1 MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL - SPECIAL MEETING (WORKSHOP)
CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA
March 3, 2025 Council Chambers
5:00 p.m. 99 E. Ramsey Street
In Chambers Banning, CA 92220
The following information comprises the minutes for the special meeting of the Banning City Council, a joint meeting of the City Council and Banning Utility Authority, and the Banning City Council sitting in its capacity as the Banning Successor Agency Board.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Member Cynthia Barrington Mayor Sheri Flynn
Council Member Leroy Miller
Mayor Pro Tem Richard Royce
Council Member Colleen Wallace
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: John O. Pinkney, City Attorney
Robert Fisher, Acting City Manager
Vickie Sellers, City Clerk
Caroline Patton, Administrative City Clerk
1. CALL TO ORDER – 5:01 P.M.
COUNCIL MEMBER PRESENT ABSENT
Barrington, Cynthia X
Flynn, Sheri X
Miller, Leroy X
Royce, Richard X
Wallace, Colleen X
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Agenda Items Only
Mario Carlos, A Banning resident and case manager for Opportunity Village expressed concerns about a grant impacting the population he serves. He urged the City Council to oppose the resolution, noting that the workshop was cut short and that Mayor Flynn raised important questions needing answers. He stressed the importance of careful consideration before committing to a $6.9 million grant and suggested holding the local advisory committee accountable, which could allow Faith in Action to participate. He also referred the council to the grant administration guide for future modifications.
Michelle Walters, resident of Banning, provided a summary of Proposition 47. She noted that she understood that there should have been a local advisory committee formed with various local 2 entities. She stated that inmates will be released regardless and asked City Council to vote in favor of the grant.
Inge Schuler, resident of Banning expressed concern about the difference between the homeless and inmate population encouraging there to be a separation. She noted that Step on Second is in litigation and under accusation to pay back millions of dollars that have been misused. She asked City Council to reconsider the proposition.
Sue Savage, spoke on the Rialto population versus Banning’s. She spoke on an organization named SWAG and the resources offered to enhance the support of the local police department.
She summarized the goals, potential funding for SWAG and other cities such as Rialto who has seen success.
Ellis, resident of Banning expressed that she the grant was wrong for Banning and agreed with the past two speakers. She stated that the grant is for the largest prison in the County, not for the homeless population, stated it is scary, and each town should be held responsible for their own homeless population.
Eddie Estrada, Vice President of Step Up for the Inland Empire Region and spoke in favor of Proposition 47. He stated that Step Up is in good standing with the state of the federal government, serves numerous counties and has worked with the City of San Bernardino for approximately 2 years. He expressed that if there are no resources or a project there will be individuals released from the county jail system stuck, and that the project is meant to intervene before release and then upon released linked into the city where they originally come from. He stated that the benefit would be the 1 million dollars to maintain the project and to help beatify the city and without the project individual will still be released and stuck in the City of Banning. He reiterated that Step Up provides mental health services, chronic disease management, outreach program and 587 housing units. Estrada ended his comment by asking the council to not rescind the contract.
Dave Kieffer, pastor of Our Savior’s Lutheran Church, stated that he was not sure what the hurry was in making the decision and asked for non-profit organizations to be involved. He reminisced on the homeless encampment east of the courthouse and how his faith community brought food/water, spoke to an officer. He stated it’s difficult to separate the homeless and the purpose of the grant. Kieffer expressed the involvement with Opportunity Village and asked for a pause to be placed and went on the speak on getting involvement from local non-profit organizations.
John Hagen, resident of Banning, asked why if the programs are viable, there is no intervention while in custody and get them registered instead of dumping the individuals within the City of Banning. He stated that he believes the sheriff’s department should transport releasees not from Banning should be released in Riverside and not dumped in a city that happens to have a jail facility. He stated that the positive comments come from organizations that are benefiting from the grant, but the programs serve as a magnet, drawing people with known problems. He went on to say that you cannot measure the success of a program based on helping 2 or 4 people out of 900.
Mike Volse, resident of Banning, stated that the legislature of California devised this program, and he has been involved in it directly. He mentored two of his best friends through the program successfully. He said that turning down the grant would be absurd, believing that it helps those who have made mistakes, aiding the population in getting back on their feet. He stated he has seen success from these programs as the prison system does not provide the help needed, expressed support for the Salvation Army’s program, and if the grant is denied, young people who have made mistakes will be affected.
3 Bill Hobbs, resident of Banning, asked the city council to vote no on Proposition 47, stating that it would be a burden for an already short-staffed police department and would benefit outside organizations instead of residents. He expressed wanting the City of Banning to grow in a responsible direction, focusing on constituents and following examples such as the city of Rialto.
Keturah Chavez, a resident of Banning, expressed that the likely “no” vote is driven by personal vendettas rather than care for the city. She affirmed that rejecting the grant will harm the community's future, limit opportunities, and hurt the city and the residents. She asked for greater accountability and a more genuine representation of the city of Banning.
Kathleen Dale, a resident of Banning, said that the 6 million dollar grant is risky because it is based on reimbursements, and all of the expenses may not be covered as written and would only help a small fraction of people. She urged the council to either rework the grant or ensure all subcontractors, not the city, take on the financial risk.
Jack Gunderson, resident of Banning expressed the uncertainty of the grant and that it could leave the city financially responsible if the state of CA does not follow through. He questions whether Banning should focus on social services or bringing business in, suggesting the Sheriff’s department handle returning people to their town of origin, and then urged the council to vote no on the proposition.
Luke Gregory addressed the City Council and emphasized the importance of making informed decisions. He expressed appreciation for the Council’s efforts and shared his experiences of working with juveniles and highlighted the low success rates for rehab and the causes of said issues are long before incarceration. He asked Council to consider the funding and policies of the proposition and encouraged them to keep the community’s benefit.
Juanita Diaz, resident of Banning, expressed the handling of Opportunity Village and the previous Council’s complacency and the lack of questioning. She emphasized the importance of transparency, accountability, and genuine community involvement and wanting to help the homeless is not enough; the approach should be effective and well thought out. She stated that she wanted a better future for the community and continued complacency and poor decisions could make the situation worse.
Wanda Lucero, stated that not all inmates have minor offenses; she shared a personal example of someone in jail for a serious crime. She expressed that these individuals have repeated offenses and urged the council not to support the program, hoping that a vote against the proposition would avoid making a mistake for the community.
Chris Casterona, a resident of Banning, provided history on Larry D. Smith Correctional Facility and the impact it has on the community. He pointed out that, despite crime rates being low, the media can sensationalize the issues. He also highlighted the need for better resources and support for those who are affected by substance abuse and mental health issues to reduce recidivism. He asked for a more thoughtful approach to the grant and suggested involving local organizations and considering a soft handoff to the county.
Carol Albaugh, emphasized that the city can successfully make the grant work with the correct experts and nonprofits involved. She suggested changing the grant management and bringing in new partners so that there is a positive outcome and commented that she does not want the city to have a black eye by declining the grant.
3. CLOSED SESSION
John Pinkney, City Attorney read closed session items.
4 3.1 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE
DISCIPLINE/DISMISSAL/RELEASE Pursuant to
Government Code Section 54957
3.2 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING -- ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION -- SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) and/or (3) – One Potential Case
3.3 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION Pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957
Title: Interim City Attorney
4. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
John Pinkney, City Attorney provided a report on closed session item 3.1 and the Council voted to enter a separation, severance and general release agreement with City Manager and it was signed.
Motioned by Mayor Pro Tem Richard Royce
Seconded by Councilmember Leroy Miller
Motion approved unanimously by a vote of 5-0.
5. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
5.1 Consideration of Resolution 2025-31, Approving the Execution of an Agreement with the California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) for the Proposition 47 Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act Cohort 4 Grant, and Rescinding Resolution 2024-167 Robert Fisher, Acting City Manager, provided the staff report. He highlighted that the organizations named Step Up on Second and Northshore Community Church are not eligible to be a part of the grant.
Council discussion:
Councilmember Miller asked for clarification on whether the agreement can be restricted or amended. He also asked if the residents could be housed outside of Banning. He also asked if it’s a fact whether residents can stay up to ten days, and if the residential houses with rental agreements can be outside the City of Banning.
Mayor Pro Tem Richard Royce asked if the grant could be reworked based on recent changes since the initial grant award, highlighting that Step Up on Second is an active lawsuit. He emphasized not rejecting the grant but restructuring the grant.
Councilmember Barrington noted that she did not think there could be modifications made
Councilmember Colleen Wallace highlighted that she understood it to be a pilot program in the jail before inmates are released.
5 Mayor Sheri Flynn clarified that the CBOs must be in good standing and exist for at least 6 months, that they must be registered with the CA Secretary of State's office and the Attorney General's office. She highlighted that Northshore Community did not exist, and the EIN was only good through 2011. She noted that the partnering organizations should have a proven relationship and track record with the organization. Flynn clarified that the two organizations are not eligible to be part of the grant, asking for clarification on whether the City of Banning would be blackballed for future grant opportunities.
Robert Fisher expressed that the two organizations are not eligible, and he does not have an indication that the State would blackball the City.
Councilmember Wallace asked the City Attorney whether he had researched whether the Northshore Community Church was legitimate.
John Pinkney, City Attorney, provided a brief overview of the lawsuit involving one of the parties (Step Up on Second) involved in the grant, highlighting that he is not involved with that litigation, but had some concern that they were being sued by the State of California.
Councilmember Miller highlighted that an amendment can be provided in writing and not verbally, mentioning that there are some viable options for exchanging cooperating organizations.
Mayor Flynn expressed that the County of Riverside Health Department had received and grant and she had spoken to someone who had contacted someone within the city to combine efforts so that Banning could use County services, but the County was denied.
She highlighted that the Prop 57 grant is null and void. Flynn read from a grant management and administration policy from 2015, highlighting that grants should be in the best interest of the city; focusing that she did not think Prop 47 is in the best interest of all Banning residents.
Councilmember Wallace asked for the correct information for the council to review again with valid information. She expressed that there were different sources and inconsistencies with the information provided.
Councilmember Miller spoke and asked for the City Attorney to review the entire application and inquire whether the city could substitute the elements of the application, highlighting the housing of inmates outside of the City of Banning.
Mayor Pro Tem Royce agreed with Miller and reiterated that if it comes to being rescinded, he does not believe the State of CA will blackball the city.
Mayor Flynn reiterated that the grant cannot be reworked.
Mayor Pro Tem Royce questioned whether the execution of the grant was when it was agreed upon or when funds were disbursed.
Motion was made by Mayor Sheri Flynn and seconded by Councilmember Barrington to amend Resolution 2025 California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) for the Proposition 47 Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act Cohort 4 Grant, and Rescinding Resolution 2024-167
6 Motion approved by a vote of 3-2.
6. ADJOURNMENT – 7:25 P.M.
A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mayor Pro Tem Richard Royce and seconded by Councilmember Leroy Miller.
Motion carried unanimously 5-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 7:25 P.M.
Prepared by: Amanda Morgan, Program Coordinator
Reviewed and submitted by: Sandra Calderon, Acting Administrative City Clerk.
These minutes have been prepared as Summary Minutes in accordance with City Council Resolution 2025-22 and Government Code Sections 36814, 40801, and 54953(c)(2).
The entire discussion of this meeting may be viewed here:
https://banningca.granicus.com/player/clip/231?view_id=1&redirect=true