CITY OF PLEASANTON
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 4, 2022
This meeting was conducted in accordance with Governor Newsom' s Executive Order N- 29- 20 and AB 361 COVID- 19 pandemic protocols.
REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Brown called the teleconferenced regular meeting of the City Council from various remote locations to order at the hour of 7:00 p.m. Councilmember Arkin led the Pledge of Allegiance and provided opening remarks.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown
Absent: None
AGENDA AMENDMENTS
Interim City Manager Brian Dolan reported Item 7 was a supplemental addition to the original Agenda.
Councilmember Balch continued Item 6 to a future City Council meeting.
Mayor Brown advised public speakers on Item 6 wishing to speak tonight to make their comments during Item 4.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Narum moved to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Arkin.
Community Development
1. Actions of the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission
2. Adopted and waived second reading of Ordinance No. 2230 to amend and extend, by one year, the Stoneridge Shopping Center Development Agreement governing an approximately 362,790 square foot expansion
Finance
3. Approved and authorized City Manager to execute a five-year agreement with Accounting Principals, Inc., DBA ADO Professional Solutions, Inc. for up to $ 300, 000 for temporary accounting staffing services
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/Arkin to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
4. Public Comment regarding items not listed on the agenda John Heath, proponent of the Our Neighborhood Voices initiative, stated the initiative would give cities and counties the right to override conflicting statements in planning and zoning laws. He noted the initiative is an attempt to have the State government see its municipalities as collective partners. He encouraged residents to visit their website for additional information.
Becky Dennis reported she will wait until the next meeting to discuss the Our Neighborhood Voices initiative.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS
Councilmember Arkin presented a tribute to the life and legacy of 50-year Pleasanton resident John Madden who passed away on December 28, 2021. The commendation recognized Mr. Madden' s career, being a good friend and neighbor to the Pleasanton community, and his family's contributions to the Tri- Valley through investments in the arts and properties such as the Rose Hotel.
5. Public Hearing — Receive input from the community regarding boundaries and composition of districts to be established for City Councilmember district- based elections pursuant to Elections Code section 10010
City Attorney Dan Sodergren reported in September 2021, the City Council adopted a Letter of Intent to transition from at-large to district-based elections in conformance with the California Voting Rights Act CVRA) with the office of Mayor remaining an at-large election. He advised the City is required to hold meetings to gather community input before the maps are drawn and tonight represents the first of the two hearings.
Demographer Michael Wagaman, Principal of Wagaman Strategies, reported the first couple of hearings are intended to not talk about what makes for the good representation on a broad level. In addition to the two public hearings to receive input on composition for the maps, there will be two public hearings after maps are drafted. He explained the tight timeline is determined by State law.
Mr. Wagaman presented the City' s demographics based upon the 2020 United States census, including breakdowns by race and those of voting age. He reported the six criteria governing the districting process in order of priority, noting there can be a give- and- take if one conflicts with another.
Mr. Wagaman reported the first criterion is having "substantially" equal populations between the districts with the difference between the largest and smallest districts being within 10%.
Thesecondcriterionis adheringto federallawfocusedmainlyon raceandethnicity. He reportedrace must not be the predominant factor but it can be considered. He reported Pleasanton has a substantial AsianandPacificIslander (API) populationbut notedit is veryevenlydistributedthroughoutthe City and there are very few areas with an API majority. He advised it is unlikely the federal Voting Rights Act will apply to Pleasanton but it will continue to be monitored.
The third criterion is contiguity which states all parts of a district should be connected. He reported the fourthcriterionis neighborhoodsandcommunities. Henotedthis is wherethe publicplaysa very important role so they do not draw boundaries dividing communities of interest. He advised a community of interest is defined as an area with a common social or economic interest that should be togetherin a singledistrictfor fairandeffectiverepresentation. communitiescanoverlapor peoplemay have different definitions of where the community extends.
City Council Minutes Page 2 of 10 January 4, 2022
The fifth criterion is having understandable boundaries easily identifiable to residents such as a river or a certain City street. He reported the sixth criterion is compactness. He explained State law does not favor abstract shapes bypassing one area of the population for a more distant one. He noted compactness is a lower- rated criterion because there may be reasons to have oddly- shaped districts based upon higher- ranked criteria.
Mr. Wagaman advised the goals are to divide Pleasanton into districts of roughly equal size, focus on traditional criteria of contiguous districts with understandable boundaries, ensure compliance with the CVRA and federal Voting Rights Act, and not use race as the predominant factor.
Mr. Wagaman reported the primary data source is the 2020 census with the secondary data source being the American Community Survey (ACS) which is a monthly sample averaged over five years. He stated Pleasanton has 907 census blocks averaging 88 people, 55 census block groups averaging 1,453 people, and 21 census tracts, averaging 3,804 people. He noted the districting process cannot break up a census block. He reported, in addition to a version with all 907 census blocks, the public map designing website also splits the City into 53 slices he created by combining multiple census blocks into average populations of 1, 507 with understandable boundaries.
Tom Willis, attorney with Olson Remcho LLP, advised many other area cities have converted to districts through the Safe Harbor provision in the CVRA as Pleasanton has.
In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Willis clarified the CVRA virtually mandates conversion from at-large elections to district elections due to a very low burden of proof of discrimination by plaintiffs.
Mayor Brown opened the public hearing.
Sandy reported she lives in the northwest part of the City and wondered what would happen if no one in her district wanted to run for City Council.
Kaavya Reddy requested the process be data-driven with public input. She inquired if there would be a volunteer public commission. She noted the opportunities to comment at upcoming City Council meetings.
In response to Mayor Brown, City Attorney Sodergren confirmed everything throughout the process, including the maps submitted by residents, will be publicly available on the City's website. He advised public outreach is planned.
Kathleen Jones expressed concerns over the criteria to divide Pleasanton into four districts.
In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Wagaman clarified having four districts is based upon the size of the CityCouncil. Headvisedthe criteriafor howto drawthe districtsarespelledout in the Statelawand are not something decided by the City Council.
Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Testa reported her biggest concern is confusion over an unnecessary process for the City. Shenotedthe Councilmembersall agreeon notwantingdistricts. Sheexplainedthe City hadno choice due to the litigation against almost every city in the State and noted the City Council will follow through with the process as prescribed by law.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Mr. Wagaman clarified for purposes of determining if the districts are of equal size they are required to use the 2020 census as a marker. He advised they can considerareastheyknowwillgrowfasterthanothersandleavethis districtslightlysmallerso longas it City Council Minutes Page 3 of 10 January 4. 2022
is within the acceptable deviations. He clarified if the City annexes unincorporated land after the boundaries are set there will be a process by State law to assign the new area to a district.
Councilmember Narum commented that she does not like this and expressed hopes that residents will elect candidates who look at the good of the entire City and not just their district. She advised the City has no choice and is unwilling to risk millions of dollars to fight it in court when they do not stand a chance of winning. She encouraged residents to offer opinions on how to best draw the districts.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Mr. Wagaman clarified there are ways race and ethnicity may correspond to other criteria, such as if an area of a city has disparate socioeconomic issues. The community would be put together not because of its race or ethnicity but because of factors such as common language barriers or education. He confirmed common assets like schools are a way to define a community of interest. It is not a uniform rule because some schools have open enrollment but he confirmed this is an example of the kind of direction the City Council could give him to consider.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Mr. Wagaman clarified this process has to rely on the 2020 census and the current City boundaries. He added you can consider areas where faster growth is anticipated. He advised the process for any future annexes will include adjusting the district boundaries accordingly.
Councilmember Arkin encouraged the public to offer input.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Mr. Wagaman confirmed the public does not have to draw all four districts on a map but can submit either just a single district's map or help clarify a community of interests' boundaries. He advised the public will also be able to offer opinions of the proposed maps without having to draw their own first. He clarified the intent is to release proposed maps as a batch and includes his map proposals in addition to those from residents.
Councilmember Balch expressed hope that future district- elected Councilmembers continue to achieve representation for the City as a whole. He noted it is good to see how the City plans to do its districting process after following recent redistricting processes for County Supervisors and the United States House of Representatives.
In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Willis clarified the State's Fair Maps Act does not prohibit a City from considering incumbency in drawing a map, but it comes after many other prioritized criteria.
In responseto MayorBrown, Mr. Wagamanclarifiedall residentswill be representedby one Councilmember and the Mayor regardless of the district' s socio- economic conditions. He advised identifying communities of interest is part of the needed direction, along with a priority of communities of interest because they will not be able to do everything they want.
In responseto MayorBrown, Mr. Wagamanadvisedthereis no consensuson the issueof dividing downtown among jurisdictions he has worked with and is something to consider before the next meeting.
MayorBrownexplainedCouncilmembersnowneedto beexpertsin the entireCityto be electedand this will be a challenge in the future as it relates to something like an issue relating to a specific school or park. She explained there are no other viable choices due to the lack of success through litigation.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Mr. Willis confirmed conflict of interest rules do not change with district representation. He acknowledged it can be a tough situation if a recusal means a district does not have its elected representative able to hear an item.
City Council Minutes Page 4 of 10 January 4, 2022
6. Continued — Discussion regarding Proposed Ballot Measure 21- 0016 Amendment 1 which Provides that Local Land Use and Zoning Laws Override Conflicting State Laws, and Consider Taking a Position
7. Clarification of elements of a long- term parklet program Mayor Brown reported there was a discussion about the parklet program at the last City Council meeting and many of them are presently being dismantled ahead of the January 7 deadline.
Associate Planner Megan Campbell requested additional clarification on the City Council' s direction regarding the width of parklets, wheel stop locations, and the timing.
Associate Planner Campbell reported staff understood that the City Council wished to maximize the parklet space while accounting for traffic safety. Traffic engineering staff further studied the issue and has determined an eight- foot parklet would be acceptable while maintaining the 12-foot minimum travel lane width on Main Street. Anything wider than eight feet makes Main Street travel difficult for vehicles to enter and exit street parking spaces.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed staff measured the outer edge of the street parking spaces and they are eight feet from the curb.
Associate Planner Campbell clarified a minimum of three feet is required from wheel stops to a parklet but noted staff also heard concerns over these shortening the potential length of parklets if located within a parklet' s parking space. Staff suggested wheel stops can be located in adjacent parking or buffer spaces allowing parklets to be built out to the boundaries of their parking spaces without impacting traffic or parklet- adjacent parking.
Associate Planner Campbell reported staff understood that City Council requested a design review path, and parklet installation could begin on March 1. She provided a proposed timeline to meet this date and reported the City' s pre- approved design should be ready on April 1 and recommends approval of the timeline.
In response to Mayor Brown, Councilmember Balch clarified the March 1 date is for parklets going through a design review process so they could be in place ahead of when the City' s pre- approved design is ready. Associate Planner Campbell advised staff would stick to the design guidelines given to the architect for the parklets going through design review. Interim City Manager Dolan expressed his opinion there is enough specificity in the guidelines to allow for individual design review. He advised it is more work for the applicant but allows the City to accommodate those eager to have their parklet before the April 1 pre- approved design release.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed the timeline allows a sufficient window for needed tree pruning and street maintenance ahead of the return of parklets.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed staff considered making the parklet size uniform regardless of whether it was in one of downtown' s 18 or 24-foot parking spaces. She reported staff heard City Council's direction as maximizing the potential parklet space by allowingall 24 feetto befilled inthosespotsbutaddedtheycanrestrictthe parkletto 18feet evenin a 24- foot space.
Councilmember Balch noted if the parklets are uniform in length at 18 feet, in a 24-foot parking space the wheel stops do not have to be in adjacent parking spaces.
City Council Minutes Page 5 of 10 January 4. 2022
Mayor Brown acknowledged City Council did not give staff direction on how to handle this issue, noting how it could impact adjacent parklets differently than parklets with the need for a wheel stop at both ends.
Associate Planner Campbell advised staff wanted to bring this complication to the City Council' s attention. She reported either option to account for the varying length of parking spaces would work from the staff' s perspective. She advised using 18 feet across the board could slightly simplify the process.
Councilmember Balch suggested a 21- foot maximum so when there is a 24- foot spot or two 24- foot spots together, the wheel stop can be on the dividing line between spaces and not into the adjacent spot.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Traffic Engineer Mike Tassano clarified there is no set standard for when to have an 18-foot space as opposed to a 24-foot space. He advised typically 18-foot spaces are at the end of a block and noted sometimes there will be two of them depending on the distance to the street corner.
Traffic Engineer Tassano responded to Councilmember Balch's earlier inquiry by stating the 21-foot option would work where 24-foot spaces are adjacent. He explained the City Council can decide where the length limit should be set, but noted putting the wheel stops into adjacent spaces is something staff can work with.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Traffic Engineer Tassano reported there are only one or two locations where an eight-foot parklet drops the road to only 12 feet of vehicular driving space, bringing motorists close to either the middle line or the parklet.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, City Attorney Sodergren clarified as a part of the permitting process for a parklet the City would require an indemnity provision and insurance from the business owner.
Councilmember Testa noted her only feedback on wheel stops is to allow the businesses to maximize their parklet size. She advised her recollection from the last meeting staff recommended extending the current parklet removal deadline as opposed to moving up the pre- approved design deadline and this was not done. She expressed disappointment this did not happen along with an ability to work individually with restaurants. She reported residents prefer to sit outside during this spike in COVID-19 infections and the City is requiring parklets to be removed at a time outdoor dining is needed. She advised her recollection for case-by-case grandfathering of existing parklets being discussed at the last meeting but not tonight.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed moving forward street maintenance will be able to be performed with the new parklets in place.
In responseto CouncilmemberTesta, InterimCityManagerDolanclarifiedstaffheardthe City Council's directionwasfor all parkletsto be removedby January7. Heclarifiedtheflexibilityon a case- by-case basis exists with a design review. He reported it has been a long time since tree and street maintenancehasbeenperformed, requiringthoroughcleaning. Headvisedstaffhasverylittle confidence any existing parklets will meet the new guidelines, requiring significant reconstruction, so accommodating just a couple of them while performing the cleaning is not fair.
CouncilmemberTestaadvisedit is notaboutaccommodatingrestaurants, but ratheraccommodating residentsin a timeof the pandemic. Shelamentednot havingthis discussionearliernotingmany parklets have already been removed and the timeline decision unfortunate.
City Council Minutes Page 6 of 10 January 4. 2022
Mayor Brown noted she has not opened the public hearing and the City Council has made no decisions on the timeline.
Councilmember Narum noted that as it relates to the differing lengths of parking spaces, she hates designing on the fly from the dais.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Associate Planner Campbell clarified the 18 and 24- foot spaces are spread throughout Main Street and the 18- foot spaces are not exclusively on corners. She advised City Council can direct staff as it sees fit. She noted if a parklet gets bigger than two parking spaces they encounter additional fire code issues so staff's advice is to go no larger than two parking spaces.
She confirmed there is a guideline the parklet can only be in front of its business unless receiving permission from its neighbor.
In response to Councilmember Narum, Interim City Manager Dolan advised the City would do its best to address the matter should Alameda County implement pandemic- related dining restrictions in the near term.
Interim City Manager Dolan clarified what staff is showing the City Council now about the parking space size issue is, from his perspective, what was suggested last time. He advised he is unsure where there is controversy as they are allowing the wheel stops to go into the parking spaces and the parklet spaces to be maximized.
In response to Councilmember Balch, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed staff is working on both an 18- foot and a 24- foot pre- approved design. Interim City Manager Dolan noted the length of the platform will not have as big of an effect on the actual design.
In response to Mayor Brown, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed staff specifically measured the two unnamed parklets in question and they will not meet the future size specifications, thus requiring modifications. She advised one of them also violates the fire code for being over 400 square feet. She reported the City has not reviewed any engineering for these existing parklets to assess matters like their maximum loads. She advised the City has not inspected the substructure to ensure proper drainage is happening, noting staff did see significant water pooling. She advised staff cannot assess all levels of compliance or ease of potential modifications without the parklet' s engineering plans.
In response to Mayor Brown, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed the City desires to have the new parklets include removable modular pieces allowing for street maintenance beneath them without full removal. She expressed hopes the City could know about a street repaving with enough notice to build it into the parklet agreements so there are no surprises.
Mayor Brown opened the public hearing.
Linda Harmeson reported she has been recovering from injuries and uses an upright walker. She reported having access issues due to bicycles parked on sidewalks and chairs not being properly replaced at parklets. She advised she has had particular issues with access near Baci Bistro due to havingtreesnearthe parklet. Shenotedmanyof the parkletsrequireherto stepdownintothemand inhibit her from entering.
In response to Mayor Brown, Associate Planner Campbell confirmed the new parklet guidelines include havingthe basebeflushwiththecurbto accommodateAmericanswith DisabilitiesAct (ADA) access requirements.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Community Development Director Ellen Clark confirmed the new parklets will be more ADA accessible because they will be flush with the curb and have slope restrictions. Sidewalk dining is continuously monitored and code enforced for ADA access to sidewalks.
City Council Minutes Page 7 of 10 January 4. 2022
She reported removing pedestrian pinch points was a concern raised when creating the Downtown Specific Plan ( DSP) and one of the resulting long- term concepts was building finger planters into parking spaces to help relocate trees from sidewalks. The parklets may delay implementation and added tree relocation is a significant capital investment for the City Council, but this concept remains in the DSP.
Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.
In response to Mayor Brown, Associate Planner Campbell advised staff is requesting City Council to confirm a maximum width of eight feet, confirm wheel stops can be placed in adjacent parking spaces allowing a parklet to occupy an entire space, and confirm the timeline.
Mayor Brown moved to confirm a maximum of eight feet in width for parklets. Councilmember Balch seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Brown/ Balch to approve the 8-foot width as recommended and as noted.
Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
Councilmember Balch moved to approve the recommended placement of wheel stops to maximize the parklet size while giving the Director of Community Development discretionary authority to shrink 24- foot parklets to 18 feet if deemed prudent depending on the site. Councilmember Narum seconded the motion.
In response to Mayor Brown, Councilmember Balch clarified he is supportive of staff' s clarification the adjacent parking space can have the wheel stop so the parklet can use the entire length of the parking space. He advised if a parklet in a 24-foot space is deemed a challenge to traffic or safety, the Director of Community Development would have the authority to shorten its length.
In response to Mayor Brown, Associate Planner Campbell clarified the wheel stops would be three feet away from the edge of the parking space where there is a gap. She advised the focus is to allow a car a buffer to park without hitting the parklet.
MOTION: It was m/s by Balch/Narum to approve the placement of the wheel stop as recommended and as noted, adding discretionary authority for the Director of Community Development to reduce the lengthof a 24-foot parkletto 18feet if deemedprudentfor trafficor safety. Motionpassedby the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
In responseto CouncilmemberNarum, AssociatePlannerCampbellconfirmedthe City's pre-approved design would be free of cost with the application fee.
In response to Councilmember Testa, Associate Planner Campbell clarified the addition of a design review process altered staff' s original recommendation about extending the January 7 deadline. With a design review option the gap is now sufficient for the needed street maintenance and recommended approving the timeline as presented.
City Council Minutes Page 8 of 10 January 4. 2022
Councilmember Arkin reported the City needs time for maintenance. She advised some businesses have already removed their parklets so if they change the January 7 deadline now it is not fair to those who have removed their parklets.
Councilmember Testa stated the City is making a mistake by shutting down outdoor dining at this time.
Councilmember Balch noted they already extended the temporary pop- ups well past the original plan' s ending date. He advised Pleasanton deserves high- quality parklets and agreed they are in a middle ground situation due to many pop- ups already being removed, but the City has to clean the streets. He explained it is a health and safety issue due to potential infestations. He noted this is the right time on a calendar to redo the parklets due to the colder season.
Councilmember Narum reported the City Council set a deadline and almost every pop- up is already gone accordingly so it would be unfair to change it now. She noted how much better Main Street looks without some of the more poorly- constructed pop- ups, but it is also obvious the City needs to clean the street. She advised the City needs to proceed forward with maintenance and have the parklets come back in a few months with a good design to fit the City. She supported sticking to the plan and removing the parklets on January 7.
Councilmember Testa noted the cleaning is ambiguous because they will be able to clean without full removal in the future. She agreed the City deserves a higher quality of pop- ups. She advised it is ridiculous to think something could be up-and- running again in two weeks if the County has another shutdown. She lamented the conversation was not clearer at the last meeting relative to her understanding there would be more case- by-case flexibility. She acknowledged she stands alone but advised she cannot support the timing.
Mayor Brown acknowledged the dais agreed the temporary pop- ups were unsightly but noted the pop- ups had been extended several times despite comments about the need to clean the streets. She advised the City is ready to turn the corner and make the parklets look like they should in Pleasanton.
She agreed downtown looks better now without them and also there is a renewed visibility for the retail establishments on Main Street hidden from view by some of the larger temporary parklets. She supported moving forward with the proposed calendar and noted individual businesses could go through a design review process if they do not wish to wait.
Councilmember Arkin noted that postponing the removal date would also postpone the needed maintenance and possibly the release date for the City' s pre- approved designs, along with the March 1 date for design- reviewed parklets to be reinstalled. She advised she would rather have the new parklets ready for the start of spring when the outdoor dining weather is better.
Mayor Brown moved to approve the staff' s proposed timeline. Councilmember Balch seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Brown/ Balch to approve the timing of the parklet program as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Mayor Brown Noes: Councilmember Testa
Absent: None
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
Mayor Brown advised the City flew its flags at half- staff in recognition of Mr. Maddens recent passing.
She requested having a banner under the Pleasanton arch in tribute to Mr. Madden for the upcoming week. The dais unanimously expressed their support.
City Council Minutes Page 9 of 10 January 4. 2022
Mayor Brown reported Three Valleys is looking for$ 50,000 to help fund their community foundation.
She asked the City Council for support if Three Valleys applied for the funds through the grant process.
City Attorney Sodergren confirmed this would have to come back to the City Council on a regular meeting agenda.
Councilmember Narum reported she raised this idea before and continues to support the concept.
Mayor Brown clarified she proposes having Three Valleys go through the grant process and Human Services Commission instead of coming directly to the City Council for funding. She confirmed this is a one- time request and not in perpetuity.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Mayor Brown confirmed the Three Valleys request does not fit under the existing Human Services Commission grant opportunities. She clarified this application would go through the same process as other grants. Interim City Manager Dolan clarified Three Valleys is eligible for a grant but the type of organization and services provided make it very unlikely to receive funding based on the City' s current criteria.
In response to Councilmember Arkin, Mayor Brown confirmed having additional criteria within the same grant process is her goal.
Councilmember Testa advised this sounds like jumping to the head of the line and noted there are City grant dollars without the same restrictive criteria.
Councilmember Balch advised that he has also tried to bring this forward in the past and expressed support for an agenda item for staff to present multiple options for discussion.
Councilmember Narum advised she would support adding this to the agenda as long as there are a few options beyond the grant process.
Councilmember Balch noted the City Council recently funded Goodness Village on the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Arkin explained what should be on the agenda is the criteria for the grant process and not any specific organizations. Councilmember Arkin clarified one point of the discussion can be organizations similar to Three Valleys but the agenda item should be conceptual and not organization- specific.
Councilmember Narum, Arkin, and Testa expressed support for a discussion.
COUNCIL REPORTS — None.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Brown requested a moment of silence in honor of Mr. Madden and his family.
Councilmember Arkin adjourned the regular meeting at 9: 45 p. m., with a tribute to men and women serving in the military, honoring the memories of those who have died in defense of our country.
J c lyn Kw g
Ci Clerk
City Council Minutes Page 10 of 10 January 4, 2022