2. Incidental Motions – no order or precedence. Arise incidentally and decided immediately.
MOTION YOU SAY THIS
May you
interrupt
the speaker?
Do you
need a
second?
Is it
debatable?
Can it be
amended?
What vote is
needed?
Can it be
reconsidered?
Protest breach of rules
(i.e., Point of Order)4 “I rise to a point of order…” Yes No No No None No Motion to appeal the
ruling5
“I appeal from the decision of
the Presiding Officer [or
“Chair”]”
Yes Yes Yes No Majority Yes
Suspend rules
temporarily
“I move to suspend the rules so
that …” No Yes No No 2/3 No
Avoid considering an
improper matter
“I object to the consideration of
the question…” Yes No No No 2/3
No, only if the
main question or
motion was not in
fact considered
Divide motion “I move to divide the question” No Yes No Yes Majority No Parliamentary law
question Parliamentary inquiry Yes, if urgent No No No None No Motion to depart from
the agenda
“I move to consider matter […]
out of order” No Yes Yes Yes Majority Yes
Take up matter
previously tabled6
“I move to take from the table
…” No Yes No No Majority No
Cancel or change
previous action7
“I move to rescind/amend
something previously
adopted…”
No Yes Yes Yes
2/3 or
majority
with notice
No
Reconsider motion “I move to reconsider the vote
on…” Yes Yes
Only if
motion is
debatable8
4 Decision of the Presiding Officer is final, unless overturned by motion to appeal the ruling. 5 Presiding Officer may participate in debate, Negative or tie vote sustains ruling. 6 A motion to take up a matter previously tabled must be made at the same meeting as the motion to table. If not, the motion tabled dies. 7 Does not void action ab initio, only from point of rescission. Motion is out of order if relates to contract upon which another party has detrimentally relied, relates to issuance of bonded indebtedness, or relates to the collection of any tax. 8 Cannot be made on a quasi judicial matter or matters required a noticed public hearing. Can only ne made by a member who voted with the previously prevailing side, May be made at the same meeting or a subsequent meeting subject to the same restrictions as a motion to rescind. 476
EXHIBIT B
CITY MEETING
PRESENTATION POLICY
FOR THE
CITY OF BANNING
477
EXHIBIT B
BANNING CITY COUNCIL MEETING PRESENTATION POLICY
City Council presentations are for providing information to the Mayor and Council, City management, and the community about activities of interest and value including:
Activities, events, and infrastructure projects relating to the City. Honors and celebrations for organizations, corporations and residents related to Banning.
Honors and celebrations for organizations, corporations and resident which reflect theirservice to the Banning community.
Honors and recognitions for City staff for outstanding service or commitment to the City’s mission and goals.
Please note this is not the appropriate time to seek funds from the City and/or endorsements from City Council or discuss politics.
Presentation Length
All presentations are to be no more than five minutes in length; this is to include all speakers for the group being recognized.
Presentation Schedule
City Council begins at 5:00 p.m. with an invocation and pledge to the American flag followed bypresentations. All honorees or groups are to arrive no later than 4:45 p.m.
Presentation Location
Presentations take place in the Council Chambers inside Banning City Hall located at 99 E.
Ramsey Street. Parking is available in the Police Department parking lot located at 125 E.
Ramsey Street (just off Hays Street) adjacent to the Council Chambers, or in the City Hall parking lot located at the corner of Hays and San Gorgonio.
Presentation Technical Support
The City has the capability to display PowerPoint (or equivalent) during the presentation. If a PowerPoint is to be used during the presentation:
The PowerPoint is to be no more than 10 slides with limited text; and To be submitted to the City Clerk’s Office no later than the Thursday prior to thescheduled Tuesday City Council meeting (2nd and 4th Tuesdays of the month). PowerPoints are subject to editing for appropriateness. PowerPoints which do not meet these standards will not be used. 478
(
(
2/27/204
DEAR CITY CLERK,
RECEIVED
FEB 2 7 2024
City of Banning
City Clerk's Office
I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO REQUEST THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RECONSIDER CONSENT ITEM 6.18 FROM THE FEBRUARY 16TH, 2024 MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TITLED "APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF 50 MOTOROLA APX NEXT RADIOS AND ACCESSORIES" ALONG WITH RESOLUTION 2024-22 AS ALLOWED BY THE MANUAL OF PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES UNDER 11.4. I ALSO REQUEST THAT THE ITEM BE AGENDIZED FOR THE FOLLOWING MEETING ON MARCH 12, 2024.
SINCERELY,
COUNCIL MEMBER SHERI FLYNN
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
RESOLUTION 2024-22
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF 50 MOTOROLA APX NEXT PORTABLE RADIOS AND
ACCESSORIES
WHEREAS, the City of Banning Police Department currently utilizes the Motorola APX 7000 radios as its handheld portable radio and the APX 7000 is no longer serviceable by Motorola; and
WHEREAS, the City of Banning Police Department tested and evaluated products from multiple vendors and determined that based on functionality, interoperability, and reliability, the Motorola APX NEXT radio is the optimal piece of equipment; and WHEREAS, the City of Banning Police Department the radio equipment is crucial to ensure enhanced officer safety for department members, and effectively respond to emergencies throughout the City of Banning and neighboring jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the City of Banning, now wishes to purchase 50 new Motorola APX NEXT portable radios and related accessories in the amount of $648,253.15, using the radios using the same vendor utilized for previous police radio purchases.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: by the City Council of the City of Banning as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council approves the sole source purchase of 50 Motorola APX NEXT police radios through Motorola Solutions, in an amount not to exceed $648,253.15, and authorizes the City Manager to sign a Communications System and Services Agreement with Motorola Solutions, Inc., in substantial form as attached hereto as Exhibit A, on behalf of the City Council.
SECTION 2. The City Council authorizes the City Manager to make non-substantive changes to the Agreement prior to execution, and to make necessary budget adjustments, appropriations, and transfers related to this resolution.
SECTION 3. The City Council approves the use of General Fund dollars to make three annual payments of $129,650.63 per year (payments include five-year lease rate of 5.85%) after the one-year deferred payment window should outside funding not be obtained.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 12th day of March 2024.
Alberto Sanchez, Mayor
City of Banning
507
ATTEST:
Caroline Patton, Administrative City Clerk
City of Banning
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL CONTENT:
Serita R. Young, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon
508
CERTIFICATION:
I, Caroline Patton, Administrative City Clerk of the City of Banning, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution 2024-22, was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Banning, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 12th day of March 2024 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Caroline Patton, Administrative City Clerk
City of Banning, California
509
Exhibit A
Motorola Agreement
510
Date: January 23, 2024
Financing proposal for: City of Banning
Communications System Financing Proposal
Motorola Solutions Credit Company LLC is pleased to submit the following proposal for the financing of your Motorola Communications solution in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined below:
Transaction Type: Municipal Lease-Purchase Agreement
Lessor: Motorola Solutions, Inc. (or its Assignee)
Lessee: City of Banning
Amount: $548,371.40
Down Payment: $0.00
Balance to Finance: $548,371.40
Equipment: As per the Motorola equipment proposal.
Title: Title to the equipment will vest with the Lessee.
Insurance: Lessee will be responsible to insure the equipment as outlined in the lease contract.
Taxes: Personal property, sales, leasing, use, stamp, or other taxes are for the account of the Lessee.
Option One Option Two Option Three
Lease Term: Three Years Four Years Five Years
Payment Frequency: Annual Annual Annual
Payment Structure: Arrears Arrears Arrears
Lease Rate: 5.99% 5.96% 5.85%
Lease Factor: 0.374041 0.288327 0.236428
Lease Payment: $205,113.17 $158,110.39 $129,650.63
Payment Commencement: First payment due
one year after
contract
execution.
Expiration: This above lease rates and factors are valid for all leases commenced by 2/23/2024
Qualifications: Receipt of a properly executed documentation package.
Lessee qualifies as a political subdivision or agency of the State as defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The interest portion of the Lease Payments shall be excludable from the Lessor's gross income pursuant to Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code.
Receipt of a copy of the last years audited financial statements and current year's budget from the Lessee.
This proposal should not be construed as a commitment to finance.
It is subject to final Motorola credit committee approval. This quote is based on the general level of interest rates, primarily U.S. Treasury Bills of like term maturity. Any movement in those rates in excess of 10 basis points will result in the revision of this quote.
Documentation: Municipal Equipment Lease Purchase Agreement Opinion of Counsel
Schedule A / Equipment List
Schedule B / Amortization Schedule
8038G
UCC-1
Certificate of Incumbency
Statement of Essential Use/Source of Funds
Evidence of Insurance or Statement of Self Insurance
Resolution from governing body authorizing the execution of the Lease Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions or if an alternate structuring is required.
Regards,
Bill Stancik
Motorola Customer Financing
847-538-4531
LESSEE CERTIFIES THAT IT HAS DESIGNATED THIS LEASE AS A
QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SECTION 265(b)(3) OF THE CODE, THAT IT HAS NOT DESIGNATED MORE THAN $10,000,000 OF ITS OBLIGATIONS AS QUALIFIED TAXEXEMPT OBLIGATIONS IN ACCORDANCE 511
5 year Financing Estimates
as of
1/23/24
True interest cost of the Lease (the rate necessary to discount the amounts payable on the respective principal and interest payment dates to the purchase price received for the new issue of Lease)
5.85%
Finance charge of the Lease (the sum of fees and charges paid to third parties):
$ 99,881.75
Amount of proceeds received by the public body from the sale of the Lease, less the finance charge of the Lease and any reserves or capitalized interest paid or funded with proceeds of the Lease $ 548,371.40
The total payment amount (the sum total of all debt service payments on the Lease, plus the finance charge of the Lease not paid from bond proceeds)
$ 648,253.15
Pursuant to Government Code Section 5852.1, the following good faith estimates (obtained Lender) must be disclosed at a public meeting before the authorization of the Lease. The based on market estimates as of January 23, 2024:
512
(obtained from the
estimates are
513
01/31/2024 Police/2200 951-849-1003
Ac?ng Lt Roberto Jauregui
Motorola Solutions, Inc
13108 Collections Center Drive, Chicago IL 60693 631-883-4238 X
X
X
514
This is for the purchase of Motorola radios, this is the only vendor that supplies us with the required model and equipment.
125 E. Ramsey Street, Banning CA 92220
X
515
ATTACH TO THE SOLE SOURCE FORM
DETAILED JUSTIFICATION FOR SOLE SOURCE:
(widen text boxes as necessary)
The requestor shall clearly provide:
a. A detailed descrip?on of the type of contract to be established; b. A detailed descrip?on of services and/or commodi?es to be provided by the vendor; The 50 radios would replace the APX 7000 radios the Banning Police Department currently u?lizes that are now an unsupported model and out-of-date. The APX NEXT radio is the most up-to-date handheld radio available for police use and fills all of the needs of the Banning Police Department when it comes to a handheld radio.
c. An explana?on of why the recommended vendor is the only one capable of providing the required services and/or commodi?es and include back-up informa?on to support the jus?fica?on;
Motorola Solu?ons is the only vendor available to purchase the Motorola APX NEXT radios.
The Banning Police Department is currently on the Riverside County Public Safety Enterprise Communica?on (PSEC) System which is a Motorola back-end system.
This contract with Motorola is for the purchase of 50 new APX NEXT handheld radios and related accessories. Along with a five- year subscrip?on fee for services. 516
d. The iden?ty of other sources that have been contacted and explain in detail why they cannot fulfill the City’s requirements;
The equipment being sought is a Motorola brand that cannot be fulfilled by another vendor.
Con?nuing to use Motorola radio products will allow the Banning Police Department to maintain interoperability with other agencies and the PSEC system. e. An explana?on of how the recommended vendor’s prices or fees compare to the general market and a? ach quotes for comparable services and supplies, if available (limited compe??on); This would be comparing unlike products as Motorola Solu?ons is the sole provider of Motorola products.
f. An explana?on of how the City would accomplish this par?cular task if the recommended vendor could not provide the product or service.
This would be a cri?cal blow to public safety and the safety of Banning Police Department personnel. Losing the availability of Motorola radios would risk losing the interoperability with other agencies in Riverside County and the PSEC system. Using Motorola Solu?ons radios allows the Banning Police Department to quickly connect with other agencies to react to cri?cal incidents.
517
Note: Valid Sole Source jus?fica?on requires strong technological or strong programma?c jus?fica?ons 518
CITY OF BANNING
STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Douglas Schulze, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Doug Schulze, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Discussion of Council Policy Changes Regarding Extension of Meetings and Disparaging Remarks Made by Members of the City Council RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to the City Manager regarding changes to City Council policy.
BACKGROUND:
This discussion item has been placed on the agenda as provided for by Section 5.1 of the Manual of Procedural Guidelines, which allows any legislative body member to have placed on the agenda any business that should be deliberated upon in the future by the legislative body. The request to place this item on the agenda was originally received by the City Manager's office on Thursday, February 29 and confirmed via a telephone conversation on March 5.
During the past several months, concerns about decorum and efficient use of meeting time have been raised by members of the City Council and of the community. In addition, City Council meetings have become lengthy, which results in frustration from all involved. City Council meetings are crucial for city officials to enact ordinances, resolutions, and orders necessary for running the city effectively. The procedures followed during these meetings are essential for maximizing efficiency and ensuring that critical issues are addressed while encouraging public engagement. the purpose of a city council meeting is to provide a structured forum for city officials to make decisions, address community concerns, and engage with the public in a transparent and democratic manner.
The Manual of Procedural Guidelines for the Conduct of City Council and Constituent Body/Commission Meetings has been adopted to provide the structure for efficient and effective meetings. The Manual is adopted by resolution, establishing City Council policy. The City of Banning Manual is similar to procedural manuals enacted by other cities so, it is not unique to the City of Banning.
Consent Items - Section 6.3 of the Manual provides guidelines for the Consent Calendar. The items placed on the Consent Calendar are matters of a routine or generally uncontested nature and noncontroversial. The Consent Calendar may be approved by the City Council in a single motion. Items on the Consent Calendar, upon the request of any member of the City Council or member of the public made through the Presiding Officer, may be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and/or action. Use of the consent calendar is a commonly used agenda management technique. Some cities move all pulled consent items to the end of the agenda (Discussion Items) to avoid delaying action of other items of business. It is also common practice for members of the City Council to contact the City Manager prior to the Council meeting with questions about consent calendar items, which eliminates the need to pull items from the consent calendar and use meeting time. 519
Public Comment - Section 7.1. All cities include a "General Public Comment" opportunity during regular business meetings. The City of Banning provides an opportunity for the public to comment on any and all issues (not on the agenda) within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Legislative Body. General public comment on non-agendized issues takes placed at the beginning of the meeting and each speaker is limited to a maximum of three (3) minutes to provide comments on non-agendized issues. Some cities use speaker cards to make the public comment period more efficient. Upon arrival, members of the public may submit a speaker card to the City Clerk. The City Clerk will then provide the Mayor with the speaker cards, in order received, and speakers are called to the podium accordingly. Once all speakers who submitted speaker cards have been called, anyone who did not submit a speaker card is given an opportunity to speak. Speakers cannot be required to provide their name, address, etc. to speak, but it is a technique used for more efficient meetings. Members of the public are also provided opportunities to address the legislative body on each and every item listed on the agenda. A maximum time of five (5) minutes is provided for comments on agenda items. Again, speaker cards are an effective tool for making meetings more efficient, but cannot be a mandatory requirement.
Decorum and Order - Article X. This Article of the Manual of Procedural Guidelines provides very specific rules for meeting participation by legislative body members, city staff and members of the public.
Disruptions, distractions, rude and derogatory remarks, abusive comments and statements as to motives and personalities can quickly turn a meeting into chaos. In addition, this type of behavior can discourage members of the public from attending and/or engaging in public meetings. Furthermore, City Council meetings are frequently watched by individuals who may be considering investing in Banning and may decide to invest elsewhere rather than subject themselves or their business to similar attacks. This also applies to comments on social media or any other forum. City officials are always representatives of the City and conduct, at all times, is a reflection on the entire organization. Some cities have implemented policies whereby city officials are fined for making disparaging remarks about others.
Length of Meeting Agendas and Extension of Meetings after 10:00 p.m. - When meeting agendas are planned, the management team attempts to estimate the amount of time each item will require. However, amount of time spent on general public comments, agendized item public comments, and consent calendar items pulled for discussion is difficult to estimate. In addition, there is no correlation between the number of items on an agenda and the length of the meeting. Resolution 2016-44 was adopted by the City Council due to the large number of items and complexity of items on the agenda in 2016. The amount of activity and complexity of items has only increased since 2016 and, the City Council has not increased the frequency of meetings. Some cities meet weekly so the length of meetings remains reasonable and business is completed in a timely manner. Resolution 2016-44 imposes a 10:00 p.m. curfew upon City Council meetings. Matter taken up by the Council before 10:00 p.m. may be concluded, but no new matters shall be taken up after 10:00 p.m. except upon a unanimous vote of the council members present, but such extension shall only be valid for one hour and each hour thereafter shall require a renewed action for the meeting to continue. Consideration of amending Resolution 2016-44 to only require a majority of members present to extend a meeting has been suggested.
JUSTIFICATION:
Per Section 5.1 of the Manual of Procedural Guidelines allows any legislative body member to have placed on the agenda any business that should be deliberated upon in the future by the legislative body.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Provide direction to City Manager to prepare for future consideration a resolution or resolutions amending the Manual of Procedural Guidelines or Resolution 2016-44;
2. Do not provide direction to City Manager to prepare items for future consideration.
ATTACHMENTS:
520
1. CC Resolution No. 2016-044.pdf
521
RESOLUTION NO. 2016- 44
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANNING,
CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING TIME LIMITS FOR CONDUCT OF BUSINESS AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2010- 38 WHEREAS, the large number of matters on recent Council agendas and the complexity of such matters have led to several lengthy meetings lasting until very late hours; and
WHEREAS, this Council wishes to be able to give careful attention to and make wise decisions on matters coming before it both ofwhich goals may not be met after fatigue sets in caused by several hours of active participation in important City business; and WHEREAS, a reasonable limit upon the length of Council meetings appear for these reasons to be in the best interest of both the citizens and the City Council Members of the City ofBanning.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Banning as follows:
SECTION 1. That commencing with the first regularly scheduled Council meeting following the effective date of this resolution, a 10: 00 P. M. curfew shall be imposed upon City Council meetings. Matters taken up by the Council before 10: 00 P. M. may be concluded, but no new matters shall be taken up after 10: 00 P. M. except upon a unanimous vote of the council members present, but such extension shall only be valid for one hour and each hour thereafter shall require a renewed action for the meeting to continue.
SECTION 2. The City Manager is requested to arrange the regular order of business on Council agendas to minimize any adverse effects this policy may have with respect to the timely conduct of important City business.
SECTION 3. A copy of this resolution shall be posted in a conspicuous location and appropriate references hereto shall be made on the Council agenda in order to provide adequate notice.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of Ma , 201
ATTEST:
L/ nadeilitae
Marie A. Calderon, City Clerk
Arthur L. Welc f ayor
City ofBanning
Reso. No. 2016- 44
1 522
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL CONTENT:
o i
y R. ayl ity Atto
Aleshire & Wynd- , LLP
CERTIFICATION:
I, Marie A. Calderon, City Clerk of the City of Banning, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2016- 44, was duly adopted by the City Council ofthe City of Banning, California, at a regular meeting thereofheld on the 24th day of May, 2016, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers Franklin, Moyer, Mayor Welch
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Miller
Marie A. Calderon, City Clerk
City ofBanning, California
Reso. No. 2016- 44
2 523
CITY OF BANNING
STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Douglas Schulze, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Doug Schulze, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Ring of Honor Selection Committee Appointment
RECOMMENDATION:
Discussion item only.
BACKGROUND:
The "Ring of Honor" program is to honor very special citizens who, through their efforts over a significant period of time, have enhanced the community.. The "Ring of Honor" expresses the appreciation of the community for the service and generosity of those individuals honored. Due the the special significance of the award and the established criteria, it will take a considerable number of years to complete the "Ring of Honor". The program also serves to raise individual and collective pride in the community.
A Selection Committee consisting of five (5) members is to be appointed by the City Council. The Committee shall consist of representatives from service clubs, churches, the school district and other community organizations. The Selection Committee meets on a bi-annual basis to consider nominations and forward any nomination to the City Council. This particular committee then ceases to exist after completing this task. Subsequent committees would be selected on a bi-annual basis. Meetings are to be held in April of each even numbered year. Therefore, members should be appointed no later than March of each even numbered year.
JUSTIFICATION:
Appointment of the Selection Committee is consistent with adopted policy.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Financial impact of appointment of the five member Selection Committee is minimal as it will require a few hours of staff time to prepare agenda materials and advertisement costs for interested members.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not appointment Selection Committee and provide staff with alternate direction.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ring of Honor Policy.pdf
524
BANNING "RING OF HONOR"*
The purpose of the Banning "Ring of Honor" program is to honor very special citizens who, through their efforts over a significant period of time, have enhanced the community. This program will provide a lasting monument to those persons qualifying for such special honor.
It is proposed that the "Ring of Honor" would be located in the park west of City Hall. The circular structure in the park contains eleven pillars. Both sides of each pillar would be reserved for honored citizens with the placement of a bronze plaque containing a bas-relief picture of his/her bust, name and other information relating to his/her service to the community.
The "Ring of Honor" will express the appreciation of the community for the service and generosity of those individuals honored. Due to the special significance of the award and the established criteria, it will take a considerable number of years to complete the "Ring of Honor". This program will also serve to raise individual and collective pride in the community.
"Ring of Honor" Criteria
The criteria for being ~elected as a member of the "Ring of Honor" is as follows:
1. Honorees shall be those citizens who service to the community exceeds by a considerable degree that service provided by most citizens during their lifetime or tenure in the community.
Service to the community is defined as donation of time and effort in community projects, active participation in community organizations and service clubs, long time service as an elected city official, active participation in appointed positions in city government, active participation in charitable programs and activities, etc. Service should not normally require service in all the above, but must include a substantial part of described service. Additional service not listed here may be considered by the selecting committee if they regard such service as so outstanding that it would otherwise be included in the current list.-
2. Any citizen may submit a nomination on the form provided.
3. Awards may be made posthumously.
4. No current member of the City Council or the Selection Committee will be eligible.
Selection Committee
I. The Selection Committee shall consist of five (5) members and be appointed by the City Council. It shall consist of representatives from service clubs, churches, the school district and other community organizations.
2. The Selection Committee shall meet on a bi-annual basis to consider nominations and forward any nomination to the City Council. This particular committee would cease to exist after completing this task. Subsequent committees would be selected on a bi-annual basis.
Meetings shall be held in April of each even numbered year.
3. Any nomination to the City Council requires unanimous affirmation by the Selection Committee. The Council would then render a decision to accept or reject the nomination. All nominations shall be kept confidential.
4. Only one nomination will be permitted bi-annually, however there is none required if the committee decides not to forward a nomination to the City Council. Nominations may carry over to be considered by a subsequent committee.
5. Only one selection will be permitted bi-annually, however, none are required if the committee decides not to forward a selection to the City Council. Nominations may be carried over to be considered by a subsequent committee.
* Approved by City Council January 25, 2000
525
CITY OF BANNING
STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Douglas Schulze, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Nate Smith, Public Works Deputy Director
Art Vela, Director of Public Works
MEETING DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Downtown Complete Street/Revitalization Implementation - Active Transportation Plan (ATP) Grant Opportunity
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide feedback to the Public Works Department on pursuing an Active Transportation Grant (ATP) to implement portions of the adopted Downtown Complete Street and Revitalization Plan and the draft Active Transportation Plan.
BACKGROUND:
The Downtown Complete Street and Revitalization Plan (DT-CS/R) was a multi-year process that the City undertook that evaluated the Ramsey Corridor between 8th and Martin, and between Livingston and Hays. The project was funded by a grant administered by Caltrans. The final report was presented to Council with Resolution 2024-04 that adopted the plan as a set of policy goals and design guidelines.
The plan envisioned work both within the public right of way and adjacent alleys and public owned lots to enhance the space to allow for use by all users in the City and the region, including cyclists, pedestrians, vehicles, transit users, and supportive uses for businesses. A high level cost estimate provided in the report for all projects anticipated was $50 Million dollars. The report also identified a possible prioritization schedule and funding options to begin to implement the plan.
The City is also working on an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) that would address non-vehicular transportation on a community wide basis. This project was fully funded by a grant from the Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG) and is in process. We are currently working with the vendor on the final draft of the report and anticipate a presentation to Council in Spring with formal adoption anticipated in the summer. This project has included a significant amount of public outreach to assess community needs and develop a list of priority projects. One of the projects identified in the ATP complements and completes improvements from the DT-CS/R plan beyond the limits of that study.
The project the City is considering would partially implement both the DT-CS/R and ATP for work within existing right of way controlled by the City of Banning. Below is a general description of the project area and anticipated work:
Ramsey Street (4th to Martin): Implement the cross section recommended in the DT-CS/R plan, including roadway adjustments, widened sidewalks, bike lanes, enhanced landscaping, enhanced lighting
1st Street (Livingston to Hays): Implement the cross section recommended in the DT-CS/R plan, including elevated crossing at Ramsey, elevating 1st street from Ramsey to Hays to match the elevated section from Livingston to Hays, widened sidewalks, enhanced landscaping, enhanced paving, enhanced lighting, and ability to utilize the space for community events. 526
San Gorgonio Ave ATP Projects: Implement bike lanes from Westward Ave (Banning High School) northerly and around Nicolet Middle School. The project includes Class 2 bike lanes from Westward Ave to Lincoln Street (SR-243/Caltrans Right of Way), continuing Class 2 bike lanes to Bryant Street, 2-way cycle track from Bryant Street to Wilson Street, 2-way cycle track encompassing Nicolet Middle School (Wilson, Alessandro, Nicolet), creating of a one-way couple on San Gorgonio and Alessandro (From Williams to Wilson) The City has identified a funding opportunity to assist in the implementation of this project. Every two years, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) administers the Active Transportation Program.
The next funding opportunity will be Cycle 7 (the 7th iteration of the funding opportunity). The Active Transportation Program is a highly competitive program that awards money statewide and through a regional formula. While the Cycle 7 guidelines have not been published yet, Cycle 6 provides some insight into the program. There is an estimated $568 Million available in the program, with 50% being awarded at a statewide level and 40% to areas within an Metropolitan Planning Organization (Banning is within SCAG). CTC is looking for transformative projects that have the ability to increase bicycle and pedestrian uses. There is a heavy emphasis on disadvantaged communities. There are points awarded for providing a local match of funds.
City staff has attended branch workshops hosted by CTC staff that administers the program, as well as participating in virtual site visits to have one-on-one conversations about our community, the proposed projects, community needs, and to solicit feedback from CTC staff. The virtual site visits garnered enthusiasm about our projects as they include opportunities to increase non-motorized transportation modes, enhance safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, include new and emerging ideas like the Class-4 bike lanes, cycle tracks, and flexible roadways/community spaces. The projects would be transformative, benefit a disadvantaged community, and has coordination opportunities with Morongo.
The application process is highly competitive and highly detailed. CTC staff indicated that projects typically take 2 to 3 cycles to receive an award, and advised City staff to look at applications from the Coachella Valley Association of Governments for examples of good applications. CTC staff does offer debriefs and a scoring summary to agencies, and from there, applications can be enhanced. CTC will require projects to be a "PSR Equivalent" status for consideration. PSR is a Caltrans terminology for Project Study Report, or 30% plans. We do have access to CAD files from the consultants working on the DT-CS/R and ATP plan to assist in getting to a PSR-Equivalent status. While the grant program is highly competitive, it is Staff's opinion that this opportunity is worthy of applying for this cycle.
Additionally, leg work completed for the ATP application will serve as materials for other grant opportunities or SHOPP (State Highway Operation and Protection Program). Grant awards by other organizations would count as a local match, so long as they are not awarded by the CTC.
It is important to note that other actions taken by the City Council over the current and previous term will benefit this grant application. Questions in the application look for specific health concerns within the community, and that information is available as a result of work with the Blue Cities initiative. Council has also received information on a CRIA funding mechanism, which could be utilized to assist with local match requirements. Adoption of the Housing Element allows the City to be eligible to receive grant funding from the state. In previous council sessions, authorization to proceed with the DT-CS/R and ATP reports, along with the recent community surveys and outreach will benefit the application process.
JUSTIFICATION:
City Council adopted Resolution 2024-04 on January 9, 2024 that accepted the Downtown Complete Streets/Revitalization Plan as a set of policy goals and design guidelines. Council has also provided verbal discussion to seek methods to implement the plan. The ATP Grant opportunity is a potential path to fund significant portions of the project, including design, permitting, and construction.
FISCAL IMPACT:
527
City Staff has reached out to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) for grant writing assistance. A membership benefit is that WRCOG will provide funding for three (3) grant applications in a two year period. We have used two, and WRCOG has agreed to fund this as our third application. As such, they will work with their grant writer, Blais and Associates, to prepare the grant application. This is provided at no cost to the City.
It is anticipated that some technical support would be necessary to support Blais. Staff anticipates requesting a proposal from the DT-CS/R preparer, Alta Planning, to assist in preparation of graphics, renderings, and estimates based on the information that they posses.
WRCOG Grant Writing Assistance Program - APPLICATION PREPARATION = $0 Technical Grant Assistance (ALTA Planning) = less than $25,000 ALTERNATIVES:
No alternatives proposed. This item seeks Council feedback on the matter. 528
CITY OF BANNING
STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Douglas Schulze, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Doug Schulze, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 12, 2024
SUBJECT: Discussion of Policy to Prohibit Use of Personal Cell Phones on Dais During Meetings
RECOMMENDATION:
A motion directing the City Manager to prepare a policy prohibiting the use of personal cell phones on the dais during public meetings.
BACKGROUND:
Council Member Flynn requested a future agenda item to discuss the use of personal cell phones on the dais. Many city councils have debated the issue of personal digital device use on the dais and some have adopted policies ranging from complete bans on use of personal devices to voluntarily turning off devices during meetings. However, it is frequently recognized that use of electronic devices is necessary because a growing number of cities no longer use printed agenda materials. In fact, many inland empire cities have transitioned to electronic agendas only.
While receiving text messages during meetings isn’t illegal, it could create legal problems if a council member receives a message pertaining to a quasi-judicial matter during a hearing if the message is not shared. Generally, city councils have recognized, at a minimum, the value of having personal digital devices for emergency communications with family members and care givers.
JUSTIFICATION:
A City Council policy and amendment to the Manual of Procedures would be appropriate, if the City Council supports a policy prohibiting the use of personal cell phones on the dais during meetings.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff time involved with preparation of a policy and resolution is estimated to be less than 10 hours at an average hourly rate of approximately $80 for a total cost of less than $1,000.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct City Manager to prepare a policy and resolution prohibiting use of cell phones on the dais during public meetings.
2. Take no action.
529