CITY OF EL PASO DE ROBLES
"The Pass of the Oaks"
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Addendum
Tuesday, February 17, 2026, 4:30 PM
Tuesday, February 17, 2026, 6:00 PM
Centennial Park - Norris Room
600 Nickerson Drive
Paso Robles, CA 93446
Residents can livestream the meeting at www.prcity.com/youtube, and call (805)865-7276 to provide public comment via phone. The phone line will open just prior to the start of the meeting and remain open throughout the meeting to ensure the opportunity to comment on each item heard by the Council, other than brief reports and announcements by staff or the Council.
Written public comments can be submitted via email to [email protected] prior to 12:00 noon on the day of the Council meeting to be posted as an addendum to the Agenda. If submitting written comments in advance of the meeting, please note the agenda item by number or name. City Council meetings will be livestreamed during the meeting and also available to play later on YouTube by accessing the following link: www.prcity.com/youtube. Any writing or document pertaining to an open session item on this agenda which is distributed to a majority of the City Council after the posting of this agenda will be available for public inspection at the time the subject writing or document is distributed. The writing or document will be available for public review in the City Clerk’s Office, 1000 Spring Street, Paso Robles, CA, during normal business hours, and may be posted on the City’s web site at www.prcity.com/meetings.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT Any individual, who because of a disability needs special assistance to attend or participate in this meeting, may request assistance by contacting the City Clerk’s Office (805) 237- 3960. Whenever possible, requests should be made four (4) working days in advance of the meeting.
Pages
*M. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS 2 - 6
This is the time the public may address the Council on items within the Council’s purview but not scheduled on the agenda. All persons desiring to speak on an agenda item are asked to fill out Speaker Information Cards and give them to the City Clerk prior speaking. Each individual speaker will be limited to a presentation total of three (3) minutes per item. Those persons wishing to speak on any item scheduled on the agenda will be given an opportunity to do so at the time that item is being considered.
State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code sec. 54954.2).
City Council Agenda February 17, 2026
From: Linda C George
To: Melissa Martin
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Re: Please add to today"s agenda as comments
Date: Tuesday, February 17, 2026 10:02:07 AM
Attachments: image001.png
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Ms Martin
Funny you didn’t say that last time. What bothers me about you? You’re like the DMV — you find a new problem or create a new rule or roadblock.
Yes to your questions.
General public comments.
To avoid future confusion, please submit all the rules you want so we don’t have to play the back-and-forth game I disdain in your work style. It’s obvious I can expect the same shenanigans during the election-time process from you.
It was evident I was speaking of public comments, as BBK and fees are not on the agenda. I think that’s my point. I want it on the agenda. I will be submitting this at every Council meeting until it is.
Thanks.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 9:48 AM Melissa Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
Ms. George,
I’ve received your public comment. Just to clarify, are you submitting this as a general public comment to be part of the published addendum for tonight’s meeting? The noticing on the agenda does ask that you include the number or name of the agenda item that you’re submitting a comment for in the subject line to provide that clarity.
George, Linda
M - Public Comment
Once confirmed, I will make sure that the comment you’ve submitted is included in a published agenda addendum this afternoon.
Thanks,
Melissa Martin, CMC
City Clerk
City of Paso Robles
1000 Spring Street, Paso Robles, CA 93446
[email protected]
805-237-3960
www.prcity.com
From: Linda C George
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2026 8:36 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>; Council <[email protected]>; Linda C George >
Subject: Please add to today's agenda as comments
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
City Clerk,
George, Linda
M - Public Comment
Please add the following statement to the community through the official agenda for tonight's meeting. .
---
$1.6 Million for Lawyers? Let’s Talk About It.
Paso Robles has about 33,000 residents. Yet we are paying roughly $1.6 million a year to BBK for legal services.
That’s a serious amount of money.
Our City Attorney, Elizabeth Hull, is a partner at the firm BBK. She advises the Council, handles the Brown Act, and serves as the legal expert during meetings. That’s the job.
So here’s the question: If Ms. Hull is the City Attorney and the Brown Act expert, why are we bringing in another attorney to present Brown Act updates? At a recent meeting, another BBK attorney presented the Brown Act update remotely while Ms. Hull sat at the dais laughing and joking, frankly I was waiting for her to pass the popcorn. If she is fully capable of advising on meeting law, why are we paying someone else to do a presentation? Why are we being billed twice for the same subject? And this isn’t a one-time issue. We’ve seen five or six attorneys working on the same matter at the same time. We’ve seen meetings where two attorneys attend and bill separately, often covering similar ground. Every hour they are there, the meter is running.
No one is against good legal advice. We need it. Complex litigation and labor negotiations may require specialists. That makes sense.
But routine council meetings and standard agenda items should not require a team of lawyers.
George, Linda
M - Public Comment
Now look at the comparison:
• Big Bear Lake (about 5,000 residents) budgets around $32,000 a year for legal services. • Santa Ana (about 330,000 residents — ten times our size) operates under a $325,000 flat annual contract with BBK for city attorney services.
Paso Robles, at 33,000 people, is paying $1.6 million. That’s not a small gap. That’s enormous.
There are practical solutions:
• Let the City Attorney handle routine matters.
• Stagger agenda topics so only the needed attorney attends. • Bring in specialists only when truly necessary.
• Consider a flat-rate contract so costs are predictable. • Track attorney hours and compare them with other cities.
OR REPLACE MS HULL with a competent attorney
#TimeToHullLizOut2026.
This isn’t personal. It’s about stewardship of public funds. We deserve strong legal counsel.
But we also deserve smart spending..The question is simple: Does $1.6 million make sense for a city our size?
Thank you.
George, Linda
M - Public Comment
Linda "Pinky" George
Paso Robles, District 1 Community Advocate
GSMOL Legislative Contact
Due to visual issues & hand arthritis forgive the typos PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION: This message and the information transmitted within is privileged and confidential, and is intended solely for use by the addressee(s) shown above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent of the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any copying, use, distribution, dissemination or forwarding of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, by way of reply and then destroy this message and any attached files without reading the same. Thank you George, Linda
M - Public Comment