Cities Index.
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS - AFTERNOON

Napa City Council
June 3, 2025

Document
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS - AFTERNOON
Meeting
June 3, 2025
Body
Napa City Council
Original file
2.5 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on napacity.legistar.com. That file is the official record.

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
Office of the City Clerk

City Council of the City of Napa
Regular Meeting
June 3rd, 2025

FOR THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPA

AFTERNOON SESSION

SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING

3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

3.A Proclamation for Pride Month 2025
• Email received from Jim McNamara on June 1, 2025.
• Email received from Garrett Brown on June 2, 2025.

4. PUBLIC COMMENT
• Email received from Paul Luckcuck on June 3, 2025.

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS

8.A. City of Napa FY 25/26 and FY 26/27 Proposed Budget • Memo from Staff received June 2, 2025
• Presentation from Staff
From: James McNamara
To: Clerk
Subject: 6/3 Council Meeting Agenda Item 3.A.

Date: Sunday, June 1, 2025 7:50:18 PM
[EXTERNAL]
Just for the record, I'd like you all to know that there is at least 1 resident of your city that feels very strongly that a flag that does not represent the values of "all" the citizens of Napa, should never be flown alongside "our" flag of the United States of America.

Jim McNamara
Napa, CA

From: Garrett M. Brown
To: Scott Sedgley; Christopher DeNatale; Beth Painter; Mary Luros; Bernie Narvaez; Clerk Subject: RE: Proclamation of "pride" month - I oppose and urge you to reject.

Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 6:57:04 PM
[EXTERNAL]
Mayor Sedgley and Council Members. I'm writing to respectfully oppose the Pride Month proclamation on the agenda tomorrow, not out of any animosity toward gay individuals, but because of fundamental concerns about the proper role of local government. I understand this proclamation may be considered before the public comment period, so I wanted to share my concerns in writing beforehand.

First, let's be clear about priorities. Our veterans, who sacrificed everything for our freedoms, get one day of recognition. Memorial Day honors those who died for our country – one day.

Yet we're dedicating an entire month of attention to celebrating adult relationships that are already legally protected and widely accepted.

This isn't about discrimination or rights. Gay marriage is legal. Anti-discrimination laws exist.

The battle for basic legal equality has been won. What we're discussing now is whether city government should actively promote and celebrate private lifestyle choices with taxpayer resources.

I believe government should protect all citizens equally under the law, period. But promoting, celebrating, or virtue-signaling about any group's personal relationships exceeds the proper scope of municipal government. Whether it's gay pride, straight pride, or any other adult lifestyle celebration – that's the role of private organizations and businesses, not city hall.

If this proclamation moves forward and city property displays any pride flag alongside our American flag, that crosses a serious line. The American flag represents all citizens equally.

Flying any group's flag next to it suggests government favoritism and sends the wrong message about equal treatment.

The proclamation claims this creates "inclusive environments," but true inclusion means government treats everyone the same – not picking favorites to celebrate. Real inclusion is equal protection for all citizens under law, not special months of recognition celebrating adult sexual behaviors. The government has no business chastising or celebrating sexual orientation.

Our city faces real challenges: infrastructure, public safety, economic development. These deserve our full attention and resources. Spending time and taxpayer money on symbolic gestures that divide rather than unite our community is poor governance.

I urge you to focus on core municipal functions that serve all residents equally. Reject this proclamation and keep government in its proper lane – protecting rights, not promoting lifestyles.

Unity, not diversity, is our greatest strength as Americans.

Thank you.

Garrett M. Brown

City of Napa Resident.

SUPPLEMENTAL WRITTEN COMMENTS

NAPA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, June 3, 2025
Issue: No USPS Delivery to Residents in Riversound (formerly Napa Pipe)

It has been 6 months since the first families moved into the new houses in the Riversound community built on the former Napa Pipe site. However, the United States Post Office (USPS) does not yet deliver mail to any of the residences in the neighborhood.

This is a hardship for the community residents as we are required to drive to the main Post Office in North Napa to collect our mail several times a week. This is also a hardship on the Post Office staff and other customers who have to deal with multiple individuals queueing to collect “undeliverable” mail and packages.

The Post Office staff tell us they cannot deliver mail because the builder has not yet installed the required cluster mailboxes.

Representatives of the builder, Brookfield Residential, have told us there is an agreement that mail delivery will not commence until the neighborhood is 50% occupied.

The builder has not provided any documentation explaining this lack of USPS service.

Specifically, it was not disclosed during the sale process nor included in any of the closing documents.

This issue was brought up to the Riversound Home Owner Association Board during their initial community meeting on Tuesday, March 11, 2025. The Board is currently entirely made up of individuals appointed by the builders. They stated they were unaware of this issue and would look into it, but they have not provided any status update.

We are aware the USPS is a federal jurisdiction, however the building permits for the master community and individual neighborhoods are issued by the City of Napa.

We therefore request the City Council to disclose all agreements and plans between the builders of Riversound and the city regarding delivery of mail. More specifically, if such an agreement exists, what are the actual constraints? For example, if the builder delays completing 50% due to exigent circumstances can they forestall mail delivery indefinitely? Respectfully submitted by Paul and Julie Luckcuck
, Napa, CA 94558-6335

City Hall: 955 School Street, Napa CA 94559  Mailing Address: P.O. Box 660, Napa CA 94559  (707) 257-9500  www.cityofnapa.org

MEMO

TO: Mayor Sedgley and Members of City Council
FROM: Steve Potter, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Seth Anderson, Budget Officer
DATE: June 3, 2025
SUBJECT: Item 8.A. City of Napa FY 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget Public Hearing

Staff is submitting a supplemental memo and attachment for Item 8.A. City of Napa FY 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget Public Hearing on the June 3, 2025 City Council meeting agenda.

The Agenda Report attached to the item states the proposed budget for all City funds at $392.5 million in Fiscal Year 2025/26 and $398.8 million in Fiscal Year 2026/27. These stated totals are the all funds revenues budget and should be replace with the all funds expenditures total. The first sentence of the third paragraph within the Discussion section should read as follows, “The Proposed Budget for all City funds totals $403.6 million in Fiscal Year 2025/26 and $396.1 million in FY 2026/27.” This revision will correct the statement and brings it back in line with the past practice of stating budget in terms of total expenditures.

A corrected version of the Agenda Report – 183-2025 8.A. City of Napa FY 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget Hearing is attached to this memo and has been provided for reference as an attachment to the item for Council’s approval.

ATTACHMENT:

Agenda Report - City of Napa FY 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget 1 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council

From: Steve Potter, City Manager

Prepared By:

Seth Anderson, Budget Officer

TITLE:

City of Napa FY 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget Public Hearing

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Provide direction to staff to finalize the proposed FY 2025/26 and FY 2026 /27 Budgets and present that document for final review and approval at the regularly scheduled meeting on June 17, 2025.

DIS
CUSSION:

On April 28, 2025, the Council received an overview of the FY 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 General Fund, Solid Waste and Recycling Fund, and Water Fund Proposed Budgets, along with proposed budget packages. Additionally, the Council was provided an overview of the proposed list of Capital Improvement Program projects . The full proposed budget is now presented for City Council consideration and public input.

The Proposed City of Napa Budget for Fiscal Years 2025 /26 and 2026/27 provides the City of Napa’s financial plan for City activities and programs for the next two years beginning July 1, 2025. The budget identifies the City’s organizational structure, includes program descriptions, provides an overview of the City’s financial condition and summarizes budget priorities and issues.

The Proposed Budget for all City funds totals $ 403.6 million in Fiscal Year 2025/26 and $396.1 million in FY 2026/27. The goal of this budget is to balance the need to be responsive in providing services to residents, businesses and visitors in our community with the goal to maximize our available resources. The City Council focus areas discussed in the January 2025 public workshop were a key consideration during development of these two annual budgets. The Proposed Budget reflects the following City Council focus areas:
• Climate Action
• Roads & Traffic Safety
• Economic Resilience
• Parks & Community Spaces
• Community Engagement
• Housing

With the inclusion of Measure G, the proposed General Fund operating budget totals $1 63.2 million in Fiscal Year 202 5/26 and represents a 12.9% increase in spending compared to the Fiscal Year 2024/25 budget. The FY 2026/27 budget totals $168.2 million, an increase of 3.1 % from FY 2025/26. Sales Tax sees the most significant growth, more than doubling with two full years of revenue generation from Measure G. Property Tax is projected to grow at 4% annually.

Transient Occupancy Tax growth has slowed after the FY 2022/23 high with 1% growth in FY 2025/26 and 2% growth in FY 2026/27 projected. In order to balance the budget and to make capacity for the proposed budget packages that will continue and enhance our core services, $4.3 million of Excess ERAF has been budgeted in the General Fund to increase revenue in each 2 fiscal year. Typically, this revenue source is budgeted in the Non- Recurring General Fund to be used for one- time projects. With these adjustments, t he General Fund operating budget is balanced with sufficient revenue available to fund budgeted expenditures.

In addition to the General Fund, the Proposed Budget includes a number of other funds including Special Revenue Funds, Capital Project Funds, Proprietary Enterprise Funds and Internal Service Funds. The budget document also includes information on the Housing Authority of the City of Napa.

The Proposed Budget provides funding for 524 full-time positions and 6 limited-term positions in Fiscal Year 2025/2 6, and 525 full-time positions and 5 limited-term positions in Fiscal Year 2026/27. A detailed listing of current authorized staffing is provided in Appendix A in the Proposed Budget document, and includes the additions/deletions and new positions requested in the budget packages as listed in Appendix D.

The Capital Improvement Program budget includes additional funding for new and active projects totaling $41.1 million in FY 2025/26 and $31.6 million in FY 2026/27.

The Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year s 2025/26 and 2026/27 budgets contributions to maintain General Fund and CIP reserves in accordance with City Council policies.

FINANCIAL IMPACTS:

None by this action. The purpose of the Public Hearing is to allow an opportunity for the public to provide input on the proposed FY 2025 /26 and FY 2026/27 budgets and for the City Council to offer any changes prior to the presentation of the Budget for final approval at the next City Council meeting.

CEQA:

The City Manager has determined that the Recommended Action described in this Agenda Report is not subject to CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c).

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

ATCH 1 - Proposed Operating & Capital Budget for Fiscal Years 2025/26 and 2026/27

Hyperlink - Proposed Operating & Capital Budget for Fiscal years FY 2025/26 and FY2026/27

NOTIFICATION:

Publication of Legal Ad in the Napa Valley Register on Thursday May 22nd, 2025.

← All documents from this meeting