Council Regular Meeting

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY OF MONTEREY Tuesday, September 15, 2020 4:00 PM 7:00 PM MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Councilmembers Present: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson Absent: None City Staff City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Community Present: Development Director, Public Works Director, Police Chief, Finance Director, Parks and Recreation Director, City Clerk, Human Resources Director, Library Director, Parks Operations Manager, Traffic Engineer, Deputy Human Resources Manager, Principal Planner, Administrative Analyst (Housing) ***Afternoon Session Agenda *** CALL TO ORDER Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira provided details on how to phone into the meeting to participate and provide public comment. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Esther Malkin and Tom Rowley. CONSENT ITEMS No public comment was received on the Consent Items. On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Williamson, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council approved the CONSENT ITEMS, except Item 3: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) Approval of Minutes 1. September 1, 2020 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Approved Award of Construction Contracts 2. Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $54,000 to Red Wave Comm Inc. for the Presidio of Monterey (POM) B838 Fire Alarm System Replacement R1 Project for Presidio Municipal Services Agency Projects ***PMSA*** (Categorically Excluded from NEPA 32 CFR; Not a Project under CEQA per Pub. Resource Code, § 21080) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-139 C.S.  City Council Minutes September 15, 2020 Ordinances 3. 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Prohibit Fuel Leaf Blowers within Residential Lots and Limiting Hours of Use in All Other Districts (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378) Action: Pulled from Consent; Passed ordinance to print as amended to begin compliance on January 1, 2021 and modify the hours for using any kind of leaf blower in both residential and commercial zones to 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Community Development Director Cole gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers’ questions. Mayor Roberson opened public comments. Esther Malkin; Susan Nine, Monterey Vista Neighborhood Association; Romina Sparano; Jean Rasch; and Daniel Dotterrer spoke in favor of limitations. Richard Ruccello noted potential effects of prohibitions. With no further requests to speak, Mayor Roberson closed public comments. The Council discussed the matter. It was suggested to ban gas blowers citywide. It was discussed whether or not large commercial properties can be effectively cleaned with battery- powered blowers. It was questioned whether the grace period could be extended to give small businesses a little more time to convert to electric. It was suggested to limit the hours to 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. for all leaf blowers in residential and commercial zones. It was suggested to push the grace period to January 1, 2021. The detrimental environmental impacts of gas blowers were stressed, and it was noted that blowers’ effect is often temporary. It was stated that the City of Monterey was one of the first to ban styrofoam and smoking in restaurants, and it was stated that important actions may seem controversial or ahead of their time when first adopted. On a motion by Councilmember Albert, seconded by Councilmember Haffa, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council passed to print the ordinance as recommended by staff, but as amended to begin compliance on January 1, 2021 and modify the hours for using any kind of leafblower in both residential and commercial zones to 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) Resolutions 4. Review and Amend the Monterey Conflict of Interest Code to Update the Disclosure Categories and the List of Positions Required to File Statements of Economic Interest (FPPC Form 700) (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-140 C.S. 5. Authorize Increase of FY20 Revenue and Appropriation of $1,680,000 Regional Surface Transportation Program Competitive Grant Funds ***CIP*** (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-141 C.S. 2  City Council Minutes September 15, 2020 6. Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with the California Office of Traffic to Allocate Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Education Funding, Amend Resolution 19-116 to Include the Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Education Project in the Capital Improvement Program and Appropriate California Office of Traffic Safety Funds in the amount of $40,000 ***CIP*** (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-142 C.S. 7. Award Three Professional Services Agreements for On-Call Electrical Engineering Design Services, Each With a Not-To-Exceed Limit of $500,000, for Projects with the City of Monterey and Presidio Municipal Services Agency (PMSA) to Cannon Corporation, Aurum Consulting Engineers Monterey Bay, Inc., and Advanced Design Consultants, Inc. (PMSA: Categorically Excluded from NEPA 32 CFR; Not a Project under CEQA per Pub. Resources Code, Section 21080; CIP/NCIP: Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution Nos. 20-143, 20-144, and 20-145 C.S. *** End of Consent Agenda *** Adjourn to Ocean View Community Services District Meeting: Consent Agenda 8. Receive Ocean View Community Services District Quarterly Report (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Continued to October 6, 2020 This matter was pushed to the evening session, and at that point was continued due to the time. On a motion by District Member Roberson, seconded by District Member Smith, and carried by the following roll call vote, the Community Services District continued the matter entitled "Receive Ocean View Community Services District Quarterly Report" to October 6, 2020: AYES: 5 DISTRICT MEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 DISTRICT MEMBERS: (None) ABSENT: 0 DISTRICT MEMBERS: (None) ABSTAIN: 0 DISTRICT MEMBERS: (None) RECUSED: 0 DISTRICT MEMBERS: (None) Adjourn to City Council Meeting PUBLIC APPEARANCE 9. Utilizing Grant Funds from the U.S. Department of Defense, Award a Professional Services Contract in the Amount of $539,188 to Tetra Tech, Inc. for the Development of a Compatible Use Plan for Military Installations in Monterey and South County and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378) Action: Rejected the TetraTech, Inc. proposal, and directed staff to award the contract to the second highest proposer (3-2, Councilmembers Albert and Smith voting no) Community Development Director Cole gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. Public comment was received from: Tom Rowley, who made a suggestion for citizen involvement; and Preston Hopson, TetraTech Inc., who spoke in favor of receiving the contract. 3  City Council Minutes September 15, 2020 The Council discussed the matter. It was suggested that staff review the three other compliant proposals rather than give the contract to a company with a legal cloud hanging over it. It was commented that even good people get sued. On question, Community Development Director Cole clarified that all firms passed and that TetraTech was the highest of all the parties, and said that the second firm would be acceptable. A motion was introduced by Mayor Roberson, and seconded by Councilmember Haffa, to reject the TetraTech proposal and direct staff to award the contract to the second highest ranked proposer. The Council discussed the motion. It was stated that the staff and the Army are comfortable with this contractor and many large firms get involved in lawsuits. In response, it was stated that it is not just anyone suing TetraTech, it is the United States Justice Department, and that the accusations were serious, including fraud. The motion carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Haffa, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Smith ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) The Council recessed at 5:49 p.m. and reconvened at 7:01 p.m. *** Evening Session Agenda *** PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Roberson led the Pledge. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira provided details on how to phone into the meeting to participate and provide public comment. Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Kala Fossum, Therese Rose, Tammy Jennings, Lindsey Knight, and Bob Faulis. Bill Barranco spoke in favor of allowing more height for ADUs (Item 12). PRESENTATIONS (EVE) 10. Receive Annual Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Member Update from Central Coast Community Energy (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061) Action: Received update Lina Williams, Central Coast Community Energy (formerly Monterey Bay Community Power), gave the presentation. No public comment was received. 4  City Council Minutes September 15, 2020 PUBLIC HEARING (EVE) 11. Adopt the Program Year 2019 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report for Housing and Community Development Programs; and, Authorize Submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-146 C.S. Housing Analyst Leonard gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. No public comment was received. On a motion by Councilmember Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 20-146 C.S. to Adopt the Program Year 2019 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report for Housing and Community Development Programs and Authorize Submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) PUBLIC APPEARANCE (EVE) 12. Discuss Policy Guidance for Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance Update to Comply with State Requirements (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Discussed, Gave staff general direction Principal Planner Flower gave the staff presentation. It was commented by Council that very detailed decisions may be most appropriate for the Planning Commissions' consideration. The Council recessed at 8:49 p.m. and reconvened at 9:03 p.m. Public comment was received from: Satish Rishi, Habitat for Humanity, who spoke in favor of allowing homeowners to add accessory dwelling units (ADUs); Susan Nine, Monterey Vista Neighborhood Association, Esther Malkin, Jean Rasch, and Rick Heuer, who spoke in favor of codifying only State-mandated changes; Kathryn Avila, who spoke against deed restrictions for ADUs; Rich Aiello and Nancy Soule, who suggested exceptions on a case-by-case basis; Kelly Dewolf, who requested flexibility with ADU regulations; Gus Zuleta, who spoke about ADU height and lot coverage; Michael Gordon, who stressed the need for clear rules for homeowners; Sasha Kingsley, who spoke in support of ADUs; and Richard Ruccello, who spoke against ADUs in Monterey's neighborhoods. Suggestions were made by various speakers regarding requirements that could be codified or associated with variances beyond the State mandate and/or could increase the supply of affordable housing. The Council discussed the matter. It was stated that if the Council goes beyond the State requirements, variances for matters such as height and size should be allowed only if the ADU will be made affordable. It was agreed that affordability should be a factor. It was stated that public hearing review is appropriate, especially when it comes to adding height, to help 5 City Council Minutes September 15, 2020 determine if there will be neighborhood impacts. It was stated that different variances may be appropriate in different residential zones and that a public review process through the City’s boards and commissions will help to address those questions. It was stated that there is a lot of opportunity to promote or encourage ADUs, and to partner with local industries to support financing affordable units for their workforces. Comments were made in favor of adopting the State minimums, and making any further necessary changes over time. It was stated that if the City plans to stay with only the State mandated regulations, it may not make sense for the Planning Commission to further review. Regarding appropriate placement of ADUs in Monterey’s neighborhoods: It was stated that it should be determined which neighborhoods would be appropriate for ADUs, including whether or not they make sense in airport zones, considering safety concerns. It was stated that airport zone safety issues should be balanced with the need to be creative to find space for housing. It was stated that it makes the most sense to add ADUs in commercial districts along transit corridors. It was recommended to allow ADUs to be constructed within existing proposed commercial and mixed use buildings. It was stated that there may be support for allowing ADUs in the Oak Grove Neighborhood. Regarding density: Concern was expressed about ADUs adding too much density in neighborhoods. It was posed that positive environmental impacts would be seen in reduction in commute times for low-wage hospitality workers. It was stated that Monterey has higher density than other cities of the same size, that maintaining character doesn't mean low density, and that the Council should be creative and proactive to manage the process while meeting the needs of the community, particularly low income individuals. Regarding parking and garages: It was stated that parking spaces should be protected. It was recommended to remove exceptions for replacement of garages and covered parking and to remove parking requirements in general, and it was stated that the City should focus instead on density and providing somewhere to live. Regarding lot size: Comments were made against the State’s mandated lot size regulations. It was commented that lots under 5,000 could make sense for ADUs. Regarding maximum size for ADUs: Concern was shared that large ADUs could overwhelm lots, and it was stated that an ADU should not be larger than the original building on the lot. Regarding Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirements: It was recommended to remove or loosen FAR requirements and to allow 500 sq. ft. JADU waivers for FAR and lot coverage. Regarding owner occupancy: It was recommended to remove owner occupancy requirements indefinitely for JADUs and ADUs. It was stated that home ownership is an equity issue, and that one unit on the lot should be owner-occupied. The Council made further remarks. Information was requested from staff about the State’s enforcement language. It was stated that property owners can already rent a room or portion of their home out to a tenant. It was stated that affordability restrictions may tie the hands of a property owner, and that rents may have to be market rate in order to afford to pay back the loan that was required to build an ADU in the first place. It was recommended to allow two total accessory units including in single family residential areas; to allow additional heights for ADUs with objective design standards; to allow ADUs as additions with new construction; to allow JADU additions during new construction; and that utility connections not be required. 6  City Council Minutes September 15, 2020 The Council continued to discuss the matter. It was stated that the Council should consider the need that led the State to make their requirements in the first place, and to merge the idea of community character with the equity issue, taking care of everyone in the community. It was stated that the State guidelines shouldn't be the limit, they should be a starting place that would allow the City to work toward meeting its RHNA housing goals. It was suggested that the City start with getting the State’s minimum requirements in place, and then see how to make changes in the future. It was recommended that the Planning Commission hear the detailed staff presentation. 13. Amend Resolution 19-115 Authorizing Changes to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 General Fund Budget Due to COVID-19 and Receive Unaudited Preliminary General Fund FY19/20 and August 2020 Year-to-Date Financial Reports (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-147 C.S. Finance Director Lai gave the staff presentation. It was noted by Council that the entire economy has been devastated by COVID-19 and even without the tourism industry, the City would still have seen a huge reduction in revenue. No public comment was received. On a motion by Mayor Roberson, seconded by Councilmember Albert, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 20- 147 C.S. to Amend Resolution 19-115 Authorizing Changes to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 General Fund Budget Due to COVID-19 and Receive Unaudited Preliminary General Fund FY19/20 and August 2020 Year-to-Date Financial Reports: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None) COUNCIL COMMENTS None were made due to the late hour. CITY MANAGER REPORTS None were made due to the late hour. *** Adjourn to Closed Session (See additional agenda) *** Mayor Roberson opened public comments on the closed session, received none, and closed public comments. The Council adjourned to closed session at 10:53 p.m. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION 1. BROWN, JOHN vs. CITY OF MONTEREY, et. al. WCAB 71471: Fwd: Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) Name of Case: BROWN, JOHN vs. City of Monterey (Workers' Compensation Appeals Board) Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to their negotiators 7 City Council Minutes September 15, 2020 2. HART, MARTY vs. CITY OF MONTEREY, et al. WCAB No.: 73163: Fwd: Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1) Name of Case: HART, MARTY vs. City of Monterey (Workers' Compensation Appeals Board) Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to their negotiators 3. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (City Manager) Pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b)(1) (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: On a roll call vote of 3-0, with Councilmembers Albert and Williamson absent, the Council continued the matter to October 6, 2020 ADJOURNMENT The Council adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Clementine Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson City Clerk Mayor 8