately 12% extremely low units, 12% very low units, 17% low income units, 19% moderate income units and 40% above moderate income units. So if the default standards were to be applied to the 33 existing units at Cottage of Mallory, then there would be four extremely low-income, four very low income, six low income, six moderate income and 13 above moderate or market rate units.
If the city had information that showed that the tenants incomes were different than those default standards, then the city could impose should this council so choose a different level of affordability requirements. Obviously the discussion in the prior meetings was that all units were occupied by low income tenants or lower or low or very low or moderate income tenants no market rate tenants.
That would be a key question is there information that shows that if not the default would include some market rate units?
Thanks Matt. Matt?
Thank you to the Mayor, Council Member Whitman I would just like to restate our clients position in this that's been clear and some of our prior correspondence that I hope you had the opportunity to read and the reason I alluded to the Housing Accountability Act earlier is that the Housing Accountability Act requires the city to only apply standards in effect when the project was deemed complete For the cottages and Mallory projects, these projects were actually approved by prior councils in 2012 and 2007.
They've been on extensions throughout this time in order to address certain issues as the project moved forward, about certain elements of the projects moving forward. They've changed hands, there's been financial delays etc. The City has routinely acted on those applications since 2013 without applying these replacement housing requirements Probably in theory, I can't tell you exactly why but it's been multiple extensions that have been granted for each of these projects during this time without applying and without notice to the developer regarding those requirements. The Housing Accountability Act also has a provision that within 30 days of the application for a housing project being deemed complete if the city doesn't notify that applicant of the requirements and whether or not the project application is consistent with them then the application is deemed consistent with state, with the city's requirements.
So in this case even if you tried to apply the Housing Accountability Act to the extension applications, the city failed to provide the applicant with notice and therefore under the Housing Accountability Act their extension applications would be deemed complete and deemed consistent with state, with the city's code So in effect, trying to rehash and reapply this 2013 ordinance to approvals that were completed in 2007 and 2012 would be part of the basis for our client's lawsuit against the city. And would violate state law. And there is good reason why the legislator enacted these policies so that applicants for housing development projects wouldn't need to re-litigate over and over their approvals.
So, happy to answer any more clarifying questions there.
And I'll note briefly the city disagrees with most of those statements. Happy to explain further but we don't need to turn this into a debate between lawyers. This is a policy decision by the council.
Are we ready to move on to public comment? Yep. Okay first we will have Joan Kemper and then Jeffrey Starkweather and then Matt Carlson. Oh that was you okay never mind. And Danette.
2:08 – 2:178 turns
I don't live in Ojai. I live in Oak View, but I come to a lot of City Council meetings because you can keep finding out what's going on here. But I cannot—I won't take any more of your time because we've just had a lot of wonderful information about this housing project. I can't in my hundred years, I just turned 100. I cannot understand why anybody would be turning down this project because here's a developer or a property owner that's going to...
Not solve our housing project, but certainly help it and he's gonna pay He's going to use his own money to do it. It's not going to cost the city anything I beg you do not rescind This do rescind this Application and put it if you can't vote to go ahead with us Put it to the public go to a vote and let's see what the community really wants here Let's have the community say Thank you.
Thank you, Joan. Next we have Jeffrey Starkweather then Danette Oh and then John Drucker.
Good evening Mayor City Council and fellow citizens I am up here to ask you this evening to support majority rule democracy and choose option two submit this to the voters as a referendum I'm also here to ask you to do this as soon as possible for a number of reasons that I've written to you, but I would add that housing is an existential crisis in Ojai. As much as water As much as fires, as much as climate change. It's an existing livable existential crisis. Help of Ojai was stated when they were asked the question what happens to people when they get evicted? People are being evicted all the time. Where do they go?
They leave the valley. Between 2018, excuse me 2010 and 2018 the percentage of Hispanic residents in the city of Ojai declined by 33%. There's only one reason for that it's becoming too expensive to live here. So in terms of the reasons why we should go ahead and do this as soon as possible I think it's important that the current residents of these developments have some certainty as to their status.
We had one person up here said they had moved in years ago and they always knew this was going to happen, they have to sit there for years or more than a year waiting to see what the voters are going to do. I don't think it's fair to them. When the mayor talked about her offstated thing about collaboration, it's important and people have talked about simply Ojai's lawsuits. We need to get past this black-white division in our city so that we can actually start working together on problems.
The sooner we have this vote and move on the better. Third A significant delay, such as holding it in 24 primary or general election potentially I would imagine could result in a lawsuit from Becker for delaying this. Potentially even the state of California which has gone after cities that have refused to carry out requirements of their Housing Act and denying or delaying projects without any significant reasons. We need also an election that's on just this issue, not mixed up with other highly contested elections so that the public has an opportunity to focus on these things specifically. And finally, there's a very de minimis cost in holding this election and I don't think that justifies delaying it to somehow in a general election. So please do this as soon as possible.
Thank
you. Thank you Jeffrey. Next we have Danette Oh and then John Drucker and then Renee Roth.
Hi, I'm Danette Ott and I'm a property owner in the cottages actually. I own one of the parcels that was divided in the 60s from the original 10. And I know a couple of you have mentioned that you've been here for hours and I was on What somebody else said, it's been going on for so many years. But I looked at a lot of the drawings when I first went to purchase the house and what made me fall in love with Ojai and the cottages in particular in the house that I purchased was the cottages and how absolutely charming and adorable they are. And I thought to myself, I hope these remain and are saved And I think the restoration and the renovation of them is the only thing that will save the cottages.
But I'm here also because the creek behind the cottages running parallel to Mallory Way and horizontally, actually draining underneath the Aliso Street is part of the scope of restoration. And with the weather last night, Just was waiting last night to see if my house would wash away and the house Under me would wash away. And that is part of the scope of this development and restoration of this and Part of that scope would be the restoration of the creek bed and flood management, and it is Exceeding its boundaries and pooling in the neighbors my neighbor's yard and flowing right underneath the fence of my neighbor's house part of the cottages. And into the side of my house, and that is because of The project is being delayed, and part of the scope is the management.
And the floodwaters that are flowing down from Mallory Way is washing out my easement property behind my house that is an easement as like a fire ingress and egress. And that road is used by recreation, people walking their dogs every day and it is washed out in any rain not even just the last two days. So their safety is a major concern let alone my safety being up all night last night thinking literally my house was going to wash out because the restoration has not been approved.
So I am in support of the renovation of this as a property owner there on the cottages. And I know that this opinion is not held by me alone, as other homeowners around there. So I really hope that we can move this forward as soon as possible and get it done because of our safety and my investment is at stake And if I am not able to get that underway and these items restored, then I don't know who I would ever be able to sell the property to.
So it would just be going to Los Angeles, you know another out of town investor. But I really hope that you take it to a vote and we can get this done as
soon as
possible. Thank you. Thank you.
Next, we have John Drucker then Renee Roth then Savera Lara.
2:17 – 2:236 turns
Good evening Madam Mayor, City Council members, Francina, Rule, Whitman and Lange. My name is John Drucker and I want to speak tonight both as a concerned citizen and as a litigation attorney for the past 30 years or so Being interested in all things Ojai and as a lawyer, I took particular interest in the legal issues surrounding this housing development agreement that was approved by this council in a four to one vote.
As well as the subsequent lawsuit filed by Simply Ojai. Accordingly, I've reviewed most of the relevant documents in the case and I have several observations that I'd like to share and that I hope this council heeds. First, let me address a legal ethical issue. I have no connection to any of the parties to this litigation. This is the first time I've heard Mr. Collins' name.
By contrast, Mayor Sticks was the lone vote against this housing project. She was a beneficiary of Simply Ojai's two principals Leslie Hess and Tom Francis serving her in her campaign The mayor then arranged for a $1,000 grant to Simply Ohio in 2021. And for these reasons among others Mayor Sticks should recuse herself in any vote or even any discussion of Simply Ohio's lawsuit at a very bare minimum I would request some disclosure and transparency Next, as an experienced litigator I can safely tell you that even though this city is not the main defendant in that case it is very easy to conceive that defending this lawsuit will cost the city at least $100,000.
That amount however is nothing compared with the cost of reneging on this council's resolution concerning the project Mr. Collins, I think was being polite so let me simplify this for everyone. If this agreement is rescinded any experienced attorney will tell you that the city will become enmeshed as a main defendant in a lawsuit brought by the Becker Group and the Beckers group would have an excellent chance of winning that case What that means is that the likely scenario is the city losing a legal case and owing the Becker Group many millions of dollars.
And lest you think I'm playing the boy who cried wolf, I would remind you of a very real example of what happens to a city when it reneges on its contractual agreements. A few years ago, the City of Mammoth Lakes did precisely that. The other party to the agreement sued and won a multi-million dollar judgment against the city. That judgment bankrupted the city. I do not want Ojai to go bankrupt, but that's a very likely possibility if you go down this route with simply Ojai.
We've just experienced torrential rains. I would ask you not to play with fire."
Thank you,
John. Let this housing agreement stand. Any other approach for Ojai is simply stupid. Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you, John. Next we have Renee Roth, then Savera Lara and then Teal Rowe.
Hello Mayor Sticks and members of the council. Glad you're here glad to see you care about our city. I wanted to get up and just speak basically. I agree and support what John John Becker was saying I'm concerned about our city. I'm concerned about the appearance of impropriety by our mayor regarding simply Ojai and Tom Francis, and the lawsuit. I am very concerned about the impropriety, and any decision that's made going forward could be contested for those very reasons.
The other thing I want to bring up is that I checked out the Casitas Water Agenda, and I have been following a group of people who are saying we don't have any water in Ojai so we can't approve any Ojai projects for housing. And that is simply not true. The Casitas Water District has on its agenda for tomorrow's meeting the approval of the Bryant Street housing project for 10 acre feet of water. That is on their agenda, I can send it to you and they are giving 10.07 acre feet for the Bryant Street project.
I also looked at the conservation element for the general plan for the city of Ojai. Now, unfortunately that was last updated in 1987 and as we know there have been many things come forth about our water supplies and climate change but i do want you to know that you have a responsibility in as far as the general plan to get the best information possible about our water supplies, and work with Casitas and Ojai Basin Groundwater Management to not throw up we don't have any water as a legitimate agreement to not approve any housing projects. We have water. Casitas is the agency that decides that and what's available. It's not a group of people who throw their hands up and say Climate change is upon us, we don't have any water. I hope you get good information and you're entitled to get good information about our water supplies and it's in the Ojai Water Conservation Element.
And I would encourage you to do so. Thank you.
Thank You Renee. Next we have Savera Lara then Teal Rowe then Sabrina Benskis
2:23 – 2:3613 turns
Hi Mayor, City Council Member Francina. Congratulations to council members and staff chief I come before you tonight not to represent any group that i'm part of this is my thoughts and this is my concerns as somebody that was born and raised here in Ojai I speak of this referendum because, not because it's a perfect project and not because I'm not concerned of the tenants.
Because there is no building whatsoever here in Ojai. That is a concern because there is a housing crisis as you know it. And I know it doesn't protect our seniors, it doesn't protect our artists, our young adults, our family members. But I think that it's just a statement of who we've been in Ojai for a long time. I sat on that dais for four years and I remember in 2016 that I wanted to push the housing, affordable housing issue because I know that there was issues with providing Housing for people that we need, that we grew up here with.
And unfortunately that council, the majority decided to put it off to the next council that was elected but it's been seven years and nothing has happened. I'm looking for leaders to championship this issue. The city has opportunities I heard that you wanted to put a commission. There was a commission in 2015 that was formed, an ad hoc committee led by Mr. Miley, Judy Nelson and I'm forgetting another individual. And they did a comprehensive plan to really look at how we could house people that low income to extremely low income individuals in our community.
Because they add to the vitality of this community. Our seniors, our families, our artists, our young adults. So I hope that we don't forget that with this issue. I would also recommend or somebody as an individual here in the community to put this out to the vote And it's not a perfect project, but we can't forget about the real issue we have in this community. We need housing and I hope that every one of you, you were elected for a reason and I really would love to see that you tackle this issue once and for all. There is opportunity out
there. Thank you. Next we have Teal Rowe and then Sabrina Benskis.
Good evening, Council and welcome to the new council. And thank you staff and chief. I really want to bring the point up to the meetings that started in January and all the public comments from the people. And I want to be here speaking for the people. And can actually cut the air in the room tonight, I feel being who I am. In this way, and there's so many echoes of the past evergreen cottages.
There's the January or the July 14th meeting in all the public comments. And so it was an old council that made this decision. An I'm here for the people. Anne. I know that many people back the one no vote. that was around this project. And I said at that meeting, that the people will back you guys up. And I know that's true from the people of Ojai. We'll back you guys up to support the fact that this project does not support the people of Ojai, the ones that are mopping their houses out of mud right now literally.
The people that are Shoveling the driveways, you know the realities of life that's going on right now. Of the people of Ojai and you've all knocked on the doors recently so you know and I want you to know that those people that answered their doors support You supporting us And I thank you very much for your service because I know it's a thankless job Thank you
Thank you, Teal. Next we have Sabrina Venskis.
Hi Sabrina Venskis I live in Ojai and I'm an attorney as you know and anyway just want to congratulate I won't take a minute actually 30 seconds to congratulate Mayor Sticks for winning re-election so excited and happy Councilmember Whitman, Councilmember Lange, Councilmember Ruhl. Congratulations to all of you and thank you for your service because I know that some of you get people up here attacking you actually spouting untruths and lies and it's just really I really appreciate the fact that you're still here And you Mayor Sticks decided to agree to return and I just really appreciate your strength and your consideration and your professional courtesy. So thank you, good to see you Sousa.
I just wanted to really encourage you to I don't think we need any housing. What we need is affordable housing. Expensive housing isn't going to help who we need to help, so because we need affordable housing, we shouldn't be allowing even one of our truly affordable existing units to go under the bulldozer. Absolutely not. What it costs now to build a brand new affordable, truly affordable unit is approximately five to $600,000 per unit just to build.
So it's very important that we preserve our existing affordable housing every single unit. The referendum got way more signatures than was required. I encourage you to accept the referendum, reject the development agreement that was approved by the former City Council because I am convinced that this council can do a much better job at helping the developer come up with a project or projects that will preserve all of our existing affordable housing, that is at Mallory and cottages.
And still perhaps build even more truly affordable housing, but it's going to take backbone. It's going to take grit. It is gonna take guts and it's gonna take not giving into fear because as an attorney that represents both tenants Groups, environmental groups, affordable housing advocates. I can tell you that it is a common thing that these developers are going around and threatening lawsuits not just you folks but other cities in other counties especially the smaller ones don't give into the threats If you give in to the threat now, you're gonna get them over and over and over.
It's not an unusual thing. You're not being singled out. It is a common thing. I'm seeing it everywhere as a land use environmental and housing rights attorney. So again, I encourage you to please vote to overturn the development agreement tonight. Hear the people. You got tons of signatures, way more than 10%. And thank you so much.
Thank you Sabrina. Weston any comments online?
Yes, we have three remote hands raised. First we'll have Larry Steingold followed by Elle Caldwell and Judy Murphy. Larry you have the floor?
Thank you very much. I'm driving, so bear with me. First, the fact that she just said the developer is threatening a lawsuit? That's hysterical considering the simpletons at Simply Ojai and Mindless Mindful have a lawsuit. But put that aside for a second. Forget the recusal, the collusion or whatever they want to call it. That's not the point. The point is you people are going to own the lawsuit As individuals, as district representatives.
You want to own a lawsuit? Let the voters vote on this. Let the voters decide. Don't let five people own a lawsuit, because if you win the lawsuit, you'll also win the potential of having another lawsuit and like Mr. Drucker said, Mammoth Lakes or some other town that went bankrupt has to pay fines and fees. And who's going to pay those fees? And the expenses? The taxpayer? Sure! The renter? Probably but it's certainly gonna be the homeowner Okay, so I don't want to own the lawsuit. I'm assuming that our Pike District Representative Rachel Lang doesn't want to own it and certainly Mr. Whitman doesn't want to own it or maybe he does! I don' t know. Maybe Rachel
does.
Maybe Renee Rube does. Maybe the Mayor does but if you want to own it, you own it both ways. You win, you own it. You lose, you own it. Give it to the taxpayer, give it to the voter and let the voters deal with this. Get it off your hands, take the high road. And since Simply Ojai wanted the referendum they're actually giving you a way out. So let the referendum go forward as soon as possible and let's move on with our roads and our pension system and everything else that has to deal with this town.
Because this is just going to tie everything up, and you're going to lose all your political credibility and everything you've worked for, Mayor. OK? Because this is going to be all-consuming, and nobody's going to forget lawsuits that run 10, 20, 30, $40 million over this. So thank you very much, and have a nice evening.
Thank you, Larry.
Next we have Elle Caldwell followed by Judy Murphy. Elle, you have the floor.
Thank you and good evening again. I'm one of the people who's lived in the Mallory cottages for 15 years, and I'm as concerned as anybody over the possibility of having to leave these cottages. I am an artist. We're very good at making things work that other people might not want to even give a try to. I'm really concerned about the possibility of the Council rescinding this project tonight. I hope you will vote for the referendum.
I failed to hear any logical reasons in any of the Council meetings for stopping this project from going forward. I understand that the project, stopping the project loses all the hard work that Mr. Warrick and Mr. Blatt took a couple of years in working with the Becker Group to accomplish. The Becker Group is under no obligation to create any better terms than we already have if this agreement is or this development is rescinded I understand the delaying of the project could bring great expense to the city.
And it doesn't keep the current tenants in the housing at a reasonable rental price, our rent is already pretty high and it will be able to be increased by 5-10% a year and many people here would be leaving in the next couple of years to move to Fillmore or wherever else they could find housing. So the agreement currently is one of the best ones I've ever heard. It's unheard of for a landlord to give that kind of protection in this kind of circumstance.
So please vote for the referendum, I wish it wasn't even a question and can we move on and get in action on creating the housing we need instead of going over and over and over this project? Thank you very much.
2:36 – 2:4910 turns
Thank you.
Last raised hand we have is Judy Murphy. Judy, do you have the floor? Judy please unmute if you would like to speak. Last chance. Okay that's all Mayor.
Thank You Weston. All right we move on Is she there?
Judy Murphy just unmuted.
I am here. Can you hear me?
Yes.
Okay, thank you. Congratulations to all of the council. I want to tell you that I am dismayed that a small subset of Ojai is able to try to overturn a two year process and a four-to-one city council vote That approved the Becker agreement. And I'm also dismayed that Simply Ojai has two lawsuits against the city and that Simply Ojai is pushing the city into paying for a special election on this same subject, I would like to see the Becker agreements as approved go ahead if the council Can't let the agreement stand as is. Let's have the vote, the referendum without delay and most of all please do not enmesh Ojai in a sea of legal costs.
Thank you.
Thank you Judy. All right we're going to take a short break and we will be back thank you. Okay, we are back. If you could please take your seats and come to quiet? Be greatly appreciated, thank you. Okay we are back and we're going to start with council discussion. Is there a request to speak, James?
I believe the representative of the applicant had asked for another moment. I'm sorry did I misunderstand? No it's
okay. Council is that all right with you? Yes.
2:49 – 2:5711 turns
Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. I'm going to be very brief here. I really just want to give you an opportunity to ask any further questions of me if any of those have come up based on public comment and just emphasize that our clients are not interested in a lawsuit they're interested in supporting and upholding this development agreement that's mutually beneficial for both parties and provides the first new affordable housing in the city in over 50 years by a private developer And so to that end, we hope that you will submit this to the voters at a special election in a timely manner. So that the voters can decide and show you their commitment to affordable housing in the city that you've heard from public comment tonight again happy to answer any questions
Thanks, Mac. Any questions? Okay we will thank you we'll move on to council discussion and um And I do plan to make a motion to continue this item for two weeks So I just want to put that out there before discussion Because I think it's just so complicated We have three new council members and two weeks is a short time to make such a big decision. So that's my reasoning so I'd like to begin
I'll speak.
Okay, go ahead
Susan. I don't feel the need to continue the item the only thing that's I'm in favor of the referendum and The only thing that I want to wait to decide to the next meeting is the date So that's where I'm headed I also want to point out that like my colleagues I everyone wishes that the development agreement provided more low, low income housing. Hey, I was one of the people that voted for the development agreement toward toward the end so full disclosure and if you go to the Ojai housing site There are people looking for rentals in the 4,500 range. You'll see people's you know they say what they can pay I bet you like even tonight there's 10 Ojai residents who've been displaced looking for moderate income Housing that's that's the range for moderate income, right?
3,000 to 5,000 by the state by the state definition So there is and there's no question that there's a need for both low low There's greater need for low low income but the need for moderate Income housing is it's there people are asking for it so you know people with with with children and Okay, that's all I have right now. I'll wait till I hear from my colleagues.
Andy?
Yeah, I'll go So, I do support the idea of a continuance. Part of that is because we received some of the legal analysis just yesterday and I read it just before we went into closed session. I read it again today. I've got a lot of questions about the legal analysis we received.
Maybe repeat.
Yeah, we received our legal analysis or a portion of our legal analysis yesterday I read it just before our closed session and read it again today and I still have a lot of questions and that's the main reason I'd like to see us continue the matter I have some questions for Matt. Matt, I think there was a comment about If we did not have an expeditious or very soon, we're going to face another lawsuit about delaying the referendum.
Can you give us any advice about whether there's
I don't see significant chance of success in that lawsuit because the Constitution and the Elections Code are clear. The Council has two choices regarding election date, a special election or the next general election which in this case is November 5th 2024. So they could file that lawsuit and that would incur some defense costs but I don�t think they would have much chance of success with that particular lawsuit.
So my my big concern and Actually, this goes back to my time on Planning Commission. Is that? My understanding is that our general plan Puts a high priority on us protecting our existing affordable housing is Is it true that our general plan? Yes does emphasize that And I'm concerned that we have a community of people who would, we would most want to protect. And there's somewhere in the neighborhood of 27 or 33 or the numbers can vary it doesn't really matter for purposes of discussion but We are not protecting those people in this development agreement other than for the one or two year period that they would be helped in Relocation, but we've heard all night that there is not really an opportunity to relocate.
So we're looking at people who are going to be displaced by this agreement and I want to see if we can do a better job My understanding, there's only one very low unit and I have some general understanding that there are a good percentage of the people we're displacing who would fit in that very low category. I do have a question about whether The income levels of the current tenants are set in stone because we've reached this place.
Is there still the opportunity to present evidence about income levels of the current tenants? In other words, can we at this point still gather or require the developer to gather or get somebody independently to go gather so we have a clearer understanding of those income levels.
Not as to the existing development agreement. That is, it exists, it was approved subject to referendum. If the existing development agreement is rescinded or submitted to voters and the voters reject it or submitted to the voters for a future election and the council still renegotiates in the meantime then the council can get that data for renegotiation. So it's a yes or no choice as to the existing development agreement.
But if renegotiation is to be done under one of several scenarios, then absolutely more data could be put together to the extent that that data can be gathered.
2:57 – 3:0413 turns
So I do want to comment that I was tasked as a condition of running for City Council with gathering 20 signatures And that seemed like that was not a big deal. But actually, it was a big deal. 20 signatures for what? to be put among the eligible candidates.
Nominating petition?
Yeah, the
nominating petition. Didn't you do 30?
Was it 30?
Yeah because to make sure...
Okay yeah you're right. The legal minimum is 20 you can have a maximum of 30. I
think
I did gather 30. Either way, it's not simple to gather signatures. And my understanding is that the petition gathered over 600 signatures. And so I think that that weighs against the idea that the proponents of this petition are off on their own world and that there isn't a significant interest in our community in doing the best thing we can with this property.
So like I said, I want more time so that I can spend more time With the attorney who provided us the legal analysis to clarify how to get the best result out of this agreement that we can. One last comment. I hear all the time that we don't make water decisions, Casitas does and yet Casitas issues will serve letters but the City Council sets policy on how we allocate permits and indirectly, how water gets used. So it is not a correct statement to say water isn't our issue.
Water's very important to us and we do have influence over how we utilize water.
I just want to point out that the petition was citywide and you're you were limited to District signatures so make does make it a little harder. It's just the point, you know, just right to clarify Yeah, yeah, but it's it's a little easier to get six two Yeah, I've done petitions Okay My concern is And I've said this before, and I feel like I'm going around in circles.
That our focus is on this project but every single day people are being displaced. My concern—I've already spent probably an additional 20 hours, including the closed sessions and this meeting at least another 20 hours where I would much rather be providing emergency housing for the homeless behind City Hall. For all the people, all the other people that are being displaced. I'm still concerned that our focus by focusing on this and now asking for another delay When it seems to me we only have two choices. What could we possibly...
The two choices before us are the election, to put it to the people or a risk of really big lawsuit and overturned just outright overturned you know acquiesce to what simply Ojai is asking they're basically asking us to overturn the previous council Decision, right? So what other choices are there? If you could, I don't understand. I would like more of a better understanding of the delay that the two new council members have watched the hearings or they've sat here. I feel like they're up to speed so... I mean, I'm sure you have a reason but I'm not quite grasping it. Thank you.
Rachel?
Well, I wanna speak to...
Thank you... Microphone please.
There we go. Okay, there we go. I wanna speak to the fact that there is not a great decision here, that we are really between a rock and a hard place and You know, this is a bigger issue. This is a bigger topic like I mentioned in a closed session that there's a long history of policies being made by governments that push people out, Land land owners that privilege real estate that mortgage and lending decisions And so, you know This is a modern version what we're experiencing here in our community is a modern version of colonization And it's really sad that people are going to be pushed out That's not what we're talking about tonight You know Jeff Becker isn't big national corporation, like is coming into a lot of communities and developing.
He's a member of our community and so I think I came here prepared to vote in a certain way, to let the voters decide. I am willing to postpone this to get more information, to get more facts but I think we're really... We're a microcosm of what's happening on a macrocosm And I don't know if there's a solution for that that we can make right now with this decision.
3:04 – 3:134 turns
I'm glad you mentioned about, I think you used the word corporations because I know the apartments in Ojai have at least one has been bought up by major corporations that own apartments everywhere, and the rent is going up by $1,000. For some of the longtime tenants it's going up in what's the word? Increments. But if someone dies or moves, the rent is quickly doubled, tripled.
But we're not paying attention, we're so focused on this. It does bother me that we're not focused on the whole and that tonight I wish we were discussing the logistics of creating a housing committee but you already know how I feel. So anyway okay thank you yeah but this is a huge problem
people buying up the town I, if I can, I actually did some research on this and one in three properties or one in 33% of properties being purchased in California are being purchased by real estate speculators and investors. And so again there's a whole environmental justice issue which is a lot of people who can't afford rents are getting pushed to less desirable areas, and a lot of them toxic areas.
And obviously we want to prevent that from happening to the people who live here and the people who are most vulnerable in our community. And I'm really hopeful that we can all come together to create solutions for low income—for the people who need housing the most, our workforce. And so I think this is why we're going to create a housing committee. And that, you know, I know that's separate from this decision but the decision has so many different layers that are so broad in scope.
I'm ready to make a motion to continue this. Do you want to say something? Yeah,
um, I would so I do not support emotion to continue That having been said I mean, I think to Susan's Susan's point You know we have a lawsuit We have a referendum So I think we we decide to go with the referendum we put it to the people This is a huge decision and actually I disagree that there are many, many, many layers to this. I think there's many, many, many layers to the housing issue but not to this particular issue.
And to Suze's point, I think there is another development that is in the works and we're not focusing on it at all. We're not making Bryant Street that is for low and low-low income tenants We're not working on that at all. We're worried about this and if we were to focus our energies on that, it is a huge complex problem affordable housing and the fact that you know true reasonable or not we have stopped California has stopped the building of housing and hence we have this used housing crunch now nobody wants to come into your backyard Nobody wants people to build in Ojai, okay fine. And the reason that all of these state laws are happening is because this is exactly what has happened in community after community after community and it does push out the underserved.
They're the ones who can't afford it. It's no building, the no building policy. The problem with homeless, the problem with affordable housing is that none is being built and we are buying into that But I think we can do it in a very, very considered way. And it's to me confusing and confounding how much this council doesn't understand what is in front of them You know, basically private developers are not responsible and they don't provide low income housing. That is something that is done in a public-private partnership with a nonprofit. It never happens with private developers yet here we sit and we say we want the private developer to create this. They don't create it. We create it. By going out and finding a nonprofit that will partner with us, and we are just.
derelict in our duty as we fight this over and over and over again. So you understand what I'm saying? I'm not for, you know, develop throwing out people from their homes but look at really what the reality of this is property rights and suing and being in years and years of litigation. We've talked about this so much Being in years and years of litigation over this. And meanwhile, we're not doing anything to provide housing and low income housing even if we were to get 27 or four or however many low, low, low income housing it is a drop in the bucket. And it also does not solve the greater problem of affordable housing and housing in our community. And we can say we don't want any housing.
That's what we've done. And hence, we have this problem and we can say we're going to keep with that but why don't we just say let's put our energies towards making Bryant Street happen? Let's not get involved in this crazy litigation and you know I appreciate that I've been called pro-development I really do appreciate that. I certainly am not, but I am pro-housing in this particular case and for our workforce housing. And I campaigned on that and I intend to stick to that is that our vulnerable people...and you know, I am not willing to say that middle income people you know, don't deserve our consideration. That when they get booted, you know, well, they don't deserve our consideration and only low-low income people deserve our consideration.
No, everybody deserves our consideration, right? Every contributing member in this community deserves our consideration around housing And so in closing, so I am in favor of putting this to the vote of the people who will ultimately be responsible for paying for this. For us to sit here and say we're gonna overturn this, we're gonna take on the litigation, we're gonna take on the responsibility. I think Larry said it correctly. No, the people that are going to actually bear the brunt of this are the property owners and the people that live in this town. So let them vote, right? That's the only democratic thing left to do, right? Years and years and years and years and years. Everybody I talked to when I was campaigning wanted affordable housing.
Sorry, everybody wanted affordable housing. So in closing, I am going to but thank you for that cue because I know you really don't want to hear it person who has a lawsuit against us. So there are ethics around behavior for public officials. And while we have tried to talk about it, we have been shut down together. So there is a McCulloch Center for Applied Ethics and there are five things around applied ethics. One is the duty of care which is to manage assets responsibly One is a duty of loyalty, which is putting the public interest first. One is a duty of impartiality, which is to represent our constituents fairly—all of our constituents. One is the duty of accountability—the public's ability to monitor the behavior of the elected officials.
And one, the duty to preserve the public's trust in government And what I'm going to say here is, is that what I have seen is public comment. I have seen these duties come out in the comments that came up here today and I'm really really hoping that this council can find those duties and responsibilities in themselves because in some places they are severely lacking and we have been hampered in discussing Thank you. And that's my comment. Way to go!
3:13 – 3:2010 turns
So, I just want to clear something for the record. I never said that this development was a part of that bigger picture problem. Okay. I never said that. I think you said it was not. Yes and I actually said that Jeff Becker is a member of our community. Correct. So I just want to clarify that for the record. And then also, I did want to clarify too that Matt did talk speak to the Simply Ojai conflict of interest and so I feel like it has been covered here.
He covered legal he didn't cover
ethics. And so is there anything else that we need to bring up about that before?
On the pure legal issues, I have not identified a statute or legal requirement for the mayor or any of the council members with ties to Simply Ohio. I had to recuse from matters related to Simply Ojai or its personnel ethics. I leave it to the politicians
So I would like to comment
Yes, I remember now that The night that I changed my vote to support the development agreement, I made a commitment that if those people after... First of all, I clarified that there was about a two-year window of time before they would be displaced. And I felt that in that two year window of time, if we did not have something built, that we could provide interim emergency housing Because we own properties, there are kinds of prefab and all kinds of things you can put up so these people don't have to be displaced until we have an alternative. And some of them will be able to go back or continue living at the cottages. I don't even remember all the data but I'm just as concerned I'm very concerned and I'm living the life of a displaced person.
I chose not to leave Ojai. I had plenty of opportunity, my family owns numerous properties right outside the city limit. Out of my van or my storage unit, or in a cabin that's the size of half this desk with two dogs and my two grandchildren visiting. I made a choice. I'm an elected official and I'm staying here. If I were anybody, what I tell people... Some people don't have that choice. If I had young children, I would've had to move but because I live by myself, I can survive as I'm doing now You know, so I am very passionate about providing affordable truly low-income housing. I've made that commitment in addition to supporting the development agreement. It's not a contradiction to support the development agreement and support a path forward of truly low income housing.
I don't see that as a contradiction.
So I'll just make one... Sorry.
Okay. I don't even know what I was going to say, so I'm gonna pass it over to Andy and then I will be sure to come back top-to-mine as soon as I can. Thank you.
So what I've heard in various forms is that this development agreement really isn't gonna do much at all for our underserved community If anything and What we haven't had in front of us tonight is what we're gonna do on Projects that are really addressing affordable housing. It's not before us and we shouldn't be superimposing this agreement which one I don't think it's a very good solution for our affordable housing issue. And number two, it does not comply with our ordinance that says we have to replace those affordable units that we remove and I want to understand that issue better and how to address that and that's why I want the continuance.
Um, yes. So according to Matt as I understand it the previous council said that it actually did cover the units That they made a determination because there is a way to and you can help me with this there is a Alternative way to meet the requirement and the previous council legally did say that that requirement was met. So that actually Is not true that they did not meet it legally They did so and now I do remember what I was going to talk about Was that I am very concerned About the appearance of impropriety.
And I think that we need to have a discussion about whether or not there is Impropriety, and I think we need to have a discussion because the appearance of impropriety is as destructive as the impropriety itself. Because, and this is what jurisprudence says, because people are not privy to what is in your head or what actually did happen. Therefore there is a greater There is a greater responsibility to deal with the appearance of impropriety. In other words, they are equal. They are equal.
They're equal because as you saw the people come up here and by the way if you wanted 30 people to sign a document there right there they'd sign it. 30 people came up and said, you know, however there is an appearance of impropriety. And we need to talk about it. We tried to talk about it. We were shut down. And so now it's going to become a public discussion I think.
And that's what I wanted to say.
3:20 – 3:3120 turns
Did you want to say something?
Tonight's agenda item is a question on the referendum before the Council regarding the Development Agreement Ordinance. The Council can certainly have a broader discussion of ethics. Some cities have adopted ethics codes or ethics requirements that go beyond the minimums of state law, which as I noted focus on financial conflicts, incompatible offices and common law conflicts related to duties in common law bias. Some cities have gone beyond that. That could be certainly within the council's power, but would be a separate discussion. Raisable with future agenda items on a future agenda.
Thank you Matt. Susan? Council Member Andy, I heard you say that this development agreement does nothing to provide housing for low-income people or it does very little. One year? One unit, yes. And two years. Well there's some that are not as expensive. It's all relative. My thinking is this, for example on the Ojai Housing site there was suddenly unusual Something nice for $1,700. And I was one of the people that expressed interest because it's in my district.
I'm pretty sure 40 people applied and some of those people could afford the 4,000 units or the 3,000 units but those don't exist either. And the housing goes to whoever has the most income and the most credit, usually. Not always but you know that's how they look so they're going to give that 1,700 unit not necessarily to the poorest person more likely to someone that can afford four or five thousand So that's part of my thinking. I don't know if you catch my drift, so it's not entirely black and white that the development agreement as it stands doesn't help the housing situation. Believe me, I've lost so much sleep, I've tortured myself looking at this. And I still wish that the investors and the developer would Voluntarily still offer more, you know, I still have that wish
Thank you and I agree with you Leslie that we have a duty to make a really good decision here and there's a lot at stake and we and Counts many council members Have spent a lot of time on this. So two weeks is a very short amount of time considering the Codgers was bought in 2007 originally and there been many many extensions so Also, we received a 20-page legal document yesterday and really haven't had time to digest it or break it apart and ask questions.
Didn't we do that last night? Could I finish my sentence please? Yes, we did have that last night. I read it again today and I have more questions so I would like make a motion to continue this for two weeks until January 24th to allow Council more time to consider.
I'll second the motion.
Could we have a roll call please, Weston?
Roll-call vote Passed 3–2 motion. Could we have a roll call
Show transcript
Okay thank you very much
We will move on to item number four Item number four is the consideration of a resolution amending the accessory dwelling unit, second unit compliance program guidelines to extend term by two years. James we have staff report?
Yes thank you mayor
I'll give just one second here
So the next item on the agenda is consideration of the extension of the second unit compliance program The city created the second unit compliance program on April 9th 2013. The program was a proactive approach to addressing the Lack of affordable housing by creating a simple low-cost process to legalize existing unpermitted second units within the city I think we would say that the project has been successful. It's been extended several times, including on April 28th 2015, March 8th 2016, April 25th 2017, February 26th 2019 and February 23rd 2021 The on that date it was extended to March 8th 2023 which somehow is coming up and The product of the program would end at that day unless the City Council chooses to extend it The program Is also included in our housing element as a program that proactively encourages affordable housing And so we've that is Important to note as we've talked a lot about the housing element and our programs to encourage affordable housing tonight We noted in the staff report The statistics and I want to just make sure to explain on page two of three of that staff report.
We have a chart and It may have been It says statistics for 2021 and, for example, it says in 2021 that there had been 74 legalized and finaled second unit compliance program units. And then in 2023, it says 90. I just want to explain so it's not 90 additional units from 2021. It's 16 additional units from 2021. So that's the total and the program from the beginning of the program.
So the program is essentially over the last Seven years is responsible for about 90 units of housing within the city and 90 units that Can be counted towards our arena goals. So so it is one of our more successful programs to encourage affordable housing I wanted to give just a couple updates on that. Since this report came out, as is typical at the end of the year we often get applications for projects and so this report came out and we received almost immediately after two additional applications for the program So we are still, this program is still being used. It's still being applied for and I wanted to give an example. I think community development provided this information. I thought it was really interesting.
One of the applications we received on December 20th by January 6th the property owner had received the permit had told us that their intention was To rent this out at the estimate that they gave us would classify it as an affordable unit. I think in the low category and They were able to get the unit legalized and then rent that unit out and the permit cost to the city was only two hundred and thirty three dollars So just as an example of little things we can do to help encourage affordable housing, we were able to do that in 16 days. Essentially create a legal unit with the property owner.
With all of that information and showing that people are still actively applying for these, still going through the process, still using the program, We recommend extending the program an additional two years through March 8th, 2025. And there's a resolution attached in the packet that we recommend adopting to do that. So with that, that's the staff recommendation. We're happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, James. Any questions from Council? I have a question. Do you
remember that we received a letter from this woman who said that if we reduce the fees, this must have been for a new second unit because that fee is not...
Yes and that's a point I actually was going to make so thank you. And so if we didn't have this program, theoretically the person could still apply and try to get a second unit. But they'd have to go through the standard process that would cost more money and take more time. And so yeah, when we've received comments in the past with people saying that permit costs are too high, they're typically talking about the standard process. And so this is a streamlined process to legalize those existing units.
Yeah, but so maybe we'll bring that up at point number two. But she offered to provide I believe like low-low income in exchange for the city reducing the fees she would guarantee Low low income for at least 10 years. I mean, you know that was all negotiable
Mm-hmm. I know what you're talking about that
Yeah
And I think that What what you're referring to is there was a resident who had said that if we'd wave fees That they would be willing to consider doing some sort of deed restriction. I don't think they had told us what limit on the Rent levels that they would be willing to do. So that's something that the council could do it's not this program Yeah, so it would be kind of in that future either maybe a housing committee item or a future agenda items standalone But I think that could be good for the you know if we end up doing a housing
committee
Any other questions Okay, we will move on to public comment. We have Wayne Maynard and Sabrina Vince kiss. Oh
3:31 – 3:4023 turns
Good evening, Wayne Maynard. I'm a resident of Ojai and first of all, I'm speaking in support of the staff recommendation to continue this with some reservations. I am not a housing expert but I am a fire specialist and proponent of fire safety. It's my understanding that these residents to qualify have to prove that they were in existence during 2015 And that's a long time for us to turn a blind eye to people living in potentially substandard housing. So there have been lots of opportunities Lots of extensions for people to legalize their units. And at some point in time, for the protection of people, for their fire safety, their health and sanitation safety, all those elements that are regulated by the city and legalizing these units it needs to be looked at.
And so looking at our recovery from our COVID economy I can see the value of extending this for another two years But we need to encourage these folks that have these units since 2015, to come in and get them legalized so that people in the lower income levels that need this affordable housing can have at least a standard level of safety. And safe and clean and, you know, having living quarters. So that's my reservation but I do support it. So thank you very much.
Thank you Wayne.
Mayor Sticks, council members. So I wanted to, Sabrina Venskas, I am in support of continuing this program and I am very excited that the ADUs are meeting our market rate and some moderate if I understand correctly in some of the past council City staff has stated and represented that ADUs are meeting our market, or maybe it's our moderate rate housing requirements for RENA, so I think that's great.
I would just also encourage you, I know that some folks have articulated in public meetings that they're interested in rent stabilization and just cause eviction laws and a potential city ordinance. And so I would just encourage the council to keep in consideration the ADUs should also be subject to rent stabilization and just cause eviction as well ordinances assuming that the council decides to move forward with something like that and pass it So I just wanted to throw that out but shout out to the city for this program and I encourage you to continue it. Thank you
Thank You Sabrina Weston any comments online?
No mayor,
okay, we will move on to discussion
Yep I am 100% in support of extending this and I would actually even say When did the when did it first go into effect? I'm sorry. Just I know you probably
2015
okay, so 13
sorry
okay, so Okay, so but but at this point The ADU had to be built and or occupied prior to 2015 correct
Correct July 28th 2015.
Okay, so as we keep extending it two years I'm wondering if we also want to extend the date that the units had to be In use in other words if in 2018 we said 2015 in 2022 could we say? 2020 In other words, you know not keep the 2015 assuming that those people that are between 2015 and 2022 might want to get into the compliance program. It might open up a little bit more of that so it's just I think it's something that we can think about.
If it is so successful, by changing the date when your ADU had to be occupied then we would open it up for more people. And as we keep moving the date two years, it seems to me that we could possibly move the other date as well just to make it more possible for others. Then I would also say because we are sort of at this crunch point, the state now has made it possible for lots to be subdivided in many ways and that ADUs can now have one junior ADU and an ADU, and a single family dwelling. But that does not, the junior ADU or the third ADU is not in the compliance program if we're, it's not eligible for the compliance program especially like a junior ADU. So it is possible that we also think about opening that up a little bit more. And there are benefits to doing that, one of them of course is once you have an ADU I'm not sure about I think just cause eviction all of a sudden you are no longer single family dwelling, you are now a duplex.
So the statewide just cause evictions etc., etc., are valid and will protect tenants. I think, so those are the two things. Change the date potentially also allow a third junior ADU in the compliance program since the state has already moved that way there seems to be great benefit to it. I do understand the idea around keeping your ADUs safe and habitable but there is a safety and health check Correct. I mean, it's not the title Whatever the green whatever the green title is you have the checklist that you have to go through but there is a safety check Yeah building inspection for health and wellness or safety So I think that that's kind of covered It is a way to immediately increase some of our housing stock And also get things at least on the books You know so that's my kind of comment.
So would this go under
number two? They could. I guess they could be considered potential programs under section, or recommendation two. I think the idea of changing the date for when the housing units exist I think we would need to put some, or we should put some thought into that. I think the immediate reaction is typically when you create these compliance programs, you set a date that they have to exist so that people don't keep building them illegally.
So if we change the date every two years then somebody may go well just build it illegally now and then get it permitted for cheaper and everything later. But it is,
but you know what? We're in a crisis.
That's what I was going to say is this. It isn't interesting
camping back here.
A lot of our analysis on these things now kind of changes with the reality that we're in a housing crisis and that the city has said sorry, we are going to take that position of encouraging 80 years and in these types of units. So it's something to think about. But I don't know. I think we have to think about it
again. And I'll add that the date by which they had to have existed is baked into the municipal code. So it can be extended, but it couldn't be extended tonight. It'd be direction to draft an ordinance to come back and that would provide the chance to think. The date by which the program closes, that is not in the ordinance, that's baked into a resolution so that could be done tonight. But if there was support from council we could certainly look at adjusting that date mindful of the points from the city manager.
So on that point, I would say if we're going to look at the date then maybe we should have it. You know not a hard and fast thing but show some type of justification because I think there would be concern that people would build first and see permits later
Yeah, there'd be no more actual permitted units. They'd all be amnesty.
I don't know how you'd craft that. If there is some way to put something in that deterred people from...
3:40 – 3:4521 turns
I mean, typically the way that's done is it's the standard requirement now for if you bill without a permit and you come into legalize, you pay double the fees. Double fees, yeah. That's our standard deterrence for doing it the wrong way. This program obviously has a different goal than that. This program is about bringing into the light units that we all know exist and that were not necessarily being kept as safe and were not inspected now. They're inspected now. They're verified as safe The other component of it that's worth putting on the table, when the Council originally created this program it was in part to meet the RHNA requirements with units that were already existing on the ground. In other words not having to do more building and that was done by bringing those light those units into the light um that I think To a certain extent, the Council could look at encouraging if the date is pushed forward given the other goals of any units or good units maybe pushing it forward but with a clear directive that this is a one-time push forward something like that to not send the signal that it will always be extended and thus you never need to get permits.
There are ways to think about that.
I am in support of this program, and I think it solves a real need that we have just expressed about affordable housing. And just to speak to Leslie's point, I would be open to looking at dates as well.
** I agree. I'm in total support. It's a great program. Thank you for your comments, Wayne. Appreciate that and safety first of course. So it sounds like we're in consensus and we're ready for a motion. Anybody? ** We'll
make a motion that we approve the extension of the ordinance.
Okay. Do
you want to include in that the with direction to come back with some recommended modifications? I did,
yes thank you appreciate that. So we need a roll call on this one right? Yes. Roll call please Weston.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 · 1 under review
Show transcript
Yes. Great, okay. Isn't it nice? All right
let's move on to item number five selection of council representatives to local county and regional boards so James and I spoke about how to do this and we were thinking we will go through each item James is gonna keep a list thanks James and uh we can see what everybody wants and then we will go back and vote on it right Okay, so let's begin With the well Ventura County Air Pollution Control Board Was part of the city selection meeting that I went to last week. So I did nominate Andy and he got on there Yes, congratulations
identify the ones that we are
Well, let's just we're going to go down the list and we don't need an alternate for that.
My list might be different.
I think so it's the page three. It's attachment A although that one somehow missed saying... So it's not this? That's a staff report but I think we're going in order of the attachment Yeah, so starting with VCA PCD. I think the second suggestion is Council Member White.
And the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority is the mayor, so I'll be going to that. Clean Power Alliance, I'd like to stay on it. I'm on the executive board's great organization and Michelle Ellison would also like to remain the alternate.
And I'll note on that one the council has up to two alternates. Okay, the council wanted at a second alternate
Sort of point of order, can non-council members be on any and all these boards or are they limited into some of them and not all of them?
Some of them, not all of them. Most of them have to be council members. Okay. The default is it has to be a council member unless specifically allowed. Clean Power Alliance requires council members for the board member. It allows non-council members for the alternates
She's worked so hard. Okay a city selection committee is the mayor, so I'll stay there Next we have the Ventura County Animal Services Commission board currently Sousa you're on there.
Yeah, I'll stay I'll go as alternate
Thank
you
3:45 – 3:5155 turns
We're next is the economic development collaborative Currently Sousa. You're the
rep Right now they're meeting on zoom so it's nice and easy Is there an alternate?
I'm actually really interested in this one. Um, I have a lot of I have a lot of ideas I've been talking to the chamber members of chamber. I would love to be on this one Thank
you,
thank you BMA
OK, wonderful. I would love to remain the alternate and work together on that one. Sure. Great. OK. Gold Coast Transit.
Can I take a bus there?
Yes. Yes, you can. You
could take a bus
Historically, this has been a useful position for us to secure funding for the trolley
program. First Wednesday at 10. Where is it
held? They do meet at the offices in Oxnard.
Well I'll do some horse trading. Does
anybody want
it?
Do you want it? I don't want it but if I have to, but I don't want it. You know I've done all these before so I've done it. But does anybody else want to do it?
Wednesdays, I have work commitments on Wednesdays.
That's great.
I think you'll be really good at it. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for doing that. Okay Skagg
Who who is that whose Gold Coast
Rachel? I
Do you work in the area anyway?
I do, but this would be problematic for me at
that time. Okay so do we have to decide that right now? We'll go back to it?
Yeah, we can go back to
it. I do want the truck. Can we all just go once? That doesn't work does it? Let's go
back
to
that one. Skagg, I would like to continue to be the rep. That would be great. Does anyone want to be an alternate? Nope. Okay, thank you. Rachel is the alternate. Thanks, Rachel. Once a year!
Where do you go for that?
It sounds like a good one. Last time it was in Long Beach.
They rotate around. The other thing that's useful about SCAG is, among other things, SCAG through its committees sets the RHNA numbers to be allocated. The state does a number for the whole state then they break it across the regions. SCAG gets a number. SCAG boards then divide that number into pieces across the counties and the cities. Having a voice in that room is helpful every eight years.
Yeah, that number has been set.
I mean, that number is set for right now. It won't be set Perhaps past current councilman's terms. You're right about that, but it's a useful board. It also has a fair amount of cash that it controls through grant programs.
How long does one of those meetings last? Because I could potentially be the alternate.
Skag meetings are usually, you know, the main meeting could be a day. It's the committees where most of the work is done and the goal there is to get on the committees and those are, you know, couple hours. Ideally, you'd get on an important committee and then... Yeah.
And we get to hang out with Matt there so that's good. Well
I don't go to all the SCAG ones, I go to the Cal Cities ones but
yeah. Okay thank you. All right, VCOG, Ventura County Council of Governments.
I'll do VCOG.
Oh thank you Leslie. Great. I will remain your alternate if that's okay? Okay, Ventura County Transportation Commission Board, BCTC. Oh man, I
used to do
that.
Okay once a monthly first Friday at 8. Okay if nobody else wants to do it eight o'clock that sounds pretty safe. Thank you Susan. If I leave at six commuter traffic okay and that's is that the county government of the Ventura County Government?
I think that was at the VCTC office, but we'll confirm.
Where is it? I
think that is the one by Costco now But I do get there's in Gold Coast mixed up
Okay, thank
you Susan. Is there
an alternate for that?
We haven't historically had one. OK,
I think I can do that. Then I think I've done my share. I think it's another one
that has a lot of grant opportunities for they've given us including the ATP project has a number of grants that came through that.
Yeah. Yeah, I remember enjoying it and I remember I was
pretty good at it. Yeah. OK. Thanks. Is that OK? The Ventura Regional Sanitation District Board
3:51 – 3:5842 turns
I couldn't do the representative, but I could be the alternate if. Yeah.
OK, so Andy Alternate. Anybody? I
was going to take the Ojai Valley Sanitary District.
Well, thank you for taking that. Where's this
one held? The
Ventura region? It's in Ventura next to the Governance Center.
No, the VRSD meetings are typically in just in the mornings a couple hours.
A couple hours, a couple
hours. A couple hours.
Figure eight to
noon. Eight to ten. Eight to ten. I've been to one of their meetings on behalf the city and that one was a long one but in part there were lots of lawyers so...
Well the point is can my dog stay in my car? Because she likes the park adventure. If it's four hours that's a no if it's two hours that's a yes.
Mostly safe.
Yeah, see how it goes and then if it doesn't work out sure I'll do that. All
right, and that can be the alternate
Oh No,
yeah,
I mean just can't do twice a month.
I know that's a lot, huh? Okay Alright, and you Leslie said you want the Ojai Valley Sanitary District. Yeah, I'll take this. Thank you very much Ojai Valley Green Coalition who would like to be the liaison
I'll do that. Yeah, I like doing it and I've done it. I think it'd be good if somebody else does it just because it's good. Okay. Unless you don't want
to. No, I like the Green Coalition. I like Kathy. I
talk to them a lot. And I usually go or if you can't go, I'll go. Okay perfect. You'll be alternate? With Susan being the alternate? We are also agreeable. I think it is good for new people to go there.
I would love to continue being the school district liaison. That would
be great.
And then, I will continue to be on the Budget Committee. I talked to a former Mayor Johnston who said that he would be happy to serve which I think A wonderful addition for the city. We have Jeff Rain, Steve Olson, me, James currently right now and he's got 50 years experience in budget. I
would endorse that if former Mayor Johnson is willing to do it he's an amazing source.
Very lucky
We hadn't had two council members on that one prior to I think last year we added the second so it's not a mandatory
Okay, great. That's exciting Okay, so the only thing we still have open is the Gold Coast Transit. Is that right?
Yes, that's that's the one. Yep.
That's the one
Yeah
** It does have a hard stop.
** Your dog would like it.
Can we bring it around to two weeks from now? I know that's going to be horrible. Give us all time to think and maybe, I think it's fortunate that we only have one that we're stuck on at this point.
If their meeting is first Wednesday then bringing it back next meeting is fine.
One thought would be everybody can check their calendars and figure it out. And if we have a volunteer, we could just put it on consent and not have to have a discussion about
it.
We can call up Haney and ask what it was like. I might do
that. Do you want to read the list, James? Sure. Yes.
So the list would have the following appointments. Council Member Whitman would be the representative for the Ventura County Air Pollution Control Board, Mayor Sticks would be the representative for CJPIA, Mayor Sticks with Michelle Ellison as the alternate would be the representative for CPA, Mayor Sticks would be the representative for the City Selection Committee of Ventura County Council Member Francina with alternate Leslie Rule would be, or sorry, Council Member Rule would be the appointees for the Ventura County Animal Services Commission Board.
Council Member Lang would be the representative with Council Member Francina being the alternate for EDCVC. Council Member Whitman would be the representative with Mayor Stixx being the alternate for OBGMA. Gold Coast will be determined in two weeks. SCAG will be Mayor Sticks as the representative with alternate Rachel Lange, Councilmember Lange. For VCOG, Councilmember Ruhle will be the representative with Mayor Sticks being the alternate.
For VCTC, Council Member Francina would be the representative. For VRSD, Council Member Rule will be the representative with Council Member Lange as the alternate. And for OVSD, Council Member Rule will be the liaison. For Ojai Valley Green Coalition, Council Member Rule would be the liaison with Council Member Francina's alternate. For the school district, Mayor Sticks would be liaison. And for the budget committee, Mayor Sticks would be the appointee with Johnny Johnston as the additional appointee.
So I just realized I actually, and I'm so sorry, I can't do Thursday's at 8 a.m., I'm sorry. Which one is it? It's the Ventura Regional Sanitation District Board. Okay. I'm sorry, I just realized that.
3:58 – 4:0831 turns
Anybody else on that one? So I you know, I put myself out as the alternate if anybody's willing to do that representative role You know I can because that's early in two hours. I can you know cover For you more than just when you can't do it if you need relief. I just can't do it twice a month
You have to. I can't, but
I can't. Well put that one over too then and I'll
figure out what my schedule is. If you want to split it then you and I could... A split? Is that okay for us to split? Yeah, you could
more or less job share it
As to the board, if both of you show up, the rep would vote. But if only one shows up then that's the OI seat so... You can job share. You'll have to be that much more energy into building relationships on that board but that's certainly doable.
Okay. So
who's technically the representative and who is technically the alternate?
8 o'clock in the morning is so early! Okay, I'll do it. Thank you.
Well thank you for collaborating thanks for being so agreeable everyone and so we need a motion to approve
these. The motion could be appointments as stated
So I'll make a motion to approve these appointments as stated. Second. All right.
It's fine on this
one. OK, all in favor? No. OK. OK. All right. Thank you. I really appreciate all your goodwill and hard work. OK
we will move on to item number six City Council priority setting workshop. We have a staff report James.
Yes thank you. The The item is the City Council Priority Setting Workshop. Our recommendation is to hold one and then for the city council to kind of discuss how they'd like to hold one, but I'll keep it fairly brief, but it's good practice periodically to review and state priorities clearly for the community, for the council, and for the staff to be For everybody to be working towards the same priorities and working to achieve the same goals.
I think it's particularly important in times like right now where we've had a kind of major, we had an election where we had three council members change which is not typical I would say. It's fairly unusual. And so it's a good time for us to kind of have a couple workshops where the council can talk big picture and goals versus having to go through a set agenda and specific items, and not be able to have those kinds of discussions.
So, for all those reasons and because the last priority setting session occurred during the pandemic. And as we talk about in the staff report I think that that influenced those priorities and I think that looking ahead I have a feeling that some of those priorities can be kind of restated moving forward. For all those reasons, we recommend holding the priority setting session.
It's really open to the council on how we'd like to do it. The caveat is that anytime the council members are together, it's a public meeting which isn't necessarily the best thing for relationship building and open conversation but it's the rules we have to live within So it would have to be a public meeting. Other than that, the council can pretty much lay out how they'd like to do it.
But as noted in the staff report, we did talk to Jim Selman who had helped facilitate the last session which was extremely challenging because of the pandemic and having to do it virtually and not having the public attend except watching it virtually which would be different now. But Mr. Selman is available to facilitate it and will make himself available to facilitate it. We included in the staff report a couple of date options that he would be available Saturday, February 11th or the 18th for our first session. And then when we talked to him about what he thought the process would be, he had suggested having two sessions with the second session on either March 4th or March 18th.
But again, all those things are open to the council. If the council wants to hold it on a weekday that would be an option. If the council wants to have one session or two or three, those are all up to the council but Mr. Selman is a facilitator, a coach and that was sort of the process that he recommended and envisioned With the first session being focused on brainstorming and building relationships amongst kind of a new team. And then the second session focused on taking that information from the first session and putting it together into a plan for what the City Council can accomplish, so... That's one option.
Knowing that there might be different ideas of facilitation style and those types of things, after we talked to Mr. Selman, we did contact other facilitators to try to provide council some options if there was a desire for other options. I will note the trend we're seeing right now of contractors just being booked up for months and months and months Continued We were told by several contractors. Well, we contacted two or I think we contacted three were heard back from to you and both of those two said that they are not available for six months so To some extent if we want to go out and find a facilitator we're probably not going to be able to do this for several months and If we want to go ahead with Mr. Selman or another process, that's something we can do quicker so So we are recommending holding that session and then this is an opportunity for the council to say if they're open to that plan discussed in the report Or if we want to kind of brainstorm something else or you know staff can come back with other ideas if that's not Desirable so
Thank You James any questions
Well, whatever happened to that goal setting? And that's my question. Whatever happened to Jim Selman? Weren't we supposed to have a follow-in?
Yeah, the majority of council decided not to have a second session last time. And I think that talking to Jim it would've been preferable if we had had the second session but at that time we chose not to so that's why we recommended having the full two sessions this time.
Don't you do this kind of work, Rachel? I do. Why don't we hire Rachel? Okay. Any other
questions?
Well how was Mr. Selman?
It was on Zoom.
Can we...I can speak to that but let's just finish questions after we get through the discussion. Any public comment Weston on this item?
No mayor. Okay,
let's move on to discussion and I'm happy to speak to that. I know him. I've worked with him. He's fantastic and definitely check out his website in his background. He is very skilled. He has worked with governments, with big businesses. He is local and he is willing to do it so I would really support that.
So then I'd just comment that I do like the idea of doing it on a Saturday I'd have to figure out which of those Saturdays that are proposed. I can do it.
Yeah.
I'd like to move, I'd like to have this continued because I would like to think about different ways of facilitation and you know different whether...I need more time to think about whether two set sessions of six hours there's potentially a different sort of setup that I'd This was, yeah. So I would move for a continuance until the next council meeting so that I can come up with some ideas around what a goal setting would actually look like.
We can bring it back and finalize. I think the only kind of urgency was just the idea that, I think we all would like to have the conversation sooner rather than later but two weeks doesn't change that. Right
okay thank you.
4:08 – 4:1628 turns
Do you want to make a motion?
Sure I'd like to make a motion that we continue this item to the next council meeting
Can I ask a question that could we make a motion to to approve having a priority setting workshop and then Continue it, you know with the stipulation that we're gonna come back and talk about the parameters in two weeks. Does that make sense?
That's an option or that something the council could do I think that would be reasonable. I probably wouldn't go further than that at this point, though, because if that's the case, it is good to give people a couple of weeks to think about how they want to do it.
Okay. So I'll make a motion to approve having a workshop and talk about in two weeks? That sound good? Yeah.
So two weeks, we'll come back with the date that we're available to. All in
favor? And discuss the format of the session and facilities.
And maybe Jim could even come, you know, do public comment. Okay all in favor? Yes, I yeah. Okay
wonderful, but we haven't even made a firm decision about Jim
So I would say that We should probably discuss it first before we have to come I Would feel more comfortable about that just because he's already set up a Process. Mm-hmm. Yeah, but then again, you know public comment Every once
Yeah, I'll hold off on asking him to attend at this point. Although he can if he wants to
Okay. And last but not least, and thank you Council for holding out because this is really exciting so we're going to lift the energy right now item number seven provide direction to staff regarding updated reach codes and Thank You Michelle I put this on the agenda because it's time It's pastime for all of us to take climate action now, and we've waited a long time So I wrote a report I'm gonna read and Settle back and enjoy it.
I put this on the agenda because the urgency and magnitude of the climate emergency necessitates that Ojai do all in its power to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and move toward a zero carbon economy. I read just this morning that in 2022, greenhouse gas emissions generated by the United States increased yet again. The City Council has declared a climate emergency, recognizing that rapid far-reaching and unprecedented changes are required in all aspects of society to limit global warming including the prompt phasing out of natural gas in buildings. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, the average temperature in Ventura County has risen 4.7 degrees Fahrenheit which makes it the fastest warming county in the continental U.S.
Ojai is already experiencing the effects of human-caused climate change including aridification of our local landscapes and more frequent and severe heat waves which increase wildfire risk and diminish water supplies. The city set 100% renewable energy as the default electricity supply with a clean power alliance, and as such, a vast majority of residents and businesses are using clean energy thereby eliminating their electricity-related emissions.
The city is located in an area at risk of major earthquakes which could damage gas infrastructure in the ground and in and around buildings, thereby causing explosions or fire. The use of combustion cooking appliances inside homes and businesses releases harmful pollutants into the air that can be toxic to people and pets. Buildings in Ojai account for over half of greenhouse gas emissions, more than any other sector in the city.
As a critical first step to reducing emissions and buildings, the City must ensure new buildings or units that are created to leverage use of clean energy rather than fossil fuels. So the goal of the Reach Code is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with natural gas use in buildings by requiring that all new structures and new living and commercial units created by dividing or adding onto existing structures be all electric. This includes all related outbuildings, accessory structures, new swimming pools and spas, outdoor cooking and heating equipment.
We owe it to our children and future generations to swiftly wind down human contributions to climate change here in our town. I'm hopeful that our new council will support accelerating the reduction of use of greenhouse gas emitting fossil fuels in our community by eliminating the exemptions in our reach code that have essentially rendered nearly all new buildings and housing units exempt from requirements that eliminate the use of natural gas. And James put those numbers in the staff report.
After council discussion, I will likely make a motion for council's consideration to direct staff to draft an ordinance that would expand the scope of our existing reach code including an infeasibility exemption and consider changing the title of the ordinance to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Code so that people know what it is and why we're passing it. So with that, I will take questions. We also have Michelle Ellison here to answer any questions
Would you repeat the last There's something I missed. I think it was the last two sentences
Well, I'd like to direct I mean I will make a moment will likely make a motion To direct staff to draft an ordinance that will expand the scope of our existing reach code So get rid of the exemptions and it will include an infeasibility exemption Oh, indebt was the word. Okay.
What's an infeasibility?
Which means if somebody for whatever reason cannot do it there will be an appeal process.
Okay and then could um is this is it a simple appeal process what is
that? Yeah it would go to the Planning Commission correct?
That's the way it's currently. Okay yeah. It starts at staff the current process is a hardship or infeasibility exemption, and it's the decision by the Community Development Director appealable to the Planning Commission and then from there to the City Council. As I understand the request, it would be to modify that to delete the hardship component retaining only an infeasibility component but still allowing staff decisions then subject to appeal.
Okay. Are we preparing to do this right now? No,
the request as I understand it is directing staff to draft a revised ordinance to then come back to Council for introduction.
And then that ordinance can still be tweaked?
Yes, Council can make changes as desired at that
time. Is it a gray thing? Hardship and infeasibility. Like why are you removing the word hardship because people
take advantage of it or... Well, just a difference in infeasible means not possible. Correct. So that would be very unusual.
It would be. Yeah. And hardship there could be a genuine hardship I mean, I don't know. I can't wing it but as long as we have time to modify the ordinance, I'm fine.
Council would have time to make adjustments to it? Correct and the general distinction is in feasibility is not possible so it's about technical feasibility. Can it be done? Hardship takes into account economics Yeah, is it expensive to do it? Yeah infeasibility would drop dropping hardship drops expense from the consideration Whether that's a whether to do that or not as a policy choice.
Yeah But again you we will have time to look at the ordinance one step okay any other questions Okay, let's move on to public comment. We have Michelle Ellison Jeffrey Starkweather and Sabrina Venskas
4:16 – 4:2310 turns
Good evening, Council. Glad I came out tonight. I wasn't sure if I was gonna call in but it wasn't too late so I figured might as well come in. I'm Michelle Ellison a resident of Ojai and former chair of the city's Climate Emergency Mobilization Committee which brought the Reach Code to council a couple years ago. I hope you will use this opportunity to adopt a clean reach code without exemptions requiring all new buildings to be all electric with no gas infrastructure or gas appliances.
Gas use in buildings is contributing to climate change According to Ohio's own GHG inventory, it accounts for over half of our community's emissions. Space heating and water heating are the biggest sources making up about 80% of that building emissions pie and then the remainder coming from clothes drying cooking and other applications The city declared a climate emergency back in 2019, recognizing that we must take bold and swift action to reduce our emissions in Ojai.
This is an opportunity for us to keep good on that word. And while we don't currently have much new building happening here in Ojai, it's important that we stop making this problem worse and adding new fossil fuel use. Our bigger task ahead is phasing out gas in existing buildings so let's do that next. Responding to the climate crisis is going to mean change And may incur, mean incurring some costs in the short term. But the cost of inaction, the devastation and incalculable toll of unmitigated climate change is exponentially greater.
The good news is in the case of all electric new buildings they actually cost less to build and operate because of the avoided gas infrastructure costs and highly efficient electric appliances that use less energy. In other words, all-electric buildings are more affordable than those with gas. And more affordable is a good thing particularly when it comes to ADUs and affordable housing which we've been hearing a lot about this evening.
Another benefit of going all-electric is for health of residents. Gas stoves emit a stew of toxic chemicals like methane, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide and formaldehyde I hope Steve Colomay is on the line because he can speak to all of that, he's an air quality expert. And they can generate unsafe levels of indoor air pollution increasing risk for respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease, cancer and other health conditions. This is a particular concern for low income residents living in smaller units where concentration levels can be higher.
My family recently swapped out our gas stove for an induction, and we are so pleased with its performance. And just feel better that we're not exposing ourselves to these harmful pollutants, especially our young children. And I'm also excited to share just a few weeks ago, we became an all electric home by getting rid of our last gas appliance. So we're emissions free now. We're really excited about that.
I just want them worth noting for the community's benefit there are a lot of rebates And tax credits currently available as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, which just went into effect this year to help homeowners convert from gas to electric. The Climate Committee continues to work together and we have launched an educational initiative called Electrify Ojai. We have a website, www.electrifyojai.org where you can find out all this information including links to those rebates. Thanks so much and I'm here if you need any more information.
Thank You Michelle next we have Jeffrey Starkweather and then Sabrina Venskas
Good evening. I'm not here to take any position on the Reach Code, except say that in terms of our building use it's a very small drop in the bucket because we have almost no new buildings so I think that we need to be looking at some kind of energy retrofit program that we would incentivize and encourage. The only thing I would say about the exemptions twofold One, right now you might want to look at the Planning Commission because we actually had a hardship. come before us. In fact, it's still before us and you might be interested to listen to that discussion.
And the second is...
We're not going to be taking any position on that pending appeal tonight. Pardon? We're not going to be taking any positions on that pending appeal tonight as it might come to the Council
on the second appeal. Oh I know that. I'm just saying looking at it in terms of the information that was... Yeah, that's
fine.
The issues were... And the public
meetings can be viewed by all council members.
Yeah, just the issues now. I am not taking a position on one way or another. The other was that When we've been talking about promoting affordable housing, we did have the head of Habitat come before us and basically say he wasn't sure that they could do their project if it was all electric. Now I don't know if that's completely accurate but that's what he said.
I think we ought to be looking at when you're devising this Ways that we could incentivize affordable housing projects to go all electric, and maybe that's reducing some of their fees or speeding things up or something. But you know there there's more than one way to do policy. You can eliminate barriers. That's the easiest. You can do incentives or you can mandate.
And the more you can do, the first two, the better. The final thing... Okay. The mayor in her speech over at one of them talked about she had a goal of net zero for city operations by 2025 and community-wise by 2030. We've talked about the need to form collaborative groups. I think this is the ultimate group that would need to be collaborative if you want to educate people if you want to get all voices that you want the community go along with you we ought to have a climate mitigation and resilience because that's different than mitigation committee that looks at all these things so by the time you get them All different stakeholders, builders so forth would have weighed in on it. And you know it's great to have an advocacy group like the Climate Mobilization Committee and they were still encouraged to be part of it but when you're just following an advocacy committee that's not doing collaboration with the entire community.
So I would really recommend you consider that. Climate mitigation and resilience to meet mayor's goals. Thank you.
Thank you, Jeffrey. Sabrina?
4:23 – 4:3219 turns
Sabrina Venskis Mayor Betsy sticks. Thank you so much for your leadership on this issue Really appreciate that Totally support the recommendation and would just add one little thing and that is The Inflation Reduction Act it might be if it's not already on there I haven't seen it on the city website to provide information about the Inflation Reduction Act, which has all sorts of programs as some of you may know or all of you may know about tax breaks and subsidies and so on and so forth to convert to electric.
So I know, um, I think that a lot of people look to the city for that information and so it's just a little suggestion that I would like to make that gets onto the City website. Thank you so much!
Thank you Sabrina. Any comments online Weston?
Yes we have Larry Steingold followed by Justin Pennington. Larry do you have the floor?
Thank you. I appreciate the need for this because I understand, but let me get this straight. You want to take away hardship and put it in the hands of a monopoly, the electric company that we allow our elected representatives who get their funds and money and donations to pick the regulators to protect us from the monopoly? This makes no sense. Now, but more importantly the whole town is tied up in knots about affordability, right? Affordable apartments we need housing so we're gonna lower rents, we're gonna make them all electric and then we're gonna jerk the electric bills up okay with no options again this makes no sense but hey what the hell right tenants pay electric bills Do owners?
Maybe if they gross the rent, but then there's going to be a clause in there for electric bills. Tenants plan on $50-a-month bills, 75, 80, 100. But all of a sudden it's a deuce and a half, 300, 400, and you're going to be—and they're going to be back at City Hall. And is housing going to be more expensive? They're going to drive expenses up. And the other lady is very nice, she's going to say well there's grants out there and there's tax benefits but guess what? I pay my electric bill. I can't go get a grant okay now electric isn't free yet but maybe you'll figure that out and if we all have electric solar and we all have batteries we can all disconnect from the electric company but they have laws against that so I don't know, it just seems to me that you should leave the hardship in because it's tied into affordability and that's what you're all about.
And simply Ojai is all about affordability and so is everybody else. So I think you should leave it in at least show that you care. Thank you.
Thank you Larry.
Next we have Justin Pennington. Justin you may unmute.
Hi good evening council. So I just want to introduce myself, Dustin Pennington. I'm an energy engineer. I've lived in Ojai the past couple of years and very familiar. I was part of the ad hoc committee that met with council members Blatt and Haney along with Dr. Steve Colnay. And we discussed the recommendations and did not agree necessarily with how they came out and were presented to council So we just wanted to follow up requiring homes to be electric ready, which was discussed is actually a step backwards. I mean that's now California's new energy code minimum standard.
So I am in agreement with Michelle Betsy. I think we need to... We have the numbers in front of us that the REACH Code has been gutted by these exemptions And I think we need to consider modifying the REACH code. I like the name, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Ordinance, that's it. We also talked about maybe calling it a clean energy ordinance but the goal is the same.
Ban gas appliances and new construction with no exemptions except for in cases of infeasibility or if somebody can demonstrate perhaps that there really is a cost but as Michelle has indicated overall The costs are lower and it's been demonstrated in studies. So we are in a climate crisis, and it's been proven that the best way, one of the best ways is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is by switching out the appliances.
And as Michelle said, once we stop adding new appliances, we can then focus on the real problem at hand which is the existing infrastructure and all the appliances that we have in our existing homes. And I do think that it does need to be a collaborative effort and that should be what we focus on after we can eliminate these exemptions. And, um, I would also like to say too that the there are going to be these incentives available. So the incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act or state incentives available as well to make homeowners meet this transition. There's going to be incentives for electric panel upgrades, for furnace replacements, for water heater replacements that will directly support this transition. So also as a new father health and safety is a concern indoor air pollutants studies come out time and again that it is linked to health and respiratory problems especially in children So anyway, I just wanted to say I'm in support and thank you
all. Thank you Justin. That's it Weston?
Yes Mayor that's it.
Okay we will move on to discussion. Susan.
Could we find out what the status is with Habitat for Humanity and would it be possible, for example, for Michelle to talk? You know what I'm talking about that they came before us and they didn't know whether they could provide you know support us building this housing
I can provide an update on that. When the council authorized Councilmember Haney, Blatz and Steve Colamei and Justin Pennington to meet, Steve Colamei and Justin Pennington asked Those two council members if they could meet with Habitat for Humanity to discuss that.
Okay,
they met with Habitat for Humanity Habitat has since notified me that they reviewed it and they believe they can do it But it's not definitive yet, but they they believe that they can Would be able to build the units and comply with the region
That's good news. Yeah, yeah,
so that's you know that I'll come back with the habitat project at some point
and then my other question I think I heard you say that buildings Emit over half the greenhouse gas emissions. So this is the next one traffic cars
Yeah, what's the other
half? Yeah so I'm all for this. You and I were not in favor of all those exemptions. So yeah I'd like to get this done and then we'll go to the other one.
4:32 – 4:4018 turns
If I could add something to this, so I am definitely in favor of this and I also want to speak to as I was canvassing. I spoke to a lot of people who a lot of people in District 2 not a lot but if a few A few I had some lengthy conversations with some voters in my district who don't believe climate change is a problem and And so I want to speak to that small subset of people who expressed their concerns and said, please represent my voice. And to those people, I will say that if you don't believe in climate, that climate change is a real threat, is a problem, is a crisis, there are other reasons to vote for this or to go forward with this and the number one being That is estimated by the World Health Organization that around 4 million deaths per year are related to air pollution.
And that air pollution is, we're talking about smog, we're talking about fine particulate matter or PM 2.5, that's soot So, these are emissions that come from greenhouse gases. And in addition to that there are the communities where coal is mined, where oil and greenhouse fossil fuels are being refined and procured. They're toxic to the people who live there, and they're also toxic to the people who work there. So we're talking about a whole...
There are other reasons if you don't believe in climate change for this to be something that we would vote.
Yeah. I think the title Reach Code is... Awkward always have and it doesn't communicate to the public, but maybe that's the intent. I don't know But I James you mentioned I think on another topic that The city has a grant writer And I'm wondering if we can have the grant writer Look for money for an info officer Who would. be able to provide information to those people who are interested in that voluntary conversion. So where do you get the rebates and the, you know, that the government is trying to get to us?
And actually if she's looking for that part of those recent legislation maybe also look just for Fossil fuel reduction programs in general to see if there's something that we can get grant money for that might Be a you know an addition a supplement to what? We're already talking about And I think it would also be helpful Maybe there's grant money for this is If we did an inventory For a starting point here, if we try to figure out how many homes have gas versus electric on various appliances including automobiles so that we can track as we're going forward with these programs to see if we're being successful in getting people to switch.
Probably tracking air quality in conjunction with that as well.
I'm fully in support and I am only sort of wavering between how far into infeasible versus hardship we might actually go. But other than that, I am totally in support and my first inclination is just to say we're done with fossil fuels but that having been said, I have a duty of care to all constituents so I need to think about
Well, I'm over the moon that everyone's in support and it's been a long haul. So thank you to the Climate Committee for hanging in there and so I'm going to make a motion. I make a motion to amend Ojai's existing reach code by removing the exemptions by including an infeasibility exemption and by changing the name to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Code or the Clean Energy Code we can talk about that I have science that I would like to get into it. So I'd like to work with city manager James if that's okay to get that into the draft Language is very important and I want to use modern science recognized and to work with you to include that language That's my motion. I seconded yippee We just have to say aye no
right because there's a motion to direct staff to draft that amended ordinance, okay Yeah voice votes fine
All in favor? Wonderful. Thank you so much. Okay, we will move on to... We're almost there. Thanks for hanging in there everybody. Councilmember reports? I would just like to give a big shout out to the Ojai Valley Museum for their New Year's Eve celebration it was really really fun event with more kids than I've seen in a long time having fun and Big kids too, lots of different activities so it's really great. Also thanks to Casa Ojai the Grange where our homeless or unhoused members of our community spend the night flooded. So Casa Ojai generously opened their doors and are letting us use their room so it's
really sweet.
Any other council member reports?
I have one. So, I am the liaison for the Parks and Recreation Committees and I recently attended the first meeting of my term and there is discussion happening around Pickleball and so that is ongoing discussion and I will keep you all posted and updated as new information comes about but I really appreciate what that committee's doing
I want to echo
what
Rachel said. I watched on Zoom, highly recommend watching the segment on pickleball. It was very... Did you watch it? Yeah, I highly recommend it no matter whether you're a pickleball player or not. It's a very lively session. And on a serious note, it is important.
Is that coming to
us? So the so the Parks and Recreation Recreation Commission created a ad hoc committee to make a recommendation to them And then when that recommendations made which we think will be a month or two Then the parks and rec will then make a recommendation to council.
So I've got it Few weeks to get up to speed
you got some you got a month a couple
months To solve it canvassing lots of people want to talk about pickleball
It's the hot topics.
4:40 – 4:458 turns
Are we going around? I did take the, what do you call it? The campus tour and I highly recommend perhaps going to the next one. What's the date? January 28th.
I think it's the 28th yeah.
One thing that somebody asked, and I'm curious who decided to call it a campus? Because that conjures up buildings. And that's the last thing we want back there. We want to preserve the parkland and it's so beautiful back there right now. It was just amazing. It's magical
right now. The river is flowing. So when I say, I've called it the City Hall campus and it's fairly standard with City Hall. And we have City Hall, the Police Department, the Public Works Department, the Finance Building. So we've called that our campus and then we just so happen to have eight acres to go along with it. We didn't put much thought into it other than just it's our city hall campus. It's all of our city hall facilities and buildings.
Okay. Yeah,
yeah and that's the key thing is I think I used to hear a lot of people that A didn't know where City Hall was and then B when they got here didn't realize that it was more than just one building and so we're trying to kind of Connect everybody with that We also and then we also have the Kent hall building now which is getting a ton of use we had The land Conservancy filled up both parking lots. Yes yesterday With with a meeting, so we're getting a lot of people out using the campus which was a goal Three years ago four years ago We'd ever had anybody really come out other than for council meetings So now we're trying to get the community out and get the pickleball players get the Kent Hall usage and get all of those things going. Field trips, I think we had a field trip for the first time about two or three months ago
so. So just to add, I want to acknowledge Kathy Nolan who gave the great history lesson and then she led the tour and also present was Jan Sko, Dave White people that are involved with oh the arborists I mean who we met with What's his name? Scott. Yeah, so different experts were on the tour describing the work that is being done back there. It was really good.
Just briefly, two things. One is we have our big disaster drill which now doesn't seem so important but yeah I know why didn't we schedule it today? But we are doing the disaster drill on Wednesday, the 25th. I think it's Wednesday two weeks from tomorrow. I think that's the 25th 10 a.m.. We're going to do it in Kent Hall so that anybody who wants to attend can attend and there'll be plenty of room We'll have Chief Rivera and our Fire Chief Parker, and we're inviting all of the different public safety partners.
We're inviting the different agencies in the different Humane Society and all the different groups to just try to get everybody talking and thinking about, again this seemed like we were ahead of the curve two weeks ago when we said it but getting people thinking about what to do in an emergency how to prepare you know and probably debrief a little bit about how the last couple days have gone.
So that is still scheduled on the 25th. We actually are also inviting the council, the disaster councils or public meetings so the City Council can participate or just watch on Zoom or TV but we also wanted to speak to one of the questions that comes up a lot which is as council members what And then second just to kind of quickly go over what we expect on the January 24th agenda 2 weeks from today. We will we're going to try We are bringing the rent stabilization ordinance that was requested prior from our last meeting from Council.
The referendum will come back and then the council priority setting workshop will come back so those will be the The bulk of the agenda with the Gold Coast appointment being a consent item and then the big one that we are really pushing hard for and we're pushing our contractor for is we're trying to bring the Request for proposals for paving with the bids in the specs plans and specs To try to get the paving kind of kicked off with that last year of the prior paving cycle, so I So we're planning to bring that on the 24th, and we'll try to push hard to do that.
4:45 – 4:467 turns
I
think we were talking about timing and these items and everything, and I think that's probably gonna get scheduled for February 14th.
And that also accommodates certain statutory notice requirements to make sure we dot our i's and cross our t's. So
are
we going to
push back the closed session on that one?
Thank you all for a productive and collaborative meeting. Got through a lot, and thanks for all your time. Thanks audience for hanging in there. We are adjourned.