Minutes — Sebastopol City Council, September 17, 2024

City Council
Mayor Diana Gardner Rich
Vice Mayor Stephen Zollman
Councilmember Neysa Hinton
Councilmember Sandra Maurer
Councilmember Jill McLewis
City Manager
Don Schwartz
[email protected]
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk, MMC
Mary Gourley
[email protected]

CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF: Tuesday – September 17, 2024 MINUTES FOR Regular City Council Meeting of September 17, 2024 As Approved by the City Council at their regular meeting of October 1, 2024 Please note that these are action minutes only. Detailed raw transcript is attached to the minutes and made a part of the public record. These action minutes are the City’s record of a summary of actions that took place at the meeting. The vote/action is the required information of the meeting actions that took place. Approved minutes are available on the City Council Meetings page.

The public is advised that pursuant to Government Code section 54957.5 all writings submitted to the City and City Council are public records and will be made available for review. 6:00 pm City Council Regular Meeting, In Person – Sebastopol Youth Annex, 425 Morris Street, Sebastopol, CA; and by Virtual Format (Zoom)
Call to Order: Mayor Rich called the Regular Meeting to Order at 6:06 pm.

Roll Call:

Present: Mayor Diana Gardner Rich
Vice Mayor Stephen Zollman
Councilmember Sandra Maurer
Councilmember Neysa Hinton
Councilmember Jill McLewis

Absent: None
Staff: City Manager Don Schwartz
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk Mary Gourley
Administrative Services Director Ana Kwong
Building Official Steve Brown
City Engineer Mario Landeros
Battalion Chief Dave Bray
Interim Planning Director Jane Riley
Police Chief Ron Nelson
Assistant Public Works Superintendent Erik Billing
SALUTE TO THE FLAG : Mayor Rich led the salute to the flag.

REMOTE PARTICIPATION UNDER AB 2449 (IF NEEDED): To consider and take action on any request from a Council Member to participate in a meeting remotely due to Just Cause or Emergency Circumstances pursuant to AB 2449 (Government Code Section 549539(f)). None Required.

PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS: PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS: NONE STATEMENTS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Conflicts of interest may arise in situations where a public official deliberating towards a decision, has an actual or potential financial interest in the matter before the Council. In accordance with state law, an actual conflict of interest is one that would be to the private financial benefit of a public official, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A potential conflict of interest is one that could be to the private financial benefit of a Councilmember, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A Councilmember must publicly announce potential and actual conflicts of interest, and, in the case of actual conflict of interest, must refrain from participating in debate on the issue or from voting on the issue and must remove themselves from the dais.

There were no stated conflicts of interest by City Councilmembers.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (FIRST COMMENT PERIOD):

Up to Twenty (20) Minute Time Limit (Two Minutes for up to ten speakers). Additional public comment will be held at the end of the discussion and action items for up to an additional twenty (20) minutes. Mayor has discretion to allow for additional time beyond the 20 minutes allocated for public comment dependent upon the subject matter or number of speakers.

Process for calling on Speakers: Mayor or designee shall ask for public comment as follows: Speakers to be called on in an alternate manner (One speaker in person to be called on first; then one speaker remote to be called on second with additional speakers to be called on in the same manner) based upon the time limit.

The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
• Sunny Galbraith
• Myriah Volk
• Member of the audience
• Ray Chin
• Linda
CONSENT CALENDAR: The consent agenda consists of items that are routine in nature and do not require additional discussion by the City Council or have been reviewed by the City Council previously. These items may be approved by one motion without discussion unless a member of the City Council requests that the item be taken off the consent calendar.

The Mayor will read the consent calendar items; ask if a Councilmember wishes to remove one or more items from the consent calendar; and then open public comment to the members of the public in attendance. At this time, a member of the public may speak for up to three minutes on the entire consent calendar and request at that time that an agenda item or items be removed for discussion.

If an item or items are removed from the consent calendar, the item shall be placed at the end of the regular agenda items unless otherwise determined by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tern.

Councilmembers may comment on Consent Calendar items or ask for minor clarifications without the need for pulling the item for separate consideration. Items requiring deliberation should be pulled for separate consideration and shall be placed at the end of the regular agenda items unless otherwise determined by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem.

Mayor Rich asked if any Councilmember wanted to remove a consent calendar item.

Mayor Rich questioned item number 3. Focused on police officer rates but salary represents all approved rates.

Staff stated yes.

Mayor Rich opened for Public Comment(s). The following member(s) of the public provided public comment. • Linda
MOTION:

Councilmember Maurer moved and Councilmember Hinton seconded the motion to approve Consent Calendar Item Number(s) 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Mayor Rich called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.

VOTE:

Ayes: Councilmembers Hinton, Maurer, McLewis, Vice Mayor Zollman and Mayor Rich Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None

1. Approval of Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of September 3, 2024 (Responsible Department: City Clerk)
City Council Action: Approved of Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of September 3, 2024 Minute Order Number: 2024-205

2. Adopt Resolution for Continuation of Participation in Sonoma County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program (Responsible Department: Police)
City Council Action: Adopted Resolution for Continuation of Participation in Sonoma County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program
Minute Order Number: 2024-206
Resolution Number: 6613-2024

3. Approval of Salary Schedule for Revised Job Description for Police Chief as approved at the September 3, 2024 City Council Meeting (Salary and Benefits: $289,523) and Approve Budget Amendment of $46,023 (Responsible Department: Human Resources Consultant/Administrative Services Department)
City Council Action: Approved of Salary Schedule for Revised Job Description for Police Chief as approved at the September 3, 2024 City Council Meeting (Salary and Benefits: $289,523) and Approve Budget Amendment of $46,023
Minute Order Number: 2024-207
Resolution Number: 6614-2024

4. Award of Contract by Purchase Order to Earthtone Construction for the Sebastopol Community Cultural Center flood damage fire code repairs as identified by the Sebastopol Fire and Building Safety. The total not to exceed costs of $68,140 for the required repairs is below the $70,000 approved in the 2024/25 Budget (Page 117) funded by the Flood Mitigation Fund 127 (Responsible Department: Public Works)
City Council Action: Approved Award of Contract by Purchase Order to Earthtone Construction for the Sebastopol Community Cultural Center flood damage fire code repairs as identified by the Sebastopol Fire and Building Safety. The total not to exceed costs of $68,140 for the required repairs is below the $70,000 approved in the 2024/25 Budget (Page 117) funded by the Flood Mitigation Fund 127 Minute Order Number: 2024-208
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/PRESENTATIONS: Informational Items or Presentations are items that are informational only and do not require action by the City Council. Presentations shall be scheduled as necessary for the promotion of an event or service or general information items to the Council and should be limited to ten (10) minutes total in length of item (total length includes questions of Council to presenter and public comment). NONE PUBLIC HEARING(s): NONE
REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS (DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION):

5. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution for City Council Policy on Allocation of Sales Tax Revenues/Statement of Intention (Responsible Department: City Manager) City Manager Schwartz presented the agenda item.

Mayor Rich asked for questions of staff. Council asked questions of staff.

Mayor Rich opened for public comment.

The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
• Kee
• Oliver
• Linda
• Kyle
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/or Direction to Staff:

The Council discussed the resolution and clarified comments and provided clarification.

MOTION:

Vice Mayor Zollman moved and Councilmember Maurer seconded the motion to approve Resolution for City Council Policy on Allocation of Sales Tax Revenues/Statement of Intention as amended:

1. 40% of the revenue shall be allocated for maintaining and repairing City roads, streets, drainage, and parks.

2. Sufficient revenue shall be allocated for maintaining public safety, including retaining existing Police Department staffing levels and providing sufficient funding for fire services after the reorganization of such services with the Gold Ridge Fire Protection District.

3. If there is sufficient revenue allocated for items 1 and 2, remaining revenues will be allocated to maintain Sebastopol’s City services such as 911 emergency medical/police/fire response, wildfire/emergency preparedness, maintenance of streets/roads, parks/trails, library, youth and senior services, retaining/attracting local businesses; and for general government use.

4. Any revenue generated by the Sebastopol Public Safety, Roads, City Services Measure during FY 2024- 2025 shall not be allocated until the fourth quarter of the fiscal year, once the actual revenues and expenditures for FY 2024-2025 are clearer.

Mayor Rich called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.

VOTE:

Ayes: Councilmembers Hinton, Maurer, McLewis, Vice Mayor Zollman and Mayor Rich Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Resolution for City Council Policy on Allocation of Sales Tax Revenues/Statement of Intention as amended:

1. 40% of the revenue shall be allocated for maintaining and repairing City roads, streets, drainage, and parks.

Minute Order Number: 2024-209
Resolution Number: 6615-2024

6. Discussion and Consideration of Approval of Tasks, Timeline and Budget for City Council Ad Hoc Committee for City Council Protocols, Procedures Handbook (Requestor: Ad Hoc Committee (Council Protocols); Responsible Departments: City Attorney and City Clerk) City Manager Schwartz presented the agenda item.

Mayor Rich asked for questions of staff.

Mayor Rich opened for public comment.

The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
• Robert
• Linda
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/or Direction to Staff:

The Council discussed timing and future items such as committees. Staff discussed those would be future policies.

MOTION:

Councilmember Maurer moved and Councilmember McLewis seconded the motion to approve the proposed Tasks, Timeline and Budget for City Council Ad Hoc Committee for City Council Protocols, Procedures Handbook.

Mayor Rich called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.

VOTE:

Ayes: Councilmembers Hinton, Maurer, McLewis, Vice Mayor Zollman and Mayor Rich Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the proposed Tasks, Timeline and Budget for City Council Ad Hoc Committee for City Council Protocols, Procedures Handbook:

Selection of Mayor/Vice Mayor
Roles of Mayor/Vice Mayor
Seating Selection
Trainings
Minute Order Number: 2024-210

7. Consideration of Extension of Contract with Gold Ridge Fire Department (Contract currently expires Sep 30 2024) (Requestor: Fire Ad Hoc Committee/Responsible Department: Fire) City Manager Schwartz presented the agenda item.

Mayor Rich asked for questions of staff.

Mayor Rich opened for public comment.

The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment: None City Council Discussion/Deliberations/or Direction to Staff:

No further discussion.

MOTION:

Vie Mayor Zollman moved and Councilmember Hinton seconded the motion to approve Extension of Contract with Gold Ridge Fire Department.

Mayor Rich called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.

VOTE:

Ayes: Councilmembers Hinton, Maurer, McLewis, Vice Mayor Zollman and Mayor Rich Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Extension of Contract with Gold Ridge Fire Department.

Minute Order Number: 2024-211
PLEASE NOTE: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8 ONLY WILL NOT BE HEARD ANY EARLIER THAN 8:00 PM. If the City Council completes the agenda items as noted above (items 5, 6, and 7) prior to 8:00 pm, the Council will continue with agenda items number 9 and beyond until at or after 8:00 pm.

8. AS NOTED ABOVE: Item Number 8 will not be heard prior to 8:00 pm. Consideration of Resolution of Opposition to Measure J (Requestor: Councilmember McLewis and Councilmember Hinton)
Councilmember McLewis and Councilmember Hinton presented the agenda item.

Mayor Rich asked for questions of staff/requestor. The Council asked questions of the requestors.

Mayor Rich opened for public comment.

The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
• Woody
• Sunny
• Brenden
• Erik
• Zack
• Samantha
• Danya
• Carmen
• Dusky
• Kyle
• Christa
• Tommy
• Don
• Deborah
• Don
• Kathy
• Speaker
• Sarah
• Chase
• Jane
• Amy
• Speaker
• Anna
• Speaker
• Andy
• Speaker
• Curtis
• Dominic
• Anthony
• Celia
• Speaker
• Max
• Stephanie
• Mary
• June
• Nikki
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/or Direction to Staff:

The Council discussed the resolution language.

MOTION:

Councilmember Hinton moved and Councilmember McLewis seconded the motion to approve Resolution of Opposition to Measure J.

Mayor Rich called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.

VOTE:

Ayes: Councilmembers Hinton, McLewis, and Mayor Rich
Noes: Councilmember Maurer and Vice Mayor Zollman

Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Resolution of Opposition to Measure J.

Minute Order Number: 2024-212
Resolution Number: 6616-2024

9. Discussion and Consideration of City Priorities (Short term and long term) (Responsible Department: City Manager)
City Manager Schwartz presented the agenda item.

Mayor Rich asked for questions of staff. The Council asked questions of staff.

Mayor Rich opened for public comment.

The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
• Oliver
• Linda
• Kee
• Kyle
• Mary
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/or Direction to Staff:

No further discussion.

MOTION:

Councilmember Hinton moved and Vice Mayor Zollman seconded the motion to approve the recommended priorities for the next six months as proposed by staff as follows and as amended:

1. Affordable rental housing Monitoring - Contract with County for monitoring

2. Employee Negotiations

3. Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD)

4. Fleet Assessment (This is assuming that the City Council approves the Contract Amendment). This is proposed as a priority due to the upcoming retirement of the Public Works Superintendent.

5. Fire Reorganization/Consolidation
a. Station Assessment
b. Evaluation of Expanded Coverage Options

6. Housing Element Implementation (Mandatory Requirements)

7. Public Education/Outreach for Sales Tax Ballot Measure U

8. Solid Waste Hauler Procurement

9. Sustainable Transportation Grant
And Direct Staff to Continue with Group 1 projects noted below:

1. City Council Protocols (This would be individual policies coming before the City Council with the estimate completion of a City Council Protocols and Procedures Handbook June 2025).

2. Classification and Compensation Study (It should be noted that the Staffing Assessment Study proposed in the FY 24 25 budget was recommended to be reviewed during the mid year budget review process)

3. Community Center Fire Safety

4. Community Center Master Plan

5. Emergency Operations Center Assessment

6. Review Staff Support for Climate Action Committee

7. Review Staff Support for Public Arts Commission

8. Consider consolidating Planning Commission and Design Review Board

9. Budget Tracking/Reporting

10. Review of Departments’ budgets, especially Public Works and Engineering

11. Water System Master Plan

12. Homelessness
And
Review remaining priorities during the February 2025 Goals and Priority Session; Addition of: Council assessment of downtown (Councilmember Maurer and Councilmember McLewis) Clean up of Downtown by doing the following:
a. freshly painted and landscaped town Square
b. The pathway in Ives Park brought up to ADA compliance and a new fence c. Graffiti & sticker removal
d. Garbage pick up on Main Street and the commercial corridor e. Power washing sidewalks, window washing and new benches along Main Street f. Decorating during the holidays
Mayor Rich called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.

VOTE:

Ayes: Councilmembers Hinton, Maurer, McLewis, Vice Mayor Zollman and Mayor Rich Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the recommended priorities for the next six months as proposed by staff as follows and as amended:

1. Affordable rental housing Monitoring - Contract with County for monitoring

2. Employee Negotiations

3. Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD)

4. Fleet Assessment (This is assuming that the City Council approves the Contract Amendment). This is proposed as a priority due to the upcoming retirement of the Public Works Superintendent.

5. Fire Reorganization/Consolidation
a. Station Assessment
b. Evaluation of Expanded Coverage Options

6. Housing Element Implementation (Mandatory Requirements)

7. Public Education/Outreach for Sales Tax Ballot Measure U

8. Solid Waste Hauler Procurement

9. Sustainable Transportation Grant
And Direct Staff to Continue with Group 1 projects noted below:

1. City Council Protocols (This would be individual policies coming before the City Council with the estimate completion of a City Council Protocols and Procedures Handbook June 2025).

3. Community Center Fire Safety

4. Community Center Master Plan

5. Emergency Operations Center Assessment

6. Review Staff Support for Climate Action Committee

7. Review Staff Support for Public Arts Commission

8. Consider consolidating Planning Commission and Design Review Board

9. Budget Tracking/Reporting

10. Review of Departments’ budgets, especially Public Works and Engineering

11. Water System Master Plan

10. Consideration of Approval of contract amendment with Baker Tilly for Fleet Management Asset Study to amendment budget for an increase of $18,900 (There is no fiscal impact/increase in funding to the Adopted FY 24 25 City Operating Budget; Funding is included and was approved in the Adopted FY 24 25 City Operating Budget (Responsible Department: City Manager) City Manager Schwartz presented the agenda item.

Mayor Rich asked for questions of staff. The Council asked questions of staff.

Mayor Rich opened for public comment.

The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
• Linda
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/or Direction to Staff:

The Council deliberated on the item.

MOTION:

Vice Mayor Zollman moved to approve contract amendment with Baker Tilly for Fleet Management Asset Study to amendment budget for an increase of $18,900 (There is no fiscal impact/increase in funding to the Adopted FY 24 25 City Operating Budget; Funding is included and was approved in the Adopted FY 24 25 City Operating Budget.

There was no second. Motion fails.

City Council Action: Motion Fails. No further action.

Minute Order Number: 2024-214
Meeting ended at 10:45 pm due to Council Protocols. Items below were not discussed.

11. Consideration of Recommendation for Selection of Facilitator for February 2025 City Council Goal-Setting Session and approval of amendment to contract not to exceed $10,000 (There is no fiscal impact/no requested increase in funding to the Adopted FY 24 25 City Operating Budget; Funding is included and was approved in the Adopted FY 24 25 City Operating Budget) Recommended Facilitator: Baker Tilly (Responsible Department: City Manager) City Council Action: None Taken. Item to be heard at future meeting.

Reference Order Number: 2024-215

ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Two minutes per speaker for up to twenty (20) minutes total for public comments but can be reduced at Mayor’s discretion depending upon the number of speakers or Mayor has discretion to allow for additional time beyond the 20 minutes allocated for public comment dependent upon the subject matter or number of speakers.

CITY COUNCIL/CITY STAFF REPORTS/COMMUNICATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/FUTURE MEETINGS:

12. City Manager and/or City Clerk Reports: (This will be either verbal reports at the meeting, or written reports provided at or prior to the meeting)
a. August Monthly Department Reports
Reference Order Number: 2024-216

13. City Council Reports/Committee/Sub-Committee Meeting Reports: (Reports by Mayor/City Councilmembers Regarding Various Agency Meetings/Committee Meetings/Sub-Committee Meeting /Conferences Attended and Possible Direction to its Representatives (If Needed) on Pending issues before such Boards. ((This will be either verbal reports at the meeting, or written reports provided at or prior to the meeting):
a. September 9 2024 Budget Committee Report Out/Minutes Reference Order Number: 2024-217

14. Council Communications Received (Information/Meetings/Correspondence Received from the General Public to Councilmembers)
CLOSED SESSION: NONE

ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 17, 2024 City Council Regular Meeting will be adjourned to the City Council Regular Meeting of Tuesday, October 1, 2024 at 6:00 pm, Sebastopol Youth Annex, 425 Morris Street, Sebastopol, CA.

Mayor Rich adjourned the City Council Meeting of September 17, 2024 at 10:45 pm to the next City Council Meeting of October 1, 2024 at 6:00 pm, Sebastopol Youth Annex, 425 Morris Street.

Respectfully Submitted:

Mary Gourley
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk
Attachment:

Raw Zoom Minutes
City Council Meeting - September 17, 2024
CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
YES.

SO I'M WRITING YOU REGARD A CALIFORNIA TOURISM CONFERENCE THANKS TO JOHN J FOR TELLING US ABOUT THIS EVENT. WE ARE LEARNING A LOT OF AWESOME INFORMATION TO BRING BACK. ANDREA IS HERE.

HELLO.

THAT'S ALL.

THANK YOU, MARIAH. I WILL COME BACK TO THE CHAMBER READ IF THERE IS ANYONE IN THE CHAMBERS, PLEASE GO AHEAD.

HELLO. I AM NOT SURE THIS IS THE RIGHT FORMAT FOR THIS, BUT I'VE ONLY LIVED

HERE A COUPLE OF YEARS, AND I'VE BEEN TO SEVERAL OF YOUR MEETINGS, AND I JUST WANTED, I KNOW THIS SOUNDS LIKE ADVERTISEMENT BUT IT'S NOT. I AM

CONCERNED THAT THE RIGHT AID IS GOING TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS IF WE DO NOT ENCOURAGE OUR PEOPLE INSIDE THE COMMUNITY TO GO THERE. I AM NOT -- WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE OTHER OPTIONS. WE JUST WANT TO SAY I BELIEVE IT IS IMPORTANT THAT RIGHT AID STAYS IN SEBASTOPOL. I WOULD

ENCOURAGE YOU TO ENCOURAGE ALL OF YOUR PEOPLE TO DO THAT, AND I WAS

HOPING THAT MARIAH WOULD BE HERE, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE I KNOW SHE IS IN

THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION, SO -- AND THE ROADS ARE STILL REALLY BAD BUT THAT'S ANOTHER THING.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL GO BACK TO ZOOM. IF YOU

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AN ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SCENE NONE, I WILL COME BACK TO THE CHAMBERS. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AN ITEM NOT IN TONIGHT'S AGENDA, PLEASE GO TO THE PODIUM.

GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS RAY. I AM A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PICKLE BALL GROUP IN SEBASTOPOL. ONE OF THE THINGS WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST IS THAT

THE COURTS, OR ADDITIONAL PICKLE BALL COURTS BE ADDED TO THE PRIORITY LIST THIS SUMMER. I WAS WORKING WITH DON SCHWARTZ AND STEVE, SO WE DISCREETLY ASK IF THAT COULD BE INCLUDED, OKAY, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. LINDA, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? THANK YOU, LINDA, GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT PLEASE.

THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDED TO THE LIST, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO START MONITORING AND REPORTING THE LEVELS OF RADIATION AND.

ELECTROMAGNETICALLY SENSITIVE. WE ARE ALL BEING COOKED ALIVE, LIVING IN

A MAN-MADE MICROWAVE, MICROWAVE, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE SMART DEVICES AND STUFF. WE ARE JUST GETTING SICKER AND SICKER AND WE ARE

KILLING OURSELVES WITH CANCER AND A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER ILLNESSES THAT COME FROM THE MAN-MADE FALSE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD. I ALSO WANTED TO

MENTION BECAUSE I'VE BEEN HERE THE LAST TWO DAYS, THE SITUATION WITH THE

LIBRARY MANAGER MATTHEW ROSE, HE'S BEEN FIRED FROM HIS POSITION AS

DIRECTOR OF THE SEBASTOPOL LIBRARY, SO I'M THINKING THAT ZALMAN, HERE IS

SET TO INCREASE THE LIBRARY AND STAFF, DESERVE TO HAVE SOME INFORMATION GOING ON. ROSE IS NO GOOD, EIGHT YEARS AGO WHEN HE BLOCKED A SURVEY TRYING TO FIX THE LEVELS OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD IN THE LIBRARY.

ADDITIONALLY, WE DESERVE ANOTHER REPORT FROM OUR MAYOR -- 25 SECONDS.

TO BE THE LIAISON FOR THE RV VILLAGE WHICH CONTINUES TO BE A DISASTER UP HERE, PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING THERE. THERE IS ANOTHER ONE ACROSS THE STREET, PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING ON 116 APPEAR, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE VERY

INTERESTING PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A DISASTER ECONOMICALLY FOR THIS TOWN. CONTINUES TO BE VACANT COMMERCIAL.

THANK YOU, LINDA, THAT'S TWO MINUTES.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WILL COME BACK TO THE CHAMBERS. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AN ITEM NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. SEEING NONE. I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM ONE LAST TIME. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AN ITEM NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA WHICH IS THE CONSENT CALENDAR. I'M REQUIRED BY OUR CURRENT PROTOCOLS TO READ THE FULL ITEM NAMES LISTED HERE. THERE ARE FOUR ITEMS. I WILL READ

THROUGH THEM AND THE COUNCILMEMBERS THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO

PULL THEM FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AT WHICH POINT THEY ARE PUT AT THE END OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA, SO HERE WE GO. ITEM NUMBER ONE, APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3rd 2024. NUMBER

TWO, ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR CONTINUATION OF PARTICIPATION IN SONOMA COUNTY ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. NUMBER THREE, APPROVAL

OF SALARY SCHEDULE AND REVISED JOB DESCRIPTION FOR POLICE CHIEF HAS APPROVED AT THE SEPTEMBER 3rd, 2024 COUNCIL MEETING. ITEM NUMBER FOUR, A

WORD OF CONTRACT BY PURCHASE ORDER TO EARTH IN CONSTRUCTION FOR THE

COMMUNITY CULTURAL CENTER FLOOD DAMAGE FIRE CODE REPAIRS, AS IDENTIFIED BY THE FIRE AND BUILDING SAFETY. THE TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED COST OF $68,140. THOSE ARE THE FOUR AND AND CALENDAR ITEM, BUT DO ANY COUNCILMEMBERS WANT TO PULL ANY OF THOSE FOUR ITEMS? DOES ANYONE ON THE COUNCIL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THOSE FOR ITEMS? I HAVE ONE

QUESTION ABOUT ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT I THINK CAN BE HANDLED PRETTY QUICKLY. AND I THINK THAT IS THE ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS FOCUSED SPECIFICALLY ON THE POLICE OFFICER RATES. I SEE THAT THE SUBJECT LINE HAS DEVISED THE AVAILABLE PAY SCHEDULE. MY QUESTION TO STAFF IS JUST

A CONFIRMATION THAT THE SALARY RATES THAT WE SEE IN THE STAFF REPORT REFLECTS SALARIES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY OUR CITY COUNCIL. IS THAT CORRECT?
THAT IS CORRECT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. IF YOU COULD PLEASE GO OUT FOR COMMENT ON THE CONSENT ITEMS.

THIS IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR CONSENT ITEMS ONLY. IF YOU WOULD

LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THE CONSENT ITEM, AND SEEING NONE, WE WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. LINDA, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? THANKS, GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

ALSO ON ITEM NUMBER THREE, MENTIONED THAT RON NELSON, CURRENT

RETIRING POLICE CHIEF MENTIONED HE WAS GOING TO BE HERE FOR ONLY TWO

YEARS, SO WHY IS IT THAT YOU ALL DIDN'T START TALKING ABOUT LOOKING FOR A REPLACEMENT UNTIL LIKE THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING? IT JUST GOES TO

SHOW HOW BLATANTLY AND AWFULLY DYSFUNCTIONAL THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PAST ONE WAS WITH OUR MAYOR LEADING THE WAY IN THE DYSFUNCTION.

ALSO WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, ONCE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WHO WOULD WANT TO BE

BADGERED, BULLIED, VILIFIED AND DEMONIZED BY THE MAYOR HERE AS POLICE

CHIEF OF THIS WONDERFUL TOWN WHO UNFORTUNATELY, THE COPS SPEND AS YOU KNOW, 50% OF THEIR TIME DEALING WITH THE HOMELESS. IT DOES NOT SEEM LIKE A DESIRABLE POSITION FOR ME. THREE OF OUR OFFICES INCLUDING ONE OF OUR

PAST POLICE CHIEFS VOTED WITH THEIR FEET AND ALL UP AND QUIT AND THEY ARE NOW WORKING ELSEWHERE. SO ANYWAY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CITY COUNCIL TRIED TO GET ITS ACT TOGETHER.

ABOUT 30 SECONDS
THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS. NEXT, COMING BACK INTO THE

CHAMBERS IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM. I WILL GO BACK TO ZOOM. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A

COMMENT ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ONLY, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE. PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I

WILL TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ONCE AGAIN AS I'VE OFTEN DONE, EXPRESS MY

APPRECIATION FOR OUR POLICE CHIEFS, CURRENT AND PAST AND ALSO, FOR ALL OF OUR WONDERFUL DEPARTMENT HEADS. THEY WORK HARD AND THEY ARE

EXCELLENT AND ARE FULLY AND COMPLETELY APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THEY BRING TO THE TOWN. I'M HERE AT THE COUNSEL TABLE, LOOKING FOR DISCUSSION OR FOR A MOTION ON THE FOUR CONSENT ITEMS.

I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

SECOND FROM SOMEONE?
I WILL SECOND.

THANK YOU. COULD YOU HANDLE THE ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE?
SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MAUER AND SECONDED BY HINTON FOR ITEMS 1 TO 3 AND FOUR. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ] MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE NOW ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON OUR AGENDA. IN THAT ITEM IS THE CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION FOR

CITY COUNCIL POLICY ON ALLOCATION OF SALES TAX REVENUES/STATEMENT OF

INTENTION, THE MOVING PARTY HERE IS THE CITY MANAGER WHO BROUGHT IT FORWARD. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT ITEM, MAKE SURE

EVERYONE IN THE ROOM WHO MIGHT BE HERE ON THE MEASURE J ITEM

UNDERSTANDS THAT THE EARLIEST THAT WE WILL BEGINNING TO THE MEASURE J ITEM WILL BE AN:00 P.M. WE ARE DOING THAT IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE WE

RESPECT THE TIME AND VALUE OF THE TIME OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO

SPECIFICALLY COMMENT ON THAT ITEM, SO I AM HERE TO PROMISE YOU WE WILL NOT THAT ITEM ANY EARLIER THAN 8:00 P.M.. SO ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS AN ITEM THAT IS BEING INTRODUCED BY OUR CITY MANAGER.

THANK YOU. I WILL GO AHEAD AND SHARE MY SCREEN. I HAVE A VERY BRIEF POWERPOINT TO WALK THROUGH. OKAY. SO THIS IS ABOUT THE SALES TAX, THE USE OF THE SALES TAX DOLLARS, 1.5 MILLION, APPROXIMATELY, IF THE SALES TAX PASSES. THE POLICY INDICATES COUNSEL IN TIME TO, BUT BECAUSE IT IS NOT

ACTUALLY PART OF THE BALLOT MEASURE, THE MEASURE IT SELF REMAINS IN

GENERAL TAX AS OPPOSED TO A SPECIFIC TAX IF IT ALLOCATED THE DOLLARS TO PARTICULAR USES, BUT THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN THAT. THIS IS A POLICY THAT CAN

BE CHANGED BUT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF HOW YOU INTEND TO SPEND THE MONEY AND AGAIN, WE WILL GENERATE ABOUT 1.5 MILLION PER YEAR AT THAT LEVEL. THE SUGGESTED POLICY OPTIONS ARE IN THE REPORT ALONG WITH A COUPLE OF ALTERNATIVES. THIS HAS GONE THROUGH THE BUDGET COMMITTEE.

THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEVELOP A THIRD OF IT. ABOUT 500,000 PER

YEAR OF HIGH PRIORITY INFRASTRUCTURE, ROADS, STREETS, DRAINAGE AND

PARKS AND THE SECOND IS TO ENSURE THAT WE RETAIN EXISTING STAFF IN THE

POLICE DEPARTMENT AND PROVIDE EFFICIENT FUNDING IN THE FIRE REORGANIZATION. THE REORGANIZATION WITH GOLD RIDGE. THE THIRD OPTION IS TO POTENTIALLY USE THE MONEY TO ADD STAFF. WE ARE RECOMMENDING AT LEAST NOTING IT AS A NEED. WE KNOW WE NEED STAFF ACROSS MOST

DEPARTMENTS AND CONSIDER THE SPECIFICS AFTER WE DO THE STAFFING STUDY

ANTICIPATED FOR EARLY NEXT YEAR AND DURING THE BUDGET CYCLE, THIS IS WHERE THE BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS DISAGREED. COUNCILMEMBER MAUER,

IF I CAN CHARACTERIZE THIS ACCURATELY, RECOGNIZE THE NEED BUT DOES NOT WANT TO ADD SALES TAX TO THAT ITEM. THE OTHER RECOMMENDATION IS TO

OBSERVE WHAT WE WOULD COUNT AS REVENUE IN THIS FISCAL YEAR UNTIL THE

FOR YOUR SITUATION ON REVENUES AND EXPENSES BECOMES MORE CLEAR, SO THE POLICY WOULD TAKE EFFECT AS OF FY '25-'26 AND IF WE ARE ABLE TO SPEND MORE,

THEN WE CAN REVISIT THAT IN THE BUDGETING PROCESS BUT WE WANT TO MAKE

SURE WE END UP AT A SATISFACTORY PLACE BEFORE COMMITTING THE FUNDS BEYOND RELATIVELY EARLY IN THE FISCAL YEAR. THAT IS ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TURNING TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE, ANYTHING THAT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO ADD AS A PRESENTATION PIECE? NO, THAT WAS A GOOD SUMMARY BY THE MANAGER.

OKAY, AT THIS POINT, WE ARE AT THE TIME FOR QUESTIONS FROM

COUNCILMEMBERS, SO WE WILL DEAL WITH QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM AND THEN

WE WILL GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND COME BACK FOR DISCUSSION. SO QUESTIONS? DOES ANYONE WANT TO START HERE? COUNCILMEMBERS? I WILL GO AHEAD AND ASK ON THIS STAFF REPORT, I SEE THESE VARIOUS SUGGESTIONS. ARE THEY -- IS THE RECOMMENDATION THAT ALL FOUR OF THESE PROPOSALS BE ACCEPTED, OR ARE THESE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS?

I WOULD CHARACTERIZE THEM AS A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF, REALIZING THERE'S ALL SORTS OF POSSIBILITIES AND PERMUTATIONS HERE. I WOULD SAY

THAT THE STRONGEST RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO PROBABLY GOING

REVERSE ORDER AND DON'T SPEND THE MONEY UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT THE FISCAL SITUATION IS LIKE. THE THIRD ONE WOULD PROBABLY BE THE SOFTEST IF YOU WILL. COUNCILMEMBER MAUER HAS A VERY IMPORTANT PERSPECTIVE HERE. THE MONEY COULD EASILY BE SPENT ON OTHER PURPOSES. I'M NOT SURE IT WOULD EVEN BE AVAILABLE. BUT I DON'T FEEL PERSONALLY STRONGLY ABOUT THAT ONE.

CONTINUING IN REVERSE ORDER, RETAINING PUBLIC SAFETY WAS A VERY HIGH

PRIORITY FOR THE RESIDENTS IN THE SURVEY AND THE POLLING, SO THAT IS IN

PART WHY IT IS AS HIGH AS IT IS AS WELL AS PUBLIC SAFETY BEING THE

FOUNDATIONAL REQUIREMENT AND EXPECTATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND WE KNOW OUR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS ATTENTION. THAT WAS ALSO VERY

HIGHLY RANKED IN THE POLLING SURVEY THAT WE DID AND IT'S ALSO BEEN SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE RECOGNIZED. THE ONE THING I

WOULD SAY THAT IS KIND OF EMERGING THANKS TO DANTE IS THE IMPORTANCE,

KIND OF OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND BUT THE DRAINAGE STORM WATER SYSTEM

DOES NEED HELP AND ATTENTION WITH SIGNIFICANT DOLLARS IN THE COMING YEARS WHICH IS WHY THAT ONE IS CALLED OUT AND HERE.

THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT SALES TAX REVENUE COLLECTED DURING THE

REMAINDER OF THIS FISCAL YEAR BE HELD AND A DECISION ABOUT THAT TRANCHE

OF MONEY WAIT FOR THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, AND AS TO THE NEXT TRANCHE OF SALES TAX IT WILL BE THE 25-'26 SCHOOL YEAR. A THIRD GOES TO

INFRASTRUCTURE, ROADS, STREETS, DRAINAGE AND PARKS, AND NOTE THAT IN THE OTHER CATEGORIES, YOU'VE NOT SPECIFIED A PERCENTAGE. WAS THERE A

RECOMMENDED PERCENTAGE, OR JUST THAT THESE OTHER CATEGORIES BE CONSIDERED AND PRIORITIZED?
IN TERMS OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION?

IN TERMS OF THE -- SO THERE IS A THIRD OF THE SALES TAX, HIGH PRIORITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND IT IS NOTED RETAIN EXISTING LEVEL OF STAFFING. AND CONSIDER STAFFING NEEDS AFTER COMPLETION. IF ONE THIRD IS ALLOCATED TO

INFRASTRUCTURE, IS THERE RECOMMENDED ALLOCATION TO THESE OTHER CATEGORIES, OR IS IT JUST PRIORITIZING?
IT IS JUST PRIORITIZING. BASICALLY WHAT THIS MEANS IN PRACTICE IS THAT IF WE

HAD TO MAKE REDUCTIONS IN THE CITY BUDGET AT SOME POINT, THAT EVEN

AFTER THE SALES TAX, WE WOULD MAKE RETAINING POLICE AND FIRE FUNDING A VERY HIGH PRIORITY, INCLUDING USING SALES TAX PROCEEDS IF WE NEEDED TO.

THAT IS ONE APPROACH TO IT. ANOTHER APPROACH WHICH IS PERFECTLY

LEGITIMATE IS TO SAY WE WILL DEDICATE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE TO POLICE AND FIRE. IF THAT'S NECESSARY TO RETAIN THE EXISTING STAFF, IT ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS US TO RELEASE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DOLLARS TO THE GENERAL FUND.

THE INTENT IS TO ENSURE THAT WE MAINTAIN WHAT WE HAVE FOR POLICE AND

ENSURE WE HAVE A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT GOING AS PART OF THE REORGANIZATION.

I UNDERSTAND AND I'M SURE THERE WILL BE MORE DISCUSSION WHEN YOU COME BACK AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT. COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR ATTORNEY. SO IF WE HAVE HERE DEDICATED ONE

THIRD TO PRIORITY INFRASTRUCTURE, DOES THAT CREATE A SITUATION WHERE WE CAN ONLY PUT A CAP?

UNDER THIS MODEL, IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER YOU ALREADY HAVE SUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR YOUR POLICE, BECAUSE YOU ARE SAYING THAT'S THE PRIORITY, TOO.

SO ASSUMING YOU HAVE MONEY LEFT OVER AFTER YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT

REVENUE FOR POLICE AND FIRE REORGANIZATION, YOU COULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL MONEY, TOO.

BUT WE'VE NOT DECIDED YET THAT WE WANT TO PRIORITIZE THE POLICE AND FIRE.

THAT IS A SUGGESTION THERE.

THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE DRAFT RESOLUTION.

AM THE ONE WHO ASKED FOR THIS ORIGINALLY IN ORDER TO PUT THE TAX MANAGER ON THE BALLOT BECAUSE OF NOT BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. MY

INTENT WAS TO MAKE SURE WE WERE INVESTING MONEY IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE,

SO I JUST DON'T WANT US TO END UP WITH HANDCUFFS ON US AND THIS MONEY IS NOT SPENT. IN THE SPIRIT OF WHY WE CAME FORWARD WITH THIS. SO I'M

WONDERING IF THAT'S WHY WE SET ONE THIRD AND WE NEED THAT OUR PRIORITY, IF IT'S AS ONE THIRD, ARE WE CAP THAT ONLY BEING ABLE TO SPEND ONE THIRD? IT DEPENDS WHAT ELSE YOU PUT IN PRIORITY. RIGHT NOW, THERE IS SUFFICIENT FUNDING. IF THERE WAS NOT SUFFICIENT FUNDING, YOU WOULD BE CAPPED AT THE ONE THIRD. IF THERE IS SUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR POLICE AND FIRE TO MAINTAIN

THOSE LEVELS THROUGH THE OTHER REVENUE SOURCES, THEN YOU WOULD BE FREE TO USE THAT ON OTHER MATTERS.

OKAY, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GOT A PUBLIC COMMENT? I KNOW THERE WILL BE A LOT OF DISCUSSION MAY COME BACK.

I HAVE A CLARIFICATION.

YEAH.

SO IF WE WERE NOT ABLE TO DO THE POLICE AND FIRE STAFFING WITH THE 500,000

NOT BEING FULLY PUT INTO A PARODY INFRASTRUCTURE, ONE THING I WOULD BE

COMFORTABLE EXPLORING IS WE HAVE TWO RESERVE FUNDS, ONE OF WHICH HAS ABOUT $1 MILLION FOR WHICH INFRASTRUCTURE IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY USES. IF WE WERE TO HAVE SALES TAX RINGING IN 1.5 MILLION MORE PER YEAR, I WOULD

BE COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING THE USE OF SOME OF THOSE FUNDS TO MAKE US UP TO THE 500,000 OR POTENTIALLY EXCEED THAT AMOUNT. IT GIVES US SOMETHING OF A CUSHION. I WOULD NOT BE AS CAUTIOUS IN PRESERVING THOSE

RESERVE FUNDS OF THE SALES TAX PASSES AND WE KNOW THE REVENUE IS

COMING IN AS I AM TODAY WHEN WE DO NOT HAVE THAT COMING AND I WANT TO

PRESERVE THAT MONEY FOR EMERGENCY NEEDS AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, SO

TO SOME EXTENT IT CREATES MORE FLEXIBILITY AND OPPORTUNITY FOR BRINGING

IN OTHER FUNDS TO ENSURE WE ARE FUNDING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE TO THIS LEVEL OR HIGHER.

THANK YOU. I THINK WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND I'M SURE WE WILL HAVE SUBSTANTIAL DISCUSSION WHEN WE COME BACK.

THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY

COUNCIL POLICY ON ALLOCATION OF SALES TAX REVENUE AND STATEMENT OF INTENTION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, I WILL GO TO THE CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING THEM, SO I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? THANK YOU.

YOU CAN USE IT,?
I CAN SEE THE TIMER, THANK YOU. MAKE IT GO. SO THE SALES TAX HALF A

PERCENT OF SALES TAX IS TEMPORARY AND IT CONCERNS ME THAT MANY OF THE

ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED AND HOW WE WILL SPEND THE MONEY IF WE GET IT OR NOT TEMPORARY THINGS BUT RECURRING THINGS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE DOUBLE

THE STAFF OF THE POLICE BECAUSE WE CAN AFFORD THEM, WE CAN ONLY AFFORD THEM FOR 12 YEARS AND AT THE END, WE HAVE TO LAY THEM OFF OR GET ANOTHER SALES TAX. AS A CITIZEN, AND MY PREFERENCES IF WE ARE GOING TO

GET EXTRA MONEY, THAT WE MAKE SURE WE PAY WHAT WE HAVE COMMITTED TO

ALREADY, BUT TWO, MOST OF THE FUNDS GO TOWARDS THINGS THAT WILL SAVE US MONEY IN THE FUTURE SO THAT WE WON'T NEED EXTRA SALES TAX AFTER 12 YEARS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, ALL OF HER.

HI. I APPRECIATE THE CITY MANAGER SAYING -- THIS THING IS LOUD TODAY.

THANK THE CITIZENS HAVE SPOKEN. WE DID A COMMUNITY PRIORITY SURVEY AND POLL GRID INFRASTRUCTURE WAS CLEARLY NUMBER ONE. ANYBODY THAT YOU TALK TO TWO IN THE CITY. ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE THINGS PEOPLE ARE WORRIED ABOUT. OUR WATER BILL HAS DOUBLED BECAUSE OF WATER INFRASTRUCTURE. ANY SALES TAX, I WOULD ARGUE, NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY FOCUSED ON THAT. WE'VE HAD WAY TOO MANY GENERAL FUND/SLUSH FUND

SPENDING ON ALL SORTS OF PROJECTS IN THE PAST WITH AN ADDITIONAL SALES

TAX ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER, SO I THINK PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR DISCRETE CLARITY ON THIS. BEING VERY, VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW THIS MONEY

WILL BE SPENT BECAUSE WE ARE IN A TERRIBLE MESS NOT BECAUSE OF PAST SLOPPINESS FINANCIALLY. SO I GUESS THAT'S MY MAIN COMMENT, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, ALL OF HER, FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I GO BACK TO CHAMBERS. LINDA, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE? LINDA, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE? THANK YOU, CAN YOU GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE?
SPEAKING ABOUT 500,000, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY AS I

RECALL, SPENT ON THE LEGAL CASE, YOU KNOW, WITH THE ACLU, REGARDING THE ORDINANCE FOR PARKING ON THE STREET. I JUST THOUGHT I WOULD MENTION THAT. I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A SPECIAL SESSION MEETING YESTERDAY AND I

THINK WE'LL DESERVE TO GET A REPORT SO WE CAN ACTUALLY HEAR AND KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING AND HOW MUCH IT COST. SO ANYWAYS, BUT OTHERWISE, I MENTIONED THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MENTION THAT I

TALKED WITH ERIC, SECOND IN CHARGE OF THE PUBLIC WORKS AND I ASKED HIM

ABOUT THE DAMAGED WIRELESS WATER METERS THAT ARE DYSFUNCTIONAL AND

HAVE FAILED HERE RECENTLY, THAT I WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IF NOT FOR THAT REPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR REQUESTING THAT FROM THE DEPARTMENT. IN ANY EVENT, I GOT SOME GOOD INFORMATION. THERE IS SEVERAL

OF THEM THAT HAVE FAILED, AND SOME OF THEM THAT CANNOT BE FIXED, THAT ARE BEYOND REPAIR. AS FAR AS I KNOW. SO I AM SAYING THAT THIS IS JUST PART OF THE SLOPPINESS THAT OLIVER MENTIONED. WE ARE IN DEBT FOR $5.6 MILLION.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 30 SECONDS.

ON THESE WIRELESS WATER METERS FOR WHICH WE ARE INDEBTED AND OBLIGATED TO PAY FOR THE NEXT 12 YEARS AND FOUR MONTHS, BECAUSE OF THE STUPIDITY THERE AGAIN OF DIANA RICH AND LISA HINTON. THESE ARE THE KINDS

OF DECISIONS THAT HAVE GOTTEN US TO WHERE WE ARE IN THIS IS GOING TO CREATE MORE DEBT.

LINDA, THAT'S TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL COME BACK TO THE CHAMBERS. IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE CHAMBERS, PROBABLY MAKE A COMMENT. SEEN ON. KYLE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF IS? CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
YES I CAN.

GO AHEAD PLEASE.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR REGARDING THE CITIZENS SURVEY THAT SOME

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC COUPON REFERENCING SOME SORT OF LEGIT EVIDENCE AS TO THE PRIORITIES THAT WE SHOULD BE USING. COMING FROM CITIZENS THAT

MAY NOT BE INFORMED OF THE FINANCIAL ISSUES, MANAGEMENT ISSUES, LOTS OF

OTHER KEY DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED IN TERMS OF PRIORITIZING WHERE THESE REVENUES FROM THE SALES TAX MAY GO.

THE SECOND THING I WANT TO MENTION IS THAT THE DESIGN WAS FLAWED. I PERSONALLY TOOK THAT SURVEY OVER 20 TIMES. THERE WAS NO KEY, THERE'S NO

MEANINGFUL RESTRICTIONS FOR KEEPING INDIVIDUALS FROM TAKING THAT

SURVEY MULTIPLE TIMES, AND I'M CERTAIN BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF RESPONSES

THAT WE RECEIVED IN COMPARISON TO PAST OUTREACHES BY THE CITY, THAT THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE LIKE ME WHO TOOK THAT SURVEY MULTIPLE TIMES. SO

TO UTILIZE THAT AS SOME SORT OF KEY EVIDENCE AS TO THE DIRECTION THAT WE SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTING THESE FUNDS, I THINK IS A FLAWED DECISION. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, KYLE, FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I WILL COME BACK TO THE CHAMBERS. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. SEEING NONE. GOING BACK TO ZOOM. IF YOU WOULD MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE. PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE NOW AT THE COUNSEL TABLE TO ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER MAUER. I'M SORRY, ON

THIS ITEM, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET INPUT ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT TOPIC IN EACH OF OUR COUNCILMEMBERS. SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT'S HOW I'M GOING TO TRY TO ORGANIZE THINGS. GO AHEAD.

OKAY. SO I HAVE ON RECORD SAID THAT I DID NOT WANT TO STAY -- TYPIST PIECE

OF THE STAFFING TO THE SALES TAX MEASURE AND I WANT TO CLARIFY WHY THAT

IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE BALLOT WORDING, AND

THAT COMBINED WITH THE OPEN RESPONSES FROM THAT SURVEY, THE OPEN RESPONSE, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY WANTED MORE STAFFING. THAT WAS NOT THE FEELING OF THE OPEN RESPONSES. THEY WANT MORE ACCOUNTABILITY FROM OUR

GOVERNMENT, SO IF WE ARE NOT LISTING AND THE BALLOT MEASURE, I DO NOT THINK WE SHOULD TIE IT TO THE SALES TAX MEASURE. SO WHEN WE VOTE ON THIS,

MY REQUEST IS THAT WE CAN VOTE ON EACH PIECE SEPARATELY, RATHER THAN THE FULL THING, BECAUSE I DO SUPPORT THE FIRST TWO ITEMS. I JUST DON'T SUPPORT THE THIRD ONE. AND I ALSO DON'T MEAN THAT I DON'T SUPPORT STAFFING BECAUSE I DO. AND MY VOTING RECORD SHOWS THAT I HAVE SUPPORTED STAFFING, SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN AT THIS POINT? SO MY NUMBER ONE AND TWO, COUNCILMEMBER MAUER.

ROADS AND PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO IF WE LOOK AT THE SUMMARY AT THE END UNDER OPTIONS ON PAGE SIX AND 40, THAT WOULD BE ONE INTO?
I SUPPORT THE OPTIONS ONE, TWO, AND FOUR, BUT NOT THREE.

ALL RIGHT. AND THAT WOULD BE ON PAGE SIX OF 40. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN OR COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS?

WITH NUMBER FOUR, I KNOW I'VE READ THIS AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS FROM THE

CITY MANAGER, HOW DO YOU ENVISION THAT HAPPENING AS WE GET CLOSER TO THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, MEANING IS IT COMING BACK TO THE COUNT WILL? AND THEN WE START DECIDING TO FLIP THE SWITCH? OR HOW DO YOU ENVISION THAT WORKING?

I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO SAY WHAT THE PICTURE IS GOING

TO LOOK LIKE SIX LAST MONTHS FROM NOW, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. WE ARE PUTTING IN PLACE A BUDGET MONITORING AND RECORDING DISTANT SO WE CAN GET UPDATES ON HOW WE ARE DOING. BY MONTH

NINE OR SO OF THE FISCAL YEAR, WE WILL HAVE A MUCH BETTER IDEA OF WHERE WE ARE GOING TO LAND ON OUR KEY REVENUE SOURCES. FROM THE BUDGET

HEARINGS, WE WERE TAKING A DOWN THE MIDDLE APPROACH ON REVENUES, NOT BEING CONSERVATIVE OR AGGRESSIVE. AS WE APPROACH THE END OF THE YEAR,

WE WILL HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF WHERE WE ARE GOING TO LAND, AND ON THE EXPENSE SIDE, AS WELL. WE WILL REVISIT IT AT OR POTENTIALLY BEFORE THE BUDGET HEARINGS.

SO I'M JUST CONCERNED WITH HAVING THIS YEAR SHOULD BE REACHED THE END

OF THE FISCAL YEAR, AND THEN WITH ALL THIS, WE CAN'T PREDICT THE FUTURE,

MY CONCERN IS WE CAN BE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THIS TONIGHT AND GET TO

THAT POINT AND THEN HERE THAT WE CANNOT USE THE FUNDS UNTIL THE PUBLIC

IF THEY VOTE FOR IT AND PASS IT BUT NOW WE ARE NOT USING IT FOR THE OTHER

ITEMS IF WE APPROVE THEM HERE, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE

COULD ENSURE THAT WE DON'T REACH THAT TIMEFRAME AND THEN WE ARE LIKE

SORRY, WE DID NOT REACH WHAT WE WANT SO WE ARE NOT USING IT THE WAY WE SAID WE WOULD WITH THE POLICY.

I WOULD RESPOND IN THIS WAY, FIRST OF ALL, RESERVING FLEXIBILITY FOR THREE MONTHS IN REVENUE THIS FISCAL YEAR. THE RESOLUTION IS ALSO WRITTEN AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, TO TAKE EFFECT IN FY '25-'26. ANOTHER POINT

IS ANTICIPATE WE WILL DO SOME KIND OF A BUDGET WORKSHOP IN THE SPRING OF

NEXT YEAR, AS WE DID IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR, WHERE WE WILL HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF WHERE WE ARE BUT IT WAS. EVERY MONTH YOU GO, THE NUMBERS GET

JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE SOLID AND WE CAN CERTAINLY VISITED THEN AND SEE WHERE WE ARE. BUT THE IDEA IS TO BUILD IN FLEXIBILITY FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR AND MAKE THE COMMITMENT IF YOU WILL FOR THE FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR. AND BEYOND.

COMMENTS?

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE BECAUSE WE HAVE

DISCUSSED THIS AT THE BUDGET HEARING, BUT I AM DEFINITELY IN FAVOR, ALL FOR THE OPTIONS. AND THE REASON WHY THIS STAFFING STUDY IS IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE FOR ONE, THE PUBLIC DID WEIGH IN HEAVILY ABOUT THE FINANCES.

THEY SEEM TO BE VERY CONCERNED AND I THINK RIGHTFULLY SO. WE NEED TO

HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE IN THE STAFF FINANCING DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE

THAT FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS, OR THEY ARE EXPECTED TO COME OUT, AS FAR AS

GETTING THE REST OF THE WORK DONE, AS FAR AS INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE

REST OF THE ROADS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, YOU NEED ABLE TO DO THAT, AND

THE STAFFING STUDY WE HAD DONE TWO YEARS AGO SAID WE ARE GROSSLY

UNDERSTAFFED, SO I THINK THAT IT IS PRUDENT TO HAVE MONEY SET ASIDE TO

MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THE PEOPLE TO DO THE WORK THAT NEEDS DONE, SO THANKS.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON.

WELL, I AM LOOKING AT THE RESOLUTION COMPARED TO THE AGENDA ITEM. AS I

POINTED OUT, WE HAVE FOUR OPTIONS IN THE AGENDA ITEM BUT ONLY THREE OF US WE'VE COMBINED ONE HERE. IN THE RESOLUTION. WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD

SUPPORT ALL FOR, BUT I THINK JUST REPRESENTING THE FIRE AD HOC COMMITTEE,

I THINK WE STILL HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO TOWARDS REORGANIZATION, AND WE

HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, ET CETERA, SO I THINK IF WE ARE GOING TO

INCLUDE SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN THE RESOLUTION, WE MIGHT JUST WANT TO

SAY SIGNIFICANT FUNDING AS PART OF A REORGANIZATION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. OR WE HAVE A YEAR PROCESS THEY ARE, SO I DON'T KNOW, I JUST

WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR RESOLUTION IS CORRECT HERE, SO I POINT THAT OUT AND MAYBE TO THE ATTORNEY ON HOW THAT SHOULD BE WORDED. IN LOOKING AT THE THREE ON THE RESOLUTION VERSUS THE FOUR.

SO TO CLARIFY, NUMBER FOUR COMES AT THE VERY BOTTOM. A SEPARATE FURTHER RESOLVED. WE ARE DEALING WITH THIS YOU SEPARATELY IN THE FIRST 123.

WHAT WOULD YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS BE ABOUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT?

SHOULD THAT BE THE WAY IT'S WORDED, OR SHOULD WE -- WE STILL HAVE TO SUBMIT A PLAN OF SERVICE AND BE APPROVED.

SO CURRENTLY, IT REFERENCES PROVIDING SUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR FIRE SERVICES AFTER REORGANIZATION WITH GOLD RIDGE. SO IF OUR NEGOTIATED

AGREEMENT REQUIRED SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WOULD FALL WITHIN WHAT IS ALLOWED UNDER NUMBER ONE.

I'M GOING TO WEIGH IN NOW. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT BOOTSTRAPPING THESE

FUNDS NOW, WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESS WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND IS GOING TO HAPPEN WITH OUR VARIOUS CITY NEEDS.

SO I WOULD PERSONALLY BE MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE RESOLUTION,

WITH A COMMITMENT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL THAT IDENTIFIES THE PRIORITY, NUMBER ONE, THE INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH A COMMITMENT TO ALLOCATE ONE THIRD OF THE 1.5 MILLION TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS. HONESTLY, WHO CAN ARGUE WITH THAT? WE NEED IT. IN

TERMS OF THE BALANCE, I WOULD PREFER TO HONESTLY LEAVE IT TO AN ASSESSMENT BY OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AT THAT TIME. AS TO WHAT OUR

ALLOCATION SHOULD BE, AND I HAVE TO SAY PART OF MY INTEREST IS LOOKING AT THE WHERE THE MEASURE HAS BEEN LAID OUT FOR THE VOTERS. THE MEASURE

DOESN'T JUST SPECIFY THESE ITEMS THAT ARE IN THE LISTED SUMMARIES THAT

ARE IN THE STAFF REPORT, SO I WOULD PREFER TO SEE ONE THIRD GO TO

INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THEN THE TWO THIRDS BE ALLOCATED AS THE ELECTED OFFICIALS FEEL IS APPROPRIATE. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS. I SEE COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER MAURER.

I WAS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS TAX BUT I VOTED FOR IT BECAUSE THE CITIZENS

WANTED TO SEE IT ON THE BALLOT AND I WAS ELECTED BY THE CITIZENS, SO

DESPITE MY OWN CONCERNS, I VOTED TO DO IT WITH THE CAVEAT THAT WE

WOULD BE VERY PRESCRIPTIVE AND HOW WE WOULD USE THESE TAXES, SO I HAVE TO SAY THAT IF WE VOTED, IF IT WAS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL TO VOTE 33% FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE REST, I WILL COME OUT AGAINST THIS. I BELIEVE THAT

THE CITIZENS, FOR YEARS, HAVE TRUSTED US TO UTILIZE THIS MONEY, AND IN MY

MIND, WE HAVE SPENT IT IN WAYS THAT WERE NOT WISE, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE IN

THIS SITUATION, SO WE NEED TO PAY THE PIPER AND COMMIT TO WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO WITH IT. AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE 33%. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD PUT IT TOWARDS WHAT THE POLL SHOWS. STAFFING, I COULD GO EITHER WAY. I COULD BE CONVINCED EITHER WAY. THE CITIZENS HERE DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT WE ARE GOING TO SPEND IT ON AND ACTUALLY SEE IT COME TO FRUITION. THERE ARE A

LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DO NOT EVEN TRUST THAT WE CAN SPEND IT PROPERLY

BECAUSE WE HAVE ROADS THAT ARE CRUMBLING, WE HAVE DOUBLED WATER RATES BECAUSE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THERE. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A 33%, MAYBE EVEN MORE OF THAT ALLOCATED, BUT IF IT'S ONLY 33% NUMBER I AM A VOCAL NOW ON THE ENTIRE TAX IN GENERAL, SO CONSIDER THAT.

OUR DISLIKE CLARIFICATIONS AND COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS ABOUT WHAT IT IS THAT SHE IS ASKING FOR. YOU'RE ASKING FOR 50% GOING TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE OR MORE THAN THAT? I JUST DID NOT UNDERSTAND. AND THAT I HAVE A FURTHER COMMENT.

SO THE 33%, I INITIALLY WAS NOT HAPPY WITH THAT, BUT I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THAT HIGHER. BUT WHEN I SAW THAT IT WAS AT LEAST ALLOCATING

AND STATING THEY WOULD USE IT TOWARDS PUBLIC SAFETY WHICH WAS CLEARLY

THE PUBLIC'S PRIORITY, I LEARNED TO ACCEPT THAT BUT I WANT TO ACCEPT

ANYTHING LESS THAN -- IT HAS TO HAVE, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE NUMBER ONE AND THE NUMBER TWO. IF WE DON'T HAVE BOTH OF THOSE TOGETHER THEN I'M NOT

GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AND THERE WILL BE VOCAL BECAUSE I SAID THAT WHEN I

VOTED FOR THIS THAT WE NEED TO BE VERY PRESCRIPTIVE WITH WHAT WE ARE DOING. THE CITY MANAGER AND I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THIS A VARIETY OF TIMES

THAT I UNDERSTAND THE LIMITATIONS WE ARE UNDER AND THE STRAIN WE ARE UNDER WITH OUR BUDGET. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN AT LEAST 40% OR 50% TOWARDS THE INFRASTRUCTURE. WE HAVE A LOT

OF PROBLEMS AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE US A LONG TIME TO CHIP AWAY EVEN WITH A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY. SO DOES THAT HELP?

YEAH, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I ALSO SUPPORTED IT WAS I THOUGHT IF YOU COULD PUT 50% TOWARDS THE INFRASTRUCTURE, COULD SUPPORT THAT. WE

COULD TAKE CARE OF OUR ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT

BUT I WOULD SUPPORT A COMBINATION OF WHAT THE MAYOR IS RECOMMENDING AND WHAT COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS IS RECOMMENDING. WHICH IS TO PUT A

HALF TOWARDS THE INFRASTRUCTURE, ET CETERA AND LEAVE THE FIFTH PERCENT LAST TO THE COUNCIL PER THE BALLOT WORDING. THAT'S THE THING I WOULD CHANGE, MAKING SURE WE HAVE THAT FOR THE BALLOT WORDING. THAT WAS THE PART YOU DID NOT INCLUDE. AS LONG AS WE ARE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS

BASED ON WHAT'S WORDED, HOW THE BALLOT IS WORDED, HOW THAT MEASURE IS WORDED. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SUPPORT.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON.

HAVING HEARD FROM MY COLLEAGUES, I THINK WE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT A THIRD DEDICATED TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THE BEGINNING. INFRASTRUCTURE AS WE KNOW IS LONG PAST DUE. THERE'S MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN INFRASTRUCTURE. I THINK WE NEED TO CHIP AWAY AND DEDICATE A THIRD. THEN AS WE SEE IN THE SURVEY, AND I THINK WHAT CITIZENS WANT IS 911 AND PUBLIC SERVICE. THAT COULD BE ONE THIRD. AND STAFFING, SOME OF US FEEL OKAY ABOUT IT. THAT MIGHT BE THE OTHER THIRD THAT WE LEAVE OPEN. WE CAN APPLY IT TO STAFFING, ADD MORE TO INFRASTRUCTURE. I AGREE WITH THE MAYOR'S

POSITION OF NOT WALKING OUR HANDS COMPLETELY BUT ALSO I AGREE WITH WHAT WE PROMISE THE VOTERS. DEDICATING MONEY TO INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH WE NEED, AND PUBLIC SAFETY. WE KNOW WE'VE UNDERFUNDED THE FIRE

DEPARTMENT FOR MANY YEARS AND WE HAVE ALSO GONE YEARS WHERE WE HAD

A LOT OF OVERTIME IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T SELL

POSITIONS QUICKLY AND I THINK OUR COMMUNITY WANTS AND EXPECTS PUBLIC SAFETY TO BE DELIVERED. IF WE LOCKED UP TWO THIRDS OF IT, THAT LEAVES US

WITH ONE THIRD, KIND OF DEPENDING ON WHAT OUR PROBLEMS ARE AT THE MOMENT. CANNOT TIE EVERYBODY'S HANDS, AND APPLIED AS THE COUNCIL SEES FIT AND AS STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND. MAYBE ONE YEAR AT A STAFFING AND ANOTHER YEAR IT IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. IT IS LIKE THAT AND COMPROMISE IN

BRINGING WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS

I WILL CHIME IN HERE TO ACCEPT THE -- WELL, WITH A QUESTION, BUT FIRST TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SAFETY. SOMETHING I'VE ALWAYS SUPPORTED IN THE PAST. SO I AM DEFINITELY ON BOARD TO ALLOCATE A PORTION OF THESE FUNDS TO PUBLIC SAFETY IN SOME FASHION. I THINK THAT IS REFLECTED IN THE POLL RESULTS. IN MY QUESTION, SO INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC SAFETY AND

ALLOCATION OF SPECIFIC FUNDING TO THOSE TWO CATEGORIES I FEEL IS IMPORTANT. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, THOUGH. I SEE SUBSTANTIAL

ATTENTION GIVEN FROM MY PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING AT A COLORFUL GRAPH. ON THE SURVEY. WE KNOW THAT THE SURVEY WAS NONSCIENTIFIC. THERE WAS NO LIMITATION ON THE SURVEY THAT REQUIRED THAT ONLY RESIDENTS SUBMIT AND OTHERS. THERE WAS NO CHECK AND BALANCE ON THE NUMBER OF REPLIES. HOWEVER, THE POLL WAS VERY SCIENTIFIC. I SEE IN THE

STAFF REPORT, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, LITTLE ATTENTION GIVEN TO THE RESULTS OF THE SCIENTIFIC POLL. I AM LOOKING AT PAGE THREE OF 40. IT NOTES THAT CITY

STREETS AND ROADS ALL ON BOARD WERE VERY IMPORTANT IN THE PROPERTY

CRIME AND MAINTAINING EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES AGAIN, PUBLIC SAFETY,

WERE VERY IMPORTANT, BUT WHAT WE DO NOT SEE IS WHAT THE PRIORITIZATION

WAS FOR OTHER INVESTMENTS, OTHER EXPENSES, OTHER CATEGORIES OF CITY NEEDS. DOES STAFF HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION? I KNOW I RECALL SEEING AN ENTIRE PRIORITY LIST BASED ON THE RESPONSES.

IF YOU GIVE ME A MOMENT, I CAN BRING SOMETHING UP ON THAT.

I'M LISTENING TO CONVERSATION BY COUNCILMEMBERS AND REALIZING WE

INVESTED IN THAT PAUL SUBSTANTIALLY AND WE NEED TO BE PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT AND THE WAY OUR CITIZENS PRIORITIZE OUR NEEDS. BOTTOM LINE, INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC SAFETY, DEFINITELY ON BOARD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS? GO AHEAD, VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN.

YEAH. I THINK WHAT WE HAVE AS FAR AS THE FOUR OPTIONS IS PRESCRIPTIVE

AND ALSO I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY NEGATIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS SINCE IT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED. I LIKE THE FACT THAT THERE IS THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT CANNOT HIGHWAY THAT THE BOWLING. I HAVE NO IDEA.

RIGHT NOW, FULLY FUNDING PULLEYS. PUBLIC SAFETY IS HUGE. I HAVE NO IDEA

WHAT MONEY WE ARE GOING TO NEED AS WE DO THE REORDER WITH GOLD RICH, SO IT COMPLETELY LEAVES IT OPEN AS FAR AS HOW MUCH MONEY. I MEAN, I HAVE NO IDEA. RIGHT NOW IT IS COMPLETELY DELINEATED AND IT'S COMPLETELY OPEN BUT IT'S COMPLETELY EARMARKED FOR THAT. I THINK THAT'S COMPLETELY PRESCRIPTIVE. AS FAR AS THE STAFFING, I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS I

STATED BEFORE, YOU CANNOT GET ANY OF THIS IMPORTANT WORK DONE WITHOUT THE STAFF, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH FOUR. SO I'M FINE WITH THAT.

I SEE THE CITY MANAGER LEANING IN.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE I CAN SHOW YOU MORE RESULTS, SUMMARY LEVEL.

IF YOU CAN REALLY QUICKLY PULL IT UP. SO THE TOP ITEM, JUST READING TO

MAINTAIN SIDEWALKS AND CROSSWALKS, SECOND ITEM IS MANAGING CITY FINANCES, THE THIRD IS ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, INCLUDING 911, POLICE AND FIRE

RESPONSE, INFRASTRUCTURE, PARKS, TRAILS, BIKE LANES AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, SO IT'S ACTUALLY A VERY CLOSE MATCH TO THE SURVEY. AND FROM THERE, IT'S HOMELESSNESS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE.

COUNCILMEMBER MAURER .

SO I CREATED THIS SPREADSHEET ON OPEN RESPONSES, WHICH IS WHERE PEOPLE PUT THEIR THOUGHTS, NOT TAKING THE SURVEY BUT PUTTING THEIR THOUGHTS IN.

THE THING ABOUT MANAGING CITY FINANCES, I CALLED THE GOVERNMENT

ACCOUNTABILITY AND IT WASN'T ASKING FOR MORE STAFF HERE KIT WAS, YOU

KNOW, CUTTING SALARIES FOR THE TOP GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AND NO MORE HIGH PAID CONSULTANTS AND TERM LIMITS FOR COUNCILMEMBERS.

ACCOUNTABILITY ON HOW TAX MONEY IS SPENT. REDUCING PENSION BENEFITS. IT WAS NOT NECESSARILY LIKE GET MORE STAFFING. IT WASN'T VERY POSITIVE.

THERE WERE SOME POSITIVES, FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S SEE. RETAIN EMPLOYEES, THAT WAS ONE. SOMEONE SUPPORTED A TAX, BUT ANOTHER COMMENT, THINGS SHOULD

HAVE BEEN BETTER MANAGED, GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER, SETTLE THE ACLU LAWSUIT. THESE ARE ALL ABOUT GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, THAT'S A BIG ISSUE. IT DOES NOT MEAN PEOPLE WANT MORE STAFFING. IT JUST MEANT THERE'S AN ISSUE THAT THE CITY IS FACING, AND THAT'S

WHY THAT COMBINED WITH THAT IT WAS NOT IN THE BALLOT WORDING, THAT'S WHAT I DID NOT WANT TO SUPPORT THIS. I WOULD SUPPORT KEEPING A PORTION OF IT OPEN. BRINGING HER BACK TO COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS. THE ONE WHO BROUGHT THE IDEA OF HAVING THE PRIORITY POLICY IN PLACE. THIS WAS HER IDEA AND WE ALL AGREED WITH HAVING ONE. SO I WOULD WANT TO HEAR AGAIN ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD DO IT.

GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS .

WHEN YOU READ ALL THOSE COMMENTS I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU AS FAR AS THE STAFF GOES. HOW I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE 40% TOWARDS THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND LEAVE IT OPEN TO NOT JUST THE

PERCENTAGE FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT SOMETHING THAT BASICALLY SAYS SUFFICIENT STAFFING OR WHATEVER. AND THEN AFTER THAT, UTILIZING AFTER WE

MET THOSE TWO BURDENS, UTILIZING IN THE WAY THAT WE, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER WE NEED TO USE IT.

WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH ADDING THE WORDS PER THE BALLOT WORDING? LIKE THE MONEY SPENT.

I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE BALLOT WORDING WAS.

IT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE VOTING FOR.

COULD WE PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN?
IT'S ON PAGE TWO. THE COMMENT ON THE POLL RESULTS, WE DID SEE THAT ONE OF THE HIGH-PRIORITY ITEMS WAS PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES. I DON'T SEE THAT IDENTIFIED AT ALL. THAT WOULD BE FOR MY PERSPECTIVE I WOULD INCLUDE PARKS, POOLS, COMMUNITY CENTER, RECREATION IN TOWN. JUST WONDERING HOW OR WHETHER THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE THAT 60% OF THOSE POLLED DID PRIORITIZE THIS ITEM IS IMPORTANT. IS THAT CAPTURED IN THIS RESOLUTION, CAN IT BE CAPTURED IN THIS RESOLUTION? I'M LOOKING AT THE CITY

MANAGER BECAUSE HE MAY HAVE A SENSE OF THAT AND ANOTHER MY FELLOW

COUNCILMEMBERS ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT I'M LOOKING AT THE POLL AND IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS IMPORTANT.
.2 OF THE RESOLUTION, 33% OF THE REVENUE SHALL BE ALLOCATED FOR CONTAINING AND REPAIRING CITY ROADS, STREETS, DRAINAGE AND PARKS.

I DON'T THINK THAT CATEGORY WAS A MUCH BROADER DESCRIPTION. IT WAS NOT JUST PARKS BUT RECREATION AND FACILITIES, I THINK.

IT SAYS MAINTAINING PARKS, TRAILS, BIKE LANES, THE CITY POOL, AND THAT'S ENOUGH, SO IT DOES INCLUDE OTHER THINGS.

THIS IS SOMEWHAT NARROWLY AND INTENTIONALLY FOCUSED TO AVERT THE HIGHER PRIORITIES. YOU COULD CERTAINLY BROADEN IT IF YOU PREFER.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE I THINK INFRASTRUCTURE PERSONALLY HAS TO BE PRIORITIZED. THAT IS SHOWING UP IN ALL OF THE COMMENTS. MY VOTE IS

DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF SOME AMOUNT AND AM HAPPY WITH THE SPECIFIC AMOUNT RECOGNIZE THE GENERALIZED INTEREST INFRASTRUCTURE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME RECOGNITION OF OUR 61% OF PEOPLE POLLED WANTING MONEY TO GO TOWARDS THE BROADER CATEGORY. I DON'T MOTHER WOULD BE RECOGNIZED IN THIS RESOLUTION. I ALSO AM VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF PUBLIC

SAFETY, AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO HAVE A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OR PERCENTAGE ALLOCATED TOWARDS PUBLIC SAFETY. SO MAYBE THERE'S A THIRD OR SOME

PERCENTAGE TO INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH I DO NOT SEE, INFRASTRUCTURE AT

SOME PERCENTAGE TOWARDS PUBLIC SAFETY AND THEN SOME PERCENTAGE THAT CAN BE ALLOCATED BASED ON THE POLLING RESULTS OF THE CITIZENS. THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO CAPTURE THIS. CAN SOMEONE ON THE COUNCIL PLEASE HELP ME WITH THIS, OR STAFF? DO ANY OF THE OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS FEEL -- I

WOULD LIKE TO SOLICIT YOUR OPINIONS ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION CATEGORY, WHETHER IT IS IMPORTANT OR NOT. VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN.

KNOW. I AM STICKING WITH WHAT WAS PROPOSED BY STAFF. I THINK IT CAPTURES EVERYTHING IN OPTION NUMBER ONE. PERSONALLY I DO NOT WANT TO PUT A

PERCENTAGE FOR -- OR A FIGURE ASSOCIATED WITH POLICE AND FIRE BECAUSE AGAIN, IT MAKES ME VERY NERVOUS. LIKE I DON'T WANT TO BE BOXED IN ON THAT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY WILL BE ABLE TO WORK WITH GOLD RIDGE. I DON'T WANT TO GET DRAWN INTO THAT. DON'T WANT A PERCENTAGE ASSOCIATED.

I WANT TO JUST FUND IT HOWEVER IT PLAYS OUT.

I AGREE WITH THAT.

NOT PUTTING A PERCENTAGE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY. I WILL TIE THE -- IF YOU'RE

GOING TO DO AN OPEN CATEGORY, I WILL TIE IT TO THE BALLOT WORDING SPECIFICALLY.

COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS, THIS WAS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT YOU REALLY

SPEARHEADED, MAYBE WE CAN GET YOUR RESPONSE ON THE PROPOSAL THAT COUNCILMEMBER MAURER JUST LAID OUT.
[ CAPTIONERS TRANSITIONING ] I AM WITH YOU, VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN AND I WOULD SEE WORDING LIKE SUFFICIENT. I AM OKAY WITH THE BALLOT SO KEEPING THE REST WITH THE WORDING.

WE ARE STATING THAT PUBLICLY WE WILL UTILIZE IT FOR THAT SO I AM OKAY WITH THAT. IT IS A 40 PERCENT INFRASTRUCTURE AND THEN SUFFICIENT FUNDING.

IT IS ABOUT 600,000. SO IF WE LOCK THAT UP AND WE SEE THIS PRIORITIES SIGNIFICANT.

IF I MAY IT SOUNDS LIKE IN THE RESOLUTION ITSELF WE WOULD BE KEEPING ONE

INTO THE SAME AND THEN IT CURRENTLY SAYS -- NUMBER THREE WHERE IT SAYS THERE YOU COULD SAY IF THERE IS SUFFICIENT REVENUE FOR ITEMS 1 AND 2 AND

THE REMAINING REVENUE WOULD BE ALLOCATED FOR THE CATEGORIES IDENTIFIED IN THE BALLOT MEASURE.

I WILL JUST READ IT. FOR WILDFIRE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, TRAILS, LIBRARY,

YOUTH AND SENIOR SERVICES AND RETAINING AND ATTRACTING LOCAL

BUSINESSES ARE THE SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED AS EXAMPLES IN THE BALLOT MEASURE.

SO MOVED.

ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION FROM COUNCIL ? YOU SAID NUMBER 2 AND IT IS NUMBER ONE?
IF YOU LOOK AT THE RESOLUTION.

SORRY I'M LOOKING AT --
COULD I ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. SO WE ARE VOCALIZING THAT THE 40 PERCENT IS THE PRIORITY BUT IN THE RESOLUTION IS NUMBER 2. CAN WE NOT MOVE THOSE OR REORGANIZE THOSE? WE ARE LIKE NUMBER ONE IS THE 40

PERCENT, RIGHT AND NUMBER TWO, SIGNIFICANT REVENUE FOR MAINTAINING AND THE NUMBER THREE IS THE BALLOT THIS HOUR?
NUMBER 1 WOULD BE 40 PERCENT OF THE REVENUE FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE

AND NUMBER TWO IS ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT WE SPEND FOR REVENUE

ALLOCATED FOR MAINTAINING PUBLIC SAFETY AS IT IS WORDED NOW AND NUMBER THREE WOULD BE IF THERE IS REMAINING REVENUE AFTER ITEMS 1 AND 2

ARE ALLOCATED, ADDITIONAL MONEY WOULD BE SPENT OR ALLOCATED FOR THE PURPOSES AND THAT LIST FROM THE BALLOT.

A QUESTION. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU CAPTURE THE FULL BALLOT WORDING AND

THAT AND NOT JUST PART OF IT BUT THE FULL BALLOT WORDING BECAUSE IT COULD BE WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT COULD REQUIRE MORE THAN 40 PERCENT FOR

THE PARKS AND I WOULDN'T WANT US TO BE LIMITED BY THAT BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE AN OPEN RESPONSE.

THIS IS GOING TO THE POINT OF COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS. IF THERE WAS IN FACT

MORE MONEY NEEDED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT WOULD ALLOW MORE MONEY TO BE ALLOCATED BEYOND THAT 40 PERCENT? IS THAT YOUR POINT?

IT IS CLEAR THIS IS THE PRIORITY LIST IN THE ORDER PRIORITY AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE. AND THIS IS SUBJECT TO REASSESSMENT BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON A MAJORITY VOTE LATER ON, CORRECT? CITY COUNCIL CONTINUES TO HAVE THE

PURVIEW AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT AND I AM COMPLETELY IN SUPPORT OF THAT MODIFICATION FOR CITY MANAGER.

THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT COUNTS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND I

DON'T KNOW IF THE INTENT IS TO LEAVE THE LANGUAGE WE HAD WHICH IS

RELATIVELY NARROWLY FOCUSED OR IF YOU WANTED TO BE MORE BROAD AND

REPAIRING OR ALLOCATING CITY INFRASTRUCTURE IF YOU WANT THIS LANGUAGE IN RESOLUTION.

AT THE MOMENT HOW DOES IT DESCRIBE THE INFRASTRUCTURE?
IT SPECIFIES ROAD -- ROADS, STREETS, DRAINAGE AND PARKS.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY NEED TO EXPANDED BEYOND THOSE CATEGORIES? I AM COMFORTABLE WITH IT. CITY MANAGER, DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION? I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CRYSTAL CLEAR CONSISTENT WITH YOUR POLICY.

I THINK THAT IS OKAY BECAUSE IF YOU THINK ABOUT A PARK YOU WANT TO REPAVE SOMETHING OR BENEFIT THE PARK? NO?
OKAY. ALEX? YOU CAN READ NUMBER THREE. IF YOU COULD, I THINK THE BEST

IDEA HERE WOULD BE IF YOU COULD READ WHAT THE OUTCOME HERE IS AND SOMEBODY COULD HOPEFULLY MOVE BASED ON HOW YOU DESCRIBE IT.

I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR BY THE VICE MAYOR AND THIS IS THE MOTION AND IF IT IS INCORRECT, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. IT IS APPROVING A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL THE POLICY IN SALES TAX REVENUE THAT 40

PERCENT OF THE REVENUE SHALL BE ALLOCATED FOR MAINTAINING AND

REPAIRING CITY ROADS, STREETS, DRAINAGE AND PARKS SUFFICIENT REVENUE

SHALL BE ALLOCATED FOR MAINTAINING PUBLIC SAFETY INCLUDING RETAINING

EXISTING POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING LEVELS AND PROVIDING SUFFICIENT

FUNDING FOR FIRE SERVICE AFTER THE REORGANIZATION OF SUCH SERVICES WITH

THE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND IF THERE IS SUFFICIENT REVENUE ALLOCATED FOR ITEMS 1 INTO ABOVE REMAINING REVENUES WILL BE ALLOCATED TO MAINTAIN

SERVICES SUCH AS EMERGENCY MEDICAL FIRE AS BEYOND WILDFIRE

PREPAREDNESS MAINTENANCE AND STREET ROADS, PARKS, TRAILS AND SENIOR

SERVICES AND RETAINING TO ATTRACT LOCAL BUSINESSES AND GOVERNMENT USE

AND THE FOURTH ONE I DIDN'T HEAR BUT I BELIEVE IS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION IS REVENUE GENERATED BY CITY STREETS MEASURES DURING FY 2425

NOT ALLOCATED TO THIS PART OF THE FISCAL YEAR ONCE THE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES FOR 2425 ARE CLEARED.

I WILL SECOND THAT.

AND SO MOVED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL POLICY AND THE ALLOCATION OF REVENUES AS I JUST STATED.
[ ROLL CALL VOTE TAKEN ]
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND A VERY PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION. THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ALSO. WE ARE NOW ON AGENDA ITEM

NUMBER SIX, DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF TASKS, TIMELINE,

AND BUDGET FOR CITY COUNCIL AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR PROTOCOLS, PROCEDURES, AND HANDBOOK. THIS ITEM IS BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE AD HOC

COMMITTEE THAT THIS CITY COUNCIL APPOINTED TO LOOK INTO THIS ITEM IN

THAT COMMITTEE CONSISTS OF VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN, MYSELF, AND THEN WE HAVE STAFF MEMBERS, OUR CITY MANAGER AND THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. I

GUESS I WILL TURN TO THE CITY MANAGER AND WOULD YOU PREFER TO TAKE THE LEAD? THIS ITEM -- WE WERE APPOINTED TO LOOK INTO THE CITY COUNCIL

PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES AND REASSESS THEM, PROVIDE A

RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND IN APPROACH OF REASSESSING THEM. AS WE KNOW, WE HAVE A NEW CITY ATTORNEY RETAINED AND THE AD HOC

COMMITTEE MET MULTIPLE TIMES IN ORDER TO DETERMINE A TIMELINE WHICH

YOU SEE SET OUT IN THIS PARTICULAR STAFF REPORT AND TO IDENTIFY THE

PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES THAT WE FELT WOULD BE MOST IMPORTANT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS LAYS OUT, TODAY, SEPTEMBER 17, AS THE

DATE WE WOULD ASK THIS CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER OUR PROPOSED TASKS AND TIMELINE. THE NEXT ONE, THE NEXT STEP IN THE AD HOC COMMITTEE WOULD BE ON OCTOBER ONE. I AM LOOKING AT THE PRIORITIZATION ON PAGE 3 OF 3 WHICH

OUTLINES WHEN THE VARIOUS PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES WOULD BE BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THIS IS TENTATIVE, BUT WE FEEL WE CAN MEET THESE

DEADLINES AND ON OCTOBER ONE WE WOULD BRING FORWARD THE SELECTION OF

MAYOR IN THE SELECTION OF VICE MAYOR, THE ROLE OF VICE MAYOR AND THEN

THE SEATING OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHICH, BELIEVE IT OR NOT HAS BEEN

CHAOTIC IN THE PAST AND WHERE WOULD EVERYBODY SIT ONCE MAYOR AND VICE

MAYOR ARE SELECTED AND ALSO REQUIRE TRAINING SO THIS WOULD BE THE OCTOBER ONE PLAN AND OCTOBER 15, WE WOULD BRING BACK THE PLACEMENT OF

ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, WHICH HAS BEEN AN IMPORTANT TOPIC OF DISCUSSION

FOR THIS COUNCIL AND THE FORMAT OF THE AGENDAS AND ON NOVEMBER FIVE

WOULD BRING BACK THE CITY COUNCIL STANDING COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND

AD HOC COMMITTEE FORMATION AND THE LIAISON DISCUSSION AND THEN THE

CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND STAFF COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS PROCESS AND SELECTION. YOU CAN SEE IS TRYING TO ORGANIZE THESE VARIOUS

TOPICS THAT WE ON THE AD HOC COMMITTEE HAVE SEEN THROUGH THE CITY

COUNCIL IDENTIFYING IS IMPORTANT AREAS OF CONCERN AND ALSO DIFFERENT OPINIONS. THE REASON FOR BRINGING BACK THE SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE

MAYOR INITIALLY IS THE FIRST SET BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS COMING UP IN DECEMBER SO IT SEEMED APPROPRIATE. THIS IS HOW THE STAFF REPORT IS LAID

OUT AND WE AS THE AD HOC ARE GEARED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY

MAY HAVE AND ALSO ONCE WE GET TO THAT POINT ENGAGE IN A DISCUSSION THAT ALLOWS THIS COUNCIL AS A WHOLE TO DECIDE WHAT PRIORITIES ARE. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD OR CITY MANAGER?

I WANTED TO ADD WHAT THE OUTCOME IS IN ITS TO ADDRESS THESE INDIVIDUAL

POLICIES AND BRING BACK ONE COMPLETED HANDBOOK BY THE END OF FISCAL YEAR NEXT YEAR BY JUNE. IT WILL BE REVIEWING INDIVIDUAL POLICIES AND NOT

JUST THESE BUT ONCE WE GET THROUGH THESE IT IS TO DISCUSS WHAT OTHER

FURTHER POLICIES SHOULD BE THERE AND AS DISCUSSED THROUGH THE YEAR, THE

GOAL IS BY JUNE OF NEXT YEAR TO HAVE IT COMPLETED AND I WANTED TO SEE WHAT IT WAS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU HAVE SELECTION OF MAYOR AND SELECTION OF VICE MAYOR HERE BUT THIS

HAS BEEN DONE THE SAME AND UNCOMFORTABLY EVERY YEAR SO ARE YOU THINKING OF CHANGING THAT POLICY?

THE PLAN IN EACH OF THESE INSTANCES WAS TO RESPECT THE ESTABLISHED

INTERESTS AND IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF HAVING THOSE OPTIONS AVAILABLE SO

THE TOPIC OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR AS ONE EXAMPLE, THE DISCUSSION HAS

BEEN TO BRING IT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL A NUMBER OF OPTIONS OR NUMBER OF WAYS MAYORS AND VICE MAYORS CAN BE SELECTED. WE WOULD BRING BACK THOSE OPTIONS. MARY AND ALEX HAVE ALREADY BEEN WORKING ON PUTTING

TOGETHER THOSE OPTIONS AND THEN HOPEFULLY IF THE AD HOC AGREES WE HAVE

A RECOMMENDED APPROACH BUT WE WOULD BRING BACK OPTIONS RECOGNIZING THE CHAOTIC NATURE IN THE PAST. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT?
SO YOU WILL BE BRINGING BACK EXAMPLES OF OTHER CITIES? OKAY.

YES. THE IDEA IS TO BRING BACK VARIOUS OPTIONS AND SO FAR IT SEEMS TO BE

LANDING ON ABOUT THREE OPTIONS, ONE OF WHICH WOULD BE THE CURRENT

PROCESS, BUT THERE WOULD BE OTHER OPTIONS BROUGHT FORWARD AND MARY

GOURLEY HAS ALREADY DONE A VERY THOROUGH SEARCH INTO WHAT OTHER

JURISDICTIONS ARE DOING AND WHAT THEIR APPROACHES ARE AND WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT EXPERTISE AND EXPERIENCE ALREADY.

YOU HAVE FOUND PEOPLE DO IT TWO DIFFERENT WAYS?
NO. THERE IS MORE THAN TWO DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO IT AND I WOULDN'T SAY THERE IS MORE THAN FIVE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MALL.

I HAVE RESEARCHED ALL THE CALIFORNIA CITIES AND THE MAJORITY DO THEM IN

THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT WAYS IN THE MAJORITY DO IT THREE OF THOSE

DIFFERENT WAYS SO WE WILL BE BRINGING THOSE POLICIES AND BRING YOU A TABLE TO SHOW YOU HOW THEY DO IT. AND THERE PROTOCOLS BEHIND IT.

I THINK WE ARE IN GOOD HANDS WITH MARY AND HER DEEP RESEARCH SKILLS

AND THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE WANT REFERENCES AND JURISDICTIONAL

EXAMPLES AND ALEX WHO HAS EXPERIENCE BEYOND OUR TALENT AND IS DOING THAT QUITE WELL. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT? PUBLIC COMMENT?

THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED TASKS,

TIMELINE AND BUDGET FOR THE PROTOCOLS AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A

PUBLIC COMMENT, I WOULD COME TO CHAMBERS FIRST AND THEN GO OUT TO

ZOOM AND SEEING NONE I WOULD GO OUT TO ZOOM AND CAN YOU TAKE YOURSELF OFF MUTE?
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
GO AHEAD.

I AM MIXING A FEW THINGS IN THE STAFFING PRIORITIES THAT WERE DISCUSSED

AS PART OF THE BUDGET PRIORITIES LAST TIME ALWAYS MAKES ME NERVOUS

WHEN I HEAR WE NEED MORE PEOPLE IN THE CITY HAS NOT GROWN IN HOWEVER MANY YEARS IT HAS BEEN.

I WILL INTERRUPT YOU, ROBERT, BUT I THINK YOU ARE COMMENTING ON AN ITEM WE HAVEN'T YET DISCUSSED.

I AM NOT.

I AM SORRY. PLEASE MAKE SURE HE GETS HIS FULL TIME.

SO YOU THROUGH ME OFF. YOU ARE GOOD AT THIS, MAYOR. MY THOUGHT IS THIS

AS YOU THINK ABOUT PRIORITIES, YOU ALL APPROVE EVERY PROJECT THAT STAFF

DOES AND AT LEAST FOUR TIMES AND YOU LOOK AT IT WHEN THE BUDGET COMMITTEE LOOKS AT IT AND THEN BUDGET REVIEW.

I AM NOT TRYING TO BE RUDE BUT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE PRIORITIES

ITEM BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO APPROACH AS AN AD

HOC COMMITTEE THE REASSESSMENT OF OUR POLICIES AND THE COUNCIL POLICIES AND PROTOCOLS. SO WE ARE NO LONGER TALKING ABOUT PRIORITIES.

I AM SORRY. I HAVE TWO MINUTES TO SAY THIS. IS THAT THE ROLE? NOT THREE? YES. THANK YOU. LET'S START THE TIME OVER AND IT IS ON THE PROTOCOLS AND

APPROACH THAT WE WILL BE TAKING ON REASSESSMENT OF OUR POLICIES AND PROTOCOLS. THANK YOU.

LET ME GET TO THE POINT. MY POINT IS AS YOU REASSESS YOUR PROTOCOLS, ONE

OF THOSE YOU COULD POTENTIALLY REASSESS IS HOW OFTEN YOU APPROVE PROJECTS THAT THE CITY STAFF IS TRYING TO CONDUCT. I THINK THINK ABOUT THIS YEAR. YOU DIDN'T GET A BUDGET APPROVED ON TIME AND YOU TOOK AUGUST

OFF IN THE FIRST STAFF REPORT REQUESTING FUNDING FOR PROJECTS PART OF THE

PLAN FOR THIS YEAR AND WANT HEARD UNTIL SEPTEMBER AND WON'T START BEFORE OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER. IT MEANS STAFF HAVE EIGHT MONTHS TO GET THOSE THINGS DONE. 33 PERCENT OF THE YEAR IS SHOT AND THAT IS WHY STAFF IS OVERWORKED. IT IS A VERY INEFFICIENT PROCESS AND YOU CAN FIX THAT BY

ADDING TO YOUR PROTOCOL DISCUSSION AND HOW DO WE GO ABOUT APPROVING THESE THINGS. MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE BUDGET COMMITTEE HAS ALREADY

LOOKS DEEPLY AT MOST OF THE PROJECTS AND THEY HAVE HAD A SHOT ON IT DURING BUDGET REVIEW IN A GOOD YEAR. AND IT MAY MAKE SENSE THAT FOR

SMALLER PROJECTS THAT THAT IS ENOUGH OF APPROVAL AND STAFF COULD MOVE

FORWARD AND SIMPLY REPORT ON IT AS PART OF THEIR MONTHLY REPORT OUTS

AND OF THE PROJECTS ARE LITTLE BIT BIGGER, MAYBE THEY GO TO THE BUDGET

COMMITTEE FOR APPROVAL RATHER THAN COMING BACK TO FULL COUNCIL

BECAUSE YOUR MEETING AGENDAS ARE FULL AND YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO HAD

A LOT OF DEEP DISCUSSIONS ON THESE THINGS IN THE BUDGET COMMITTEE IS

WHAT THEY DO AND THEY COULD PROBABLY TAKE CARE OF MOST OF THOSE THINGS IN YOUR LEFT WITH BIG PROJECTS. THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE BUILT INTO

YOUR HANDBOOK DURING YOUR PROTOCOLS AND CHANGE THE WAY THE CITY APPROVES THE WAY THEY DO WORK AND THAT IS MY POINT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THE PROTOCOLS, TASK AND TIMELINE? SEEING NONE, I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, LINDA, PLEASE. GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

THAT WAS A VERY GOOD POINT AND YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AND BY THE WAY I MISS YOU. ASIDE FROM THAT, I AM GOING WITH PROTOCOLS AND STUFF, SO MUCH

TIME NOT LISTENING TO SOLUTIONS THAT ARE SUGGESTED LIKE RICHARD AND

MYSELF AND OTHERS HERE AND THEN EVERYTHING COMES DUE AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THE BIG STUFF LIKE AGAIN THE $5.6 MILLION LOAN THAT THE MAYOR

STILL DOESN'T ACKNOWLEDGE FOR THE WIRELESS WATER METERS THAT ARE

FEELING AND HAVE FAILED AND WILL COST US YET MORE MONEY AND AGAIN OBLIGATED TO PAY OFF FOR 15 YEARS ALL BROUGHT TO US BY YET ANOTHER BOGUS SURVEY. ANYWAY, MY POINT IS SO THE HANDBOOK AND STUFF, IT WON'T

CHANGE STUPIDITY OR IMPROVE HAVING PEOPLE ON THE CITY COUNCIL WHO ARE

DEAF DUMB AND STUPID LIKE THE CURRENT MAYOR WHO HAS DONE EVERYTHING

SHE COULD TO SILENCE ALL OF US AND SHE DOESN'T HEAR IT OR DOESN'T WANT TO HEAR IT.

YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS.
-- QUESTIONS WITH THE HUGELY CREATIVE CITIZENS OF THIS FINE TOWN SUGGEST

AND A LOT OF THEM HAVE BECOME SO DISTRUSTFUL AND DISSATISFIED THAT THEY DON'T SPEAK UP ANYMORE BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY ARE NOT BEING HEARD.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF THERE IS ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PROTOCOLS ITEM. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO TO ZOOM AT ONE LAST TIME. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED ON THIS ITEM.

CONFIRMING FOR EVERYBODY IN THE PUBLIC THAT WE DO HERE ON THE CITY

COUNCIL, ELECTED BY ALL OF YOU, LISTEN CLOSELY TO EVERYTHING YOU SAY TO

US WHETHER IN WRITTEN FORM BY EMAIL OR VERBALLY AND REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU MAY EXPRESS YOUR OPINIONS. THIS IS A COUNTRY WHERE FREE SPEECH IS VALUED AND EVERY KIND OF FREE SPEECH. THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO SHARES OPINIONS IN WHATEVER WAY THEY NEED TO AND WE DO LISTEN. WE ARE

NOW COMING UP TO THE COUNCIL TABLE IN ORDER TO DISCUSS AT THIS ITEM , THE

RECOMMENDATION, SUGGESTION FROM THE AD HOC COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY THIS COUNCIL TO LOOK INTO POLICIES AND PROTOCOLS. ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS OR DISCUSSION? GO AHEAD COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS.

JUST KNOWING HOW JAMPACKED OUR AGENDAS ARE, I WANT TO EXPRESS MY

DESIRE FOR THESE THAT THEY ARE IN A WAY THAT WE CAN GET TO THEM EACH

TIME BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A TENDENCY TO HAVE THINGS AT THE END AND GIVEN

THE TIMELINES AND THE IMPORTANCE OF IT, I WANT TO EXPRESS IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US TO MAKE SURE WE GET TO THEM OR HAVE THE ABILITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU ARE SPEAKING TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN AND I ARE DEFINITELY AN AGREEMENT. COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

I WANTED TO ADD THAT A FEW YEARS AGO I BROUGHT FORTH AN ITEM WHEN WE

LOOKED AT HOW THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND DESIGN COMMISSIONERS WERE SELECTED. WE DID A FULL ANALYSIS OF HOW THEY DID IT IN OTHER CITIES. I

DON'T KNOW IF THIS WOULD BE PART OF THIS PROTOCOL PROCESS, AND MAYBE IT

SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T BUT I WANTED TO BRING THAT TO THE COMMITTEE'S

ATTENTION THAT IT IS A FORMER FULL BUILDOUT AGENDA ITEM THAT THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER HELPED ME BUILD OUT AND WE DID RESEARCH. IT MAY BE SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.

IF YOU DO LOOK AT THESE POLICIES DISCUSSING COMMITTEES, IT WILL BE A PART OF THAT CONVERSATION AT THAT POINT.

THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT.

I AM SORRY, GO AHEAD.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE TASK, TIMELINE AND BUDGET AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES AND WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT? SO WE JUST APPROVED IT THE TASK, TIMELINE, AND BUDGET OF THIS AGENDA ITEM.

SECOND.

MARY, A ROLL CALL VOTE.

SO MOVED IN A SECOND TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED TASK TIMELINE AND BUDGET FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR THE PROTOCOLS PROCEDURES HANDBOOK. [ ROLL CALL VOTE TAKEN ]
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE NOW MOVING TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AND I

WILL REPEAT FOR THOSE IN THE ROOM WHO MAY BE HERE FOR MEASURE J IT IS OUR PLAN TO ADDRESS THAT ITEM WHICH IS EIGHT NO EARLIER THAN 8:00 P.M.

WHICH MEANS THAT WE MAY BE GOING TO AN ITEM THAT IS CURRENTLY

SCHEDULED -- EARLIER THAN THAT SO IT MEANS TO THE EXTENT WE FINISH THIS ITEM NUMBER 7 BEFORE THAT TIME WE WILL BE GOING TO ITEM NUMBER 9 IN ORDER TO TRY TO ADDRESS IT. SO LET'S LOOK AT ITEM NUMBER 7, CONSIDERATION OF EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH GOLD RIDGE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THIS IS BEING

BROUGHT FORTH BY THE FIRE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND WE HAVE TWO

COUNCILMEMBERS WHO ARE ON THAT COMMITTEE LOOKING TO COUNCILMEMBER HINTON IN COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PRESENT THIS ITEM? I THINK WE CAN LET THE CITY MANAGER PRESENTED IN THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

AS YOU MAY REMEMBER IN APRIL I DID APPROVE THE TEMPORARY AGREEMENT

WITH THEM TO PROVIDE US WITH ASSISTANCE AS THE FIRE CHIEF AND THEY HAVE

BEEN DOING THIS EVER SINCE THEN AND PAYING FOR ESSENTIALLY HALF TIME FOR

A DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF AND I THINK WE ARE GETTING MORE THAN HALF TIME FROM HIM AND HE CAN SPEAK TO THAT AS WELL AS TIME FROM OTHER THE OTHER STAFF.

THE CHANGES HERE ARE PRETTY SIMPLE AND THOSE OF THE GREATEST

SIGNIFICANCE ARE THE AGREEMENT THAT WOULD CONTINUE UNTIL WE

CONSOLIDATE OR REORGANIZE WITH THEM OR IF ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER CHOOSES TO GIVE 90 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE AND THE SECOND IS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING

THAT GOLD RIDGE WOULD ESSENTIALLY MANAGE THE STATION ASSESSMENT

PROJECT WITH SHARED OVERSIGHT WITH THE CITY SO INVOLVED IN THAT

DECISION-MAKING ON THAT PROJECT BUT THEY ARE IN A BETTER POSITION TO

MANAGE THAT THEN WE ARE, WE BELIEVE AND WE WOULD ALSO FUND SOME

MODEST COSTS FOR SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES FOR TRAINING PACKAGES IF YOU

WILL OR SERVICES WE BOTH USE THAT WOULD BE EFFICIENT AND THEN THERE IS A

MODEST COST THAT THEY WOULD LIKE US TO FUND AS WELL THAT WOULD BE USEFUL SO THOSE OF THE KEY CHANGES AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO REPORT.

QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS OR ANY COMMENTS? DO WE NEED ANY COMMENT OR INPUT? FOR ANY REASON?
NOT THAT I AM AWARE OF.

HE IS IN THE BACKGROUND AND THERE HE IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. SO,

MARY GOURLEY, IF YOU COULD GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, AND WE WILL BRING IT BACK FOR DISCUSSION.

THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE EXTENSION OF

CONTRACT WITH GOLD RIDGE FOR SHARED SERVICES IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT AND I WILL GO TO CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING

THE CONTRACT EXTENSION FOR GOLD RIDGE OR SERVICES WITH THE CITY, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS ONE LAST TIME. THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

GREAT. THANK YOU. I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION AND THIS IS FOR THE CITY MANAGER. YOU DID ANSWER THIS SOMEWHAT BUT WHAT IS THE MONETARY DIFFERENCE IN THIS CONTRACT VERSUS THE EXTENSION? I KNOW THAT IT WILL NOW INCLUDE OVERSIGHT OF THE $60,000 PROJECT BUT YOU DID ALSO MENTION

SOME ADDITIONAL INCREASES IN THE COST AND WHAT IS THE INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT COST?
ABOUT $3000 FOR THE TRAINING PROGRAM AND THE APP, ABOUT $3000 A YEAR

COMBINED FOR THE TWO OF THOSE AND I DO BELIEVE THAT GOLD RIDGE HAS A MODEST PAY INCREASE AND THEY ARE ABSORBING THAT COST. IT IS ABOUT $3000 A YEAR PLUS THE $60,000 FOR THE STATION ASSESSMENT.

THERE IS ALSO NO EXPIRATION LIKE WE HAD BEFORE BUT THE 90 DAY NOTICE AS

WE MOVE FORWARD AND WE ARE APPROVING THIS AND HOPEFULLY THIS WILL GET US OVER THE FINISH LINE.

THE INCREASE OF $3000 A YEAR, IS THAT ALREADY APPROVED WITHIN THE BUDGET?
I BELIEVE IT IS.

I SEE THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SAYING YES?

IF YOU READ IT IT WILL SHARE THIS FOR SERVICES AND BENEFITS AND THAT IS WHAT IT IS AND WE ALREADY HAVE SUBSCRIPTIONS IN THE BUDGET. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO NOT DOUBLE PAY. IF THEY GOT IT, WE ARE TRYING TO REDUCE SOME THINGS.

YES, IT HAS BEEN ALLOCATED IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET ALREADY.

OKAY, NO CHANGE TO THE BUDGET NEEDED.

WE ALSO HAVE A BOARD MEMBER FROM GOLD RIDGE SO ANY QUESTIONS WE HAVE. JUST MENTIONING IT SINCE NOT EVERYBODY KNOWS.

GREAT. WE DO HAVE -- WHAT IS THE TITLE FOR DAVE? IS HE THE ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF?

HE IS THE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF FOR GOLD RIDGE AND HE IS THE DAY-TO-DAY FIRE CHIEF.

WE ALSO HAVE A BOARD MEMBER FOR GOLD RIDGE? COULD YOU STAND UP AND WAVE? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

THERE IS ONE MORE GUY IN THE BACK. HE WAS ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE PROVIDENCE RECENTLY. AND THERE YOU GO. NO DISCUSSION. I THINK WE ARE LOOKING -- GO AHEAD, VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN.

I MOVE WE EXTEND THEIR SHARE OF SERVICES WITH THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE [ INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ].

I WOULD SECOND THAT.

MOVED AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION OF THE CONTRACT WITH THE GOLD RIDGE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR SHARED SERVICES.
[ ROLL CALL VOTE TAKEN ]
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND IN HONORING OUR COMMITMENT TO NOT ADDRESS THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA WHICH IS 8 REGARDING MEASURE J WE ARE AT 7:30. I AM HEARING A REQUEST FOR A BIO BREAK BUT WILL MAKE IT BRIEF. I AM SORRY? LET'S COME BACK IN FIVE MINUTES? IS THAT SUFFICIENT? WE WILL THEN MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 9. [ EVENT ON A BREAK. CAPTIONER STANDING BY. ] WE ARE GOING TO RECONVENE AFTER THE FIVE MINUTE BREAK. WE ARE GOING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 9 WHICH IS PRIORITY SETTING SUPPLEMENTAL TO THE

SEPTEMBER THREE AGENDA REPORT BROUGHT FORWARD TO THE CITY MANAGER,

DON SCHWARTZ AND I WILL REITERATE FOR THOSE WHO JUST JOINED THE MEETING, WE WILL BE ADDRESSING ITEM NUMBER 8 NO EARLIER THAN 8:00 P.M..

AND WE ARE BEFORE THAT SO WE WILL GO TO ITEM 9 AND FINISH IT UP PROMPTLY SO WE CAN THEN GO TO THE MEASURE J ITEM.

THERE WE GO. I WILL SEE IF I CAN GET THIS. AND I THINK I WILL GO WITH THIS.

OKAY. THIS IS ABOUT SHORT TERM GOAL AND PRIORITY SETTING AND A BRIEF PRESENTATION GIVEN THE SUBSTANCE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT PROVIDES

FOCUS FOR SUSTAINABLE SUCCESS AND IT HAS TO BE SOMEWHAT FOCUSED AND YOU CAN'T BE TOO SCATTERED WE WILL GET SPLIT INTO DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS MAKE SURE WE ARE FOCUSING ON WHAT IS MOST

IMPORTANT TO THE FULL COUNCIL OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS BUT IN

PARTICULAR WE WILL BE DOING GOALSETTING AND LONGER-TERM PLANNING IN FEBRUARY.

I HATE TO INTERRUPT TWO. BUT HAS THIS SLIDE SET BEEN POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE? IF NOT, MARY GOURLEY, CAN WE PLEASE GET IT POSTED TO THE COUNCILMEMBERS? THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. AGAIN WE ARE FOCUSING ON THE

NEXT FEW MONTHS WITH ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY AS A KEY PART OF WHAT WE

CAN ACCOMPLISH AND HOW MUCH CAN BE ON THE PLATE, HOW LARGE THE PLATE IS. DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS DOMINATE MOST CITIES BUT PARTICULARLY SMALLER CITIES AND THAT IS A TRUE FOR US. THE DEPARTMENT HEADS WE HAVE

FOCUS ON DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS AND KEEPING THINGS RUNNING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE MUCH IN THE WAY OF ANALYSTS OR ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT. THEY

ALSO SERVE AND ANALYTICS FUNCTION OF DEVELOPING THOSE ITEMS AND

ANALYZING OPTIONS SO TO SOME EXTENT THEY ARE DEPARTMENT HEAD ANALYSTS AND THREE OF THEM A PART-TIME AND I GIVE DAVE CREDIT FOR FULLTIME BUT ENGINEERING, TONY IS WORKING FEWER HOURS BUT SHE WAS PART-TIME

BEFORE AND SHE IS WORKING FEWER WITH THE BUDGET AND PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT, JANE HAS BEEN WORKING UP TO 30 HOURS A WEEK AND THAT WILL GO DOWN. THIS WILL GO DOWN IN A FEW WEEKS BECAUSE SHE HAS OTHER

COMMITMENTS AND THEN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, STEVE BROWN ALSO REMAINS PART-TIME ALTHOUGH HE HAS INCREASED HIS HOURS A BIT THIS YEAR.

WE ARE STRAPPED. WE HAVE SOME MAJOR EFFORTS UNDERWAY AND FIRE

REORGANIZATION GOT A TASTE OF THAT LAST ITEM INCLUDING THE FUTURE OF

THE FIRE STATION AND THE SOLID WASTE PROCUREMENT WITH EMPLOYEE

NEGOTIATIONS IN THE HOTEL WATER MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTING THE HOUSING

ELEMENT IN THOSE ARE EXAMPLES OF MAJOR THINGS UNDERWAY AND THERE ARE OTHERS AS WELL. THE QUOTE I HEARD BEFORE THAT I LIKE IS WE CAN DO ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT BUT JUST NOT EVERYTHING THAT YOU WANT. AGAIN, WE HAVE TO PROVIDE SOME SENSE OF FOCUS. THERE IS A FAIR AMOUNT OF

INTEREST IN EVENTS AND PROMOTIONS AND SOMETHING WE ARE NOT

RECOMMENDING THE CITY TAKE THE LEAD ON BUT WE CERTAINLY WOULD BE

SUPPORTIVE AND WE CAN SUPPORT WHAT THE POLICE TIME IN PUBLIC WORKS TIME

AND HELP PUBLICIZE ON SOCIAL MEDIA BUT WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO LEAD OR ORGANIZE OR SPONSOR EVENTS OR THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. THE CHAMBER IS

DOING SOME AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT POSSIBLY DOING MORE AND INDICATING WHERE WE CAN HELP. WE USUALLY CHARGE TO COVER THE COST OF STAFF TIME

ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE EVENTS AND ABSENT THE DIRECTION TO DO OTHERWISE WOULD BE THE NORMAL PROTOCOL. AGAIN, THEY CAN BE FLEXIBLE IF YOU WOULD LIKE. SO IN TERMS OF COUNCIL DIRECTION, I SUGGEST FIRST IF THERE IS ANYTHING MISSING THAT YOU ADDED TO THE LIST OF PROJECTS FOR CONSIDERATION. IF

THERE ARE ANY CONSIDERATIONS TO MAKE IT UNCLEAR AND DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ABOUT WHAT THE PRIORITIES ARE. WITH THAT I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND GO FROM THERE.

THANK YOU.

I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT YOU MENTIONED THREE PART-TIME DEPARTMENT HEADS BUT NOT ALL OF THOSE ARE DUE TO BUDGET SHORTFALLS. CAN YOU

CLARIFY THAT SOME ARE PART-TIME BECAUSE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF RECRUITMENT AND THEY ENDED UP BEING PART-TIME?

I DON'T BELIEVE TONY HAS BEEN FULL-TIME AT LEAST SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE AND THEY HAVE SHARED THE CITY ENGINEER FUNCTION, IF YOU WILL. I BELIEVE

THAT HAS BEEN PART-TIME FOR A WHILE IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

PLANNING DEVELOPER HAS NOT BEEN DONE HISTORICALLY PART-TIME AND NOT FOR SIX MONTHS OR SOMETHING.

DUE TO A PREVIOUS EMPLOYEE LEAVING EMPLOYMENT?
RIGHT. AND THEN FILLED BY SOMEBODY DOING IT PART-TIME AND THEN AGAIN

PART-TIME NOW IN REDUCING OUR HOURS WE'RE LOOKING AT WAYS WE COULD MAKE UP FOR THAT BUT WE HAVEN'T CROSSED THAT THRESHOLD YET. AND

ANYTIME YOU DO HAVE A TRANSITION AND WE FACE THOSE TRANSITIONS COMING

UP, AGAIN, THERE IS SOME LOSS OF PRODUCTIVITY AS PEOPLE COME UP TO SPEED AND FIGURE OUT WHERE THEY ARE IN RELATIONSHIPS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

WE ARE IN THE EARLY STAGES OF THAT ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSITION IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION AND LOOKING

AT THE STAFF REPORT, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE UNDERSTOOD CLEARLY THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF. MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE STAFF REPORT IS STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT ONLY THE ITEMS IN GROUP 1 BE CONSIDERED FOR COMPLETION DURING THE NEXT 5 TO 6 MONTHS AND THE REST OF THEM BE DELAYED FOR LATER CONSIDERATION. AM I INTERPRETING THIS CORRECTLY? NOT QUITE. THERE IS A GROUP BEFORE GROUP 1, IF YOU WILL, THAT STARTS ON PAGE 2 IN THE NARRATIVE AND IN THE TABLE.

PROJECTS ALREADY REQUIRED BY LEGAL AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS? FOR THE MOST PART, YES. I BELIEVE THERE ARE NINE OF THOSE. THAT IS GROUP 0 IF YOU WANT AND GROUP 1 AS WELL AND WE SUGGEST THE FOCUS BE THERE. I

THINK IT IS A LITTLE AMBITIOUS TO HAVE THOSE PROJECTS BEFORE US AND NOT

CONFIDENT PROMISING WE WILL GET THEM ALL COMPLETELY DONE IN THE TIME FRAME INDICATED HERE. I THINK IT IS WORTH PURSUING AND HAVE ENOUGH VALUE THAT THEY ARE CLASSIFIED APPROPRIATELY.

OKAY, BUT THE ITEMS IN GROUPS TWO AND THREE ARE BEING RECOMMENDED TO BE CONSIDERED AT THE FEBRUARY WORKSHOP?
YES. THERE IS A NUANCE TO THIS IF YOU WILL AND THE INITIATIVES ON HOLDER

ACTIVE AND THIS CONVERSATION IS IN UNTIL THURSDAY ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND

A POTENTIAL FOR SECURING A LOCAL GRANT FROM THIS DISTRICT THAT WE COULD

USE AS LOCAL MATCH MONEY TO GET A STATE GRANT TO PROCEED WITH DOING

SOME OF THE WORK BUT I BELIEVE IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN FOR

THE PARK BUT I BELIEVE JUST THOUSAND DOLLARS IN CITY MONEY WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH STAFF TIME WOULD BE REQUIRED. WE'RE TRYING TO SORT IT OUT AT THIS POINT. IT IS A LITTLE BIT OF A WAIT AND SEE.

I DON'T SEE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW BUT COULD YOU PLEASE GO OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, MARY GOURLEY.

THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY

PRIORITIES AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT I WILL GO TO CHAMBERS FIRST AND THEN ZOOM.

I AM LIKE A BROKEN RECORD TONIGHT BUT THE FIRST SLIDE YOU HAD IS WHAT THE COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION HAD. AND THE CITIZENS OF THE SURVEY, THAT IS

WHAT THE CITIZENS WANT SO I THINK THAT SHOULD BE AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT IN IT IS SLIGHTLY MISSING AT THE MOMENT. AND ANOTHER THING IS THE

RENEGOTIATION OF THE LINE RELEASE I WASN'T QUITE CLEAR AND MY

UNDERSTANDING IS WE LEASE THE LIBRARY TO THE COUNTY FOR ONE DOLLAR A YEAR OR SOMETHING? AND THEN A PERCENTAGE OF THE SALES COVERS THE

LIBRARY SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS ANY WIGGLE ROOM TO REDUCE HER COMMITMENT TO THAT. AND THEN ANOTHER THING NOBODY RUNNING FOR

COUNCIL HERE AND I THINK IT IS SLIGHTLY WEAK AND YOU WOULD THINK THAT

PEOPLE RUNNING FOR COUNCIL WOULD BE CONTRIBUTING TO SOME OF THESE

IMPORTANT CONVERSATIONS TO THAT AND ONE OF THEM WOULD BE SITTING ON THE COUNCIL. BUT I FIND THAT DISAPPOINTING. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT PUBLIC COMMENT. LINDA, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE. GO AHEAD WITH PUBLIC COMMENT.

THAT IS A GOOD POINT, OLIVER AND THE ONLY TIME I HAVE EVER HEARD YOU ON

THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING IS TONIGHT, ONCE AND THE OTHER GUY I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT. ANYWAY, THAT IS A GOOD POINT. AS YOU KNOW, MANY OF YOU

KNOW I AM ELECTIVE SENSITIVE AND TV FREE, CELL PHONE FREE AND LARGELY

ELECTRICITY FREE AND I DON'T HAVE EASY ACCESS TO THE STUFF THAT IS LISTED ON THE AGENDA. SO FROM WHAT IS LISTED ON THE AGENDA, I AM SUGGESTING

THAT THERE IS A COMMON SENSE APPROACH THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN

REGARDING THE CONSTRUCTION IN THESE PROJECTS AND SOME OF THEM VERY

LARGE IN THE PIPELINE TO BE BUILT DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE

INFRASTRUCTURE FOR IT OR THE ROADS TO SUPPORT THE INCREASED TRAFFIC,

WHICH IS ALREADY PRETTY MUCH A DISASTER AND EVERY AFTERNOON IT IS A BACKED UP AND TO PROPOSE WHERE THAT HOTEL IS, A MESS. AND CONSIDER MORE

BUILDINGS BUT ANYWAY WE WERE SUPPOSED TO RETAIN THE SMALL TOWN

CHARACTER AND EVERYTHING YOU'RE DOING AND ALL OF THIS CONSTRUCTION

FLIES IN THE FACE OF OUR INTENTIONS AND THERE ARE VEHICLES FROM THE CANOPY PROJECT ALONE THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE ON HIGHWAY 116 IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER TWO PROJECTS THAT ARE PLANNED TO BE BUILT WITH THE 2022

UNITS ON THE LOW INCOME --
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS AND IF THERE IS ANYBODY IN CHAMBERS WHO WANTS TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. CAN YOU TAKE YOURSELF OFF OF MUTE.

YES, I CAN SEE THE NUMBERS TOO.'S SO, OLIVER, I AM WATCHING ONLINE AND I FINE I CAN READ THROUGH THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT PAPERS POSTED ONLINE. I CAN MAKE COMMENTS AND DO RESEARCH. YES, I AM DEFINITELY NOT IN THE ROOM. I DID MAKE A COMMENT EARLIER TODAY AND DURING THE MEETING. YES. I AM NOT

SHOWING UP IN THE MEETINGS AND I THINK I AM MORE EFFECTIVE RIGHT NOW AS AN OBSERVER. AND CALLING INTO ZOOM. AND I FIGURED I SHOULD DEFEND MYSELF. AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE PHIL IS BUT HE IS INTERESTED IN THING AND

HE IS ATTENDED MORE MEETINGS IN PERSON THAN I AM AND I DON'T DISPARAGE HIM AND I THINK ALL THREE OF US ARE COMMITTED TO THE CITY. THAT IS IT.

I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS AND IF THERE IS ANYBODY IN CHAMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. KYLE? CAN YOU STILL SEE THE TIMER? GO AHEAD.

I DON'T WANT TO GET OFF THE TOPIC BECAUSE WE ARE POLITICIZING THIS AGENDA

ITEM I WANT TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT ALL CANDIDATES HAVE BOTH

WEBSITES AS WELL AS BALLOT STATEMENTS THAT CAN BE READILY ACCESSED FOR

PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR VIEWS ARE ABOUT COUNCIL ISSUES AND

THEY DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE HAPPENING INSIDE OF CITY MEETINGS AND

BY ALL MEANS THEY DON'T REQUIRE IN-PERSON ATTENDANCE IN ORDER TO MAKE THOSE THINGS HAPPEN. BUT TO EACH THEIR OWN. BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT

WITH THIS TOPIC IS IT APPEARS THIS TOPIC IS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD FROM THE CITY MANAGER. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COUNCIL PRIORITIES ARE

DICTATED BY A PROCESS OF AN AGENDA SETTING COMMITTEE OF WHICH THE CITY

MANAGER TAKES PART OF BUT PRIMARILY DRIVEN IN THE CURRENT FORM WITH THE MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR AS WELL AS OTHER MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF. SODA

HAVE THIS PROCESS BE BROUGHT FORWARD AS AN AGENDA ITEM SEEMS LIKE IT IS

OUT OF PLACE WITH PAST PROTOCOL DICTATING AND A LITTLE CONCERNING AND

ESPECIALLY IN A CONTENTIOUS ELECTION CYCLE THAT WE PUT FORWARD WHAT

THE ISSUES ARE FOR THE NEXT FIVE MONTHS IN THE MIDDLE OF A CAMPAIGN SEASON. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT AND I WILL GO BACK INTO CHAMBERS

AND IF THERE IS ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS, AND SEEING NONE, WE WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER, MARY?
I CAN.

GO AHEAD.

I AM JUST WONDERING IF RISE AND SHINE SHOULD BE ON THIS LIST. I DO

REMEMBER OUR CITY MANAGER IT WOULD TAKE A LOT OF THE CITIES TIME FOR THAT. I WAS WONDERING WHAT HE THINKS OF THIS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS

IF THERE IS ANYBODY IN CHAMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, RACER HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED ON THIS ITEM.

WE ARE NOW BACK AT THE TABLE TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM THAT WAS BROUGHT

FORWARD BY THE CITY MANAGER AND I WILL NOTE THAT THE HOMELESSNESS

ITEM IS ACTUALLY CAPTURED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS AN ITEM THAT STAFF FEELS NEEDS SOME ATTENTION.

TWO COMMENTS TO START. I DO WANT TO NOTE IN THE SLIDE PRESENTATION WHICH WE DID GO THROUGH WEEKLY AT THE BEGINNING. BECAUSE I DID SEE A FEW PEOPLE DOUBLE TAKE AT EVENTS AND PROMOTIONS. USUALLY THE CITY CHARGES TO COVER THE COSTS. WE DO HAVE TO COVER THE STAFF COSTS TO HELP

WITH EVENTS AND PROMOTIONS BUT I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WE HAVE

WAIVED THAT IS A COUNCIL MANY TIMES FOR PEACE DOWN, APPLE BLOSSOM, ET CETERA. I THINK WE DO AS A COUNCIL TAKE THOSE AND OCCASIONALLY WHEN WE FEEL LIKE WE CAN TRY TO WAIVE THEM FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO I WANTED TO

BRING UP THAT AND THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS ON THE STAFF REPORT IT DID HAVE A COMMENT THERE AND WHERE IS IT? IT WAS NUMBER 4 ON PAGE 2, SPECIAL

GENERATING IDEAS, REVIEW THE FORMULA BUSINESS ORDINANCE OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN. AND MY UNDERSTANDING, AND I AM ASKING FOR STAFF

CLARIFICATION ON THIS, IS OUR FORMULA BUSINESS COORDINATES ONLY COVERS DOWNTOWN AND NOT THE ENTIRE CITY? JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, CAN YOU

CLARIFY THAT SO IT SEEMS LIKE A MISPRINT IN THE STAFF REPORT BUT MAYBE I AM WRONG.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS DOWNTOWN IS INCLUDED BUT IT IS A RELATIVELY NEW TOPIC.

I THINK THE QUESTION IS WHETHER IT INCLUDES ONLY DOWNTOWN AND IS THAT THE QUESTION?
RIGHT. THE STATEMENT IS NUMBER 4 AND REVIEW THE BUSINESS ORDINANCE OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ONE.

I WILL BUT IN A BIT. IT DOES INCLUDE ALL OF DOWNTOWN BUT IT ALSO INCLUDES

A FAIRLY LARGE AREA WITH NORTH MAIN AND EVEN A LITTLE PORTION OF SOUTH

MAIN AND FOUR BLOCKS ON SOUTH MAIN AND IT'S ALL THE WAY UP TO AND

INCLUDING WHERE BANK OF AMERICA IS AND THE TALK ABOUT LIMITING THAT IS THE TALK AND NOT ELIMINATING INTO THE DOWNTOWN AREA FROM THE 100 BLOCK OF NORTH MAIN IN THE 200 BLOCK OF SOUTH MAIN BUT MAYBE ELIMINATING IT A LITTLE OUTSIDE OF THOSE BOUNDARIES.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION AND I REQUESTED A CITY OF THAT -- A COPY OF THAT. I DID HAVE A QUESTION AND I AM HOPING AS WE LOOK AT THIS I WANT TO

FRAME THE DISCUSSION AND SUGGEST A WAY BUT THE FIRST QUESTION IS TO STAFF. WHAT I DO SEE IN THE STAFF REPORT IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE ITEMS THAT YOU LIST IN GROUPS 2 AND 3, AND ALSO IN THE INITIATIVES ON HOLD OR INACTIVE, NOT BE ADDRESSED DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME. MY QUESTION IS

THE FOLLOWING AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS COUNCIL FEELS THAT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE IN GROUPS 2, 3, OR THE ON HOLD

OR INACTIVE LIST NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DURING THIS PERIOD IS IT THEN YOUR

SUGGESTION THAT THERE WOULD NEED TO BE AN ITEM FROM THE PROPOSED LIST

OF STAFF THICKETS ELIMINATED, OR IS THERE IS SOME WIGGLE ROOM, SOME

FLEXIBILITY THAT STAFF MAY BE ABLE TO OFFER TO THIS COUNCIL THAT ALLOWS ACCOMMODATION OF ONE OF THOSE ITEMS?

THERE IS VERY LITTLE WIGGLE ROOM IN HERE ESPECIALLY SINCE THE TIME OF THE

PRIOR MEETING AND THIS MEETING AND WE HAVE GONE BACK AND ADDED ITEMS IN HERE AND THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE. THERE IS VERY LITTLE HERE. IT WOULD BE TO

ESSENTIALLY REMOVE SOMETHING OF COMPARABLE SIZE AND COMPLEXITY BY

THE SAME DEPARTMENT OR DEPARTMENTS WORKING ON IT SO FOR EXAMPLE

TAKING SOMETHING OFF OF OR ADDING SOMETHING OFF OF THAT PLATE AND PUTTING IT ON ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DOESN'T REALLY BALANCE OUT.

OKAY. WE WILL SEE WHAT COUNCIL WANTS TO DO AND HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION. COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS?
IN READING THIS, A THOUGHT I HAD A COMMENT . I AM LOOKING DOWN AT GROUP 3 AND A LOT OF THOSE INITIATIVES ARE PRESENTED BY COUNCILMEMBERS AND

ONE CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT WE ARE CLOSELY APPROACHING THE HOLIDAYS AND IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT SOME STORES, WE ARE THERE ARE READY. WE HAVE ON

HERE QUEEN OF DOWNTOWN HOLIDAY TYPE THINGS BUT AS A BUSINESS OWNER

AND BEING IN TOUCH WITH THE BUSINESSES HERE, I THINK A LOT OF THEM WOULD

LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE URGENCY PLACED ON IMPROVING THE DOWNTOWN AND CLEAN IT UP. PREPARING FOR THE HOLIDAYS. THIS IS THE TIME WHEN THEY MAKE THE MOST MONEY. WHEN THEY MAKE MONEY, WE MAKE MONEY. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO PRIORITIZE THAT. PERSONALLY, HOWEVER WE CAN BRING

IT UP TO THE PRIORITIES WE ARE DEALING WITH NOW AND NOT IN FEBRUARY

BECAUSE IF WE START IN FEBRUARY WE ARE TALKING IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME TO NOT LOOK AT THAT. I WANTED TO COMMENT THAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE US BRING THAT UP TO A HIGHER LEVEL. AND WHATEVER THAT TAKES AND

WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT WE NEED TO MOVE DOWN, BUT I THINK WE WOULD BENEFIT FROM THAT.

THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT. IT ALLOWS ME TO BASICALLY START THE

PROCESS THAT I HOPE WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ENGAGE IN WHICH IS LOOKING AT THOSE ITEMS IN GROUPS TWO AND THREE IN THE ONES ON HOLD. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT ANY OF US WOULD LIKE TO SEE PRIORITIZED? WE SEE ONE ITEM FROM COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS.
[ CAPTIONERS TRANSITIONING ].

BUT THEN, THIS ITEM HAD

STARTED AS A MINI GOAL SETTING
SESSION. IN MY MIND, WHAT A MINI

GOALSETTING SESSION IS THE FIVE

COUNCIL MEMBERS WANTED TO TALK

ABOUT WHAT WE WANTED TO DO,
WHICH ARE THE ITEMS IN GROUP 3,

SO WE WERE ASKED TO COME UP WITH

SOME IDEAS WE WANTED TO DO, SO
IN GROUP 3, THERE'S DIFFERENT

IDEAS, AND I

SAW IT AS ANOPPORTUNITY FOR US IN THE NEXT
COUPLE MONTHS TO DO. DIANA WILL BE LEAVING COUNCIL. SHE'S NOT RERUNNING.

NESA IS RUNNING, AND WE WILL BE

A NEW COUNCIL STARTING IN

DECEMBER, SO FROM NOW UNTIL
THEN, WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO? THIS WAS ME AND HOW I SAW IT,

AND SO I AM WORKING ON THE TEAM
MEMORIAL LABYRINTH PROJECT. THIS WAS DISMANTLED BY THE

COMMUNITY CENTER BECAUSE IT WAS

A SAFETY HAZARD, FRANKLY, AND

I'M PUSHING THAT FORWARD WITH A
COUPLE PEOPLE WITH THE DESIGNER. I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANY HELP

WITH THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT THERE'S

OTHER ITEMS ON HERE, AND I THINK

OUR COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE TO SEE

SUPPORT EVENTS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE

TREE LIGHTING COULD

BESOMETHING -- GROWN IF THAT IS A

CITY SPONSOR, BUT WE COULD

SPONSOR AN EVENT WITHOUT

ACTUALLY PUTTING ANY MONEY

TOWARD IT, AND IF IT WAS CITY

SPONSORED, THEN THAT EVENT

WOULDHAVE INSURANCE, AND I BELIEVE

THEY WOULD HAVE RECYCLING
SERVICES FOR UP TO 10 EVENTS A

YEAR, BUT THE IDEA OF CLEANING

UP DOWNTOWN, THAT WAS GOT MY
IDEA, BUT I LIKE IT. WE WERE DOWNTOWN THE OTHER DAY,

AND I NOTICED THERE WAS A BENCH

RIGHT DOWNTOWN WHERE THE PAINT

WAS ALMOST ALL GONE FROM IT, AND

SOMEBODY HAD PAINTED CLOUDS ON

IT AND IT'S RIGHT ON FOUR

CORNERS, SO I WOULD BE WILLING

TO GO DOWNTOWN IF ANOTHER

COUNCILMEMBER WAS INTERESTED, DO

A WALK AROUND AND DO OUR OWN
ASSESSMENT. IT WOULDN'T COST ANYTHING FOR
ANY STAFF, NO STAFF TIME. WE'D COME UP WITH A LIST AND

FIGURE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND

FIGURE A WAY TO DO IT, SO I

WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT IF A

COUPLE OF US WANTS TO DO

THAT -- JILL IS INTERESTED, YAY,

SO THAT WOULD BE A GOAL WE COULD

WORK ON AND IN THE NEXT COUPLE
MONTHS GET IT DONE. NOT THAT WE WOULD FIX ANYTHING,

BUT WE COULD ASSESS IT AND BRING

IT TO THE ATTENTION OF PUBLIC

WORKS, BECAUSE WE HAVE A
MAINTENANCE WORKER THERE. I'M WILLING TO PAINT THAT BENCH,

I CAN DO THAT, AND I ALSO WOULD

LOVE TO SEE AN EVENT, SOME KIND

OF EVENT WHETHER IT BE -- YEAH,

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT IS, BUT I

REALLY WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM

THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT

WHAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT IN TERMS
OF NUMBER 3 THAT WOULD NOT
REALLY REQUIRE STAFF TIME.

SO WE'RE HEARING
FROMCOUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS AN

INTEREST IN ADDING ON TO THE

LIST FOR THE NEXT FIVE TO
SIXMONTHS CLEANING UP DOWNTOWN. WE'RE HEARING FROM COUNCILMEMBER

MAURER ADDING THE LABYRINTH BUT

PRIMARILY DOING IT WITH

COUNCILMEMBER EFFORT AND ADDING

AN EVENT THAT CELEBRATES
SEBASTOPOL. SHE'S RECOMMENDING THAT THE

FLEET ASSESSMENT BE REMOVED FROM
THE LIST NUMBER 1. DO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE
ANY OTHER ITEMS? COUNCILMEMBER HINTON.

I THINK IT'S UP TO THE STAFF
WHETHER THE FLEET ASSESSMENT. I DO KNOW WE'RE LOSING OUR

PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, DANTE, SO

I HATE TO REMOVE SOMETHING THAT

HE'S PROBABLY THE BEST ONE TO

FINISH THE PROJECT UP BEFORE HE

RETIRES IN THE END OF DECEMBER,
SO I JUST WAIT ON THIS TO STAFF. IT DOES SEEM LIKE A BIG, LONG

LIST AND WILL TAKE A LOT OF

TIMEAND PROBABLY THEY WON'T BE ABLE

TO GET TO IT ALL, BUT, AGAIN, I

STILL FEEL LIKE COUNCIL IS HERE

TO MAKE POLICY, AND I TRUST THE

CITY MANAGER AND THERE IS THE

STAFF THE DEPARTMENT HAS TO

PRIORITIZE THEIR

WORKLOAD TOJUST BE FRANK, AND THERE'S A LOT

ON HERE, AND I THINK WHAT WE'LL

END UP DOING IN THE GOAL
SETTING. I'M LOOKING AT IT AGAIN. I'M LOOKING AT ALL THE THINGS THAT DIDN'T GET DONE. ANYWAY, THAT'S MY FEEDBACK AND

I'M WILLING TO APPROVE THIS AS
IS.

VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN.

YES, I'D LIKE TO DEFER TO

STAFF BECAUSE WHEN WE HEARD AN

EARLIER SLIDE FROM THE CITY

MANAGER, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW HE

PHRASED IT, STAFFING IS SLIM,

SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND IT WAS

STATED IN HIS REPORT

THATSTAFFING IS SLIM, SO I

DEFINITELY DO NOT WANT TO TAKE

AWAY SOMEWHAT LUMPED INTO THIS

VARIOUS GROUP IN WHAT STAFF

ACTUALLY CAN GET DONE, AND IN

THE NEXT FIVE OR SIX MONTHS,

BUTI DEFINITELY DO AGREE WITH

COUNCILMEMBER
COUNCILMEMBERMcLEWIS AND COUNCILMEMBER MAURER

THAT WE DEFINITELY DO NEED TO DO
SOMETHING FOR THE HOLIDAYS. I MEAN, IT IS JUST RIDICULOUS

THAT THE TOWN WILL HAVE A TREE

LIGHTING AND WANDER ON TO MAIN

STREET AND HAVE IT BE DARK AND
HAVE NOTHING HAPPENING. IT'S JUST UNBELIEVABLE THAT

HAPPENS, SO WHETHER IT IS

AGROUP OF US JUST PAINTING
BENCHES, I DON'T KNOW. I GUESS I'M TURNING TO OUR

GENERAL MANAGER, WHAT CAN YOU DO
TO HELP US? WHAT CONCEIVABLE THING GIVEN

THEFACT THAT I AGREE WITH
COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS HELPING

THE BUSINESSES HELPS US AND WE

DO NOT WANT THIS TO BE DESOLATE

DURING THE HOLIDAYS, SO GIVEN

THAT SENTIMENT, WHAT CAN

YOUTAKE OFF REASONABLY FROM THE

GROUPING PRESENTED TO US TO DO

WHAT WE WANT AROUND THE
HOLIDAYS? PLEASE HELP US.

OKAY, IF I CAN ASK DANTE TO
COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. I THINK ONE POSSIBILITY ON THE

CLEAN-UP PARTICULARLY IN

DOWNTOWN IS TO SHIFT SOME OF THE

PUBLIC MAINTENANCE STAFF TIME TO

FOCUS ON DOWNTOWN, WHICH MEANS

WE'LL BE DOING LESS SOMEWHERE
ELSE. DANTE, IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO
THAT POSSIBILITY.

I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THAT

PUBLIC WORKS IS PLANNING
CLEAN-UP IN DOWNTOWN. WE'LL FINISH UP SOME MAJOR
REPAIRS AT THE POOL THIS WEEK. WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED IN THE

PLAZA THIS WEEK WORKING ON THE

ROSES, SO IT'S DEFINITELY ON THE
RADAR. WE HAVE HAD SOME OTHER REQUESTS

OF PAINTING IN THE PLAZA, SOME
REPAIRS TO THE FOUNTAIN. WE ORDERED SOME SPECIAL

GROUT -- ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE
IN THE WORKS. WE'RE LOOKING AT TRIPPING

HAZARDS DOWNTOWN ALREADY,
ADDRESSING THAT. WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN ALL THE

DECORATIONS IN THE PLAZA AS WE
ALWAYS DO. I THINK SOME OF THE

MISCONCEPTION IS THE DOWNTOWN WE
DON'T DECORATE ANYMORE. WE CAN'T PUT THE LIGHTS IN THE

LITTLE TREES, SO I KNOW THERE'S

BEEN SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH

SOME OF THE BUSINESSES TO

TRYAND DECORATE THE STORE

FRONTSRATHER THAN THE SMALLER TREES
THAT HAVE BEEN REPLACED. DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON THAT.

GO AHEAD. I THINK COUNCILMEMBER MAURER AND
COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS.

WOULD YOU BE ALL RIGHT
IFCOUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS AND I DID

A LITTLE ASSESSMENT OF THE

DOWNTOWN NEEDS AND EITHER

PAINTED THE BENCH OURSELVES OR
BROUGHT THE INFORMATION TO YOU?
ABSOLUTELY. INFORMATION IS GREAT, BECAUSE
STAFF IS THIN. THE PUBLIC WORKS STAFF IS DOWN A
STAFF MEMBER RIGHT NOW. WE'RE CURRENTLY RECRUITING AND

WORKING ON COORDINATING REPAIRS

BUDGETING AND I'M TRYING TO

CHECK AS MANY ITEMS OFF MY LIST

IN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS, BUT
I'M ALWAYS OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS. YOU KNOW, THOSE BENCHES DOWNTOWN

THAT I THINK YOU'RE TALKING

ABOUT, WERE REPLACED A FEW YEARS

AGO, AND THEY ACTUALLY DON'T

MATCH THE DOWNTOWN, SO THE PLAN

WAS TO REPLACE THOSE WITH

MATCHING DOWNTOWN BENCH AND

UTILIZE THEM MOVING THE PARK

ELSEWHERE AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN
REHABBED.

OKAY, DO YOU HAVE A TIMELINE?

I DO KNOW THE PRESSURE

WASHING OF DOWNTOWN IS

SCHEDULEDWITHIN THE NEXT MONTH, FOCUSING

ON MAKE SURE WE PRESSURE WASH

AROUND THE GARBAGE CANS AND THE

BENCHES AND THE MOLD AND
DEBRISTHAT ACCUMULATES OVER TIME.

ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER
McLEWIS.

SO I'M VERY AWARE OF THE

CONVERSATION IN CHAMPS, SO I

WANT TO SUGGEST THERE ARE MANY
SUGGESTIONS FOR LIGHTS. THERE ARE MANY SOLAR LIGHTS, AND

I KNOW ALL THE ISSUES OF THE

ELECTRICAL OUTLETS AND
EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. BUT I HOPE WE CAN MAYBE THINK

OUTSIDE THE BOX A LITTLE BIT AND

FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT,

BECAUSE IT SOUNDS MINOR BUT TO

THE BUSINESS OWNERS, IT MEANS A
LOT. I AM AWARE THEY ARE ALREADY

DISCUSSING PROMOTIONS AND

DIFFERENT THINGS THEY WANT TO DO

THROUGH THE HOLIDAYS, AND

THEY'RE DOING THAT ALONGSIDE

WITH MARIAH FROM THE CHAMBER,

AND AS WE KNOW, THE CHAMBER

USUALLY TAKES CARE OF THE

CHRISTMAS TREE LIGHTING, SO I

WOULD LOVE TO DO THE WALK-AROUND

AND SEE IF THERE IS ANY WAY FOR

US TO PARTNER WITH THE OTHER

COMMUNITY GROUPS, DIFFERENT

FOLKS WHO DO BENCHES AND THOSE
TYPES OF THINGS.

ROTARY.

YEAH. I JUST THINK WE REALLY NEED TO

START FOCUSING ON THAT AND

ACTUALLY HAVE -- YOU KNOW, IT'S

GOOD TO HAVE DEADLINES, THAT'S

WHEN THINGS GET FIGURED OUT AND

IF WE COULD PRIORITIZE BEFORE

THE HOLIDAYS, THAT'S MY BIGGEST
THING.

STRINGING TOGETHER THE

BUSINESSES, IF THE PUBLIC WORKS

COULD GET THE TWINKLE LIGHTING

TO THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES, MAIN
STREET, LIKE I DON'T KNOW. THESE ARE IDEAS THROWN AROUND

FOREVER, SO IF YOU CAN JUST

THINK ABOUT THAT AND FIGURE OUT
THE PRICING, I DON'T KNOW. BUT SOMEHOW, THAT SEEMS LIKE

SOMETHING THAT COULD ACTUALLY
HAPPEN. THE OTHER COMMENT, TOO, IS ABOUT
WAIVING THE FEES. SO DOES IT REQUIRE A MOTION? DOES IT NEED TO COME

THROUGH THE

BUDGET, BUT I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF

WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE WAIVED IN

ORDER TO SUPPORT THE

BUSINESSESTO HAVE THIS IN THE HOLIDAYS SO

THE DOWNTOWN IS NOT DEAD AT

NIGHT CONSISTENTLY DURING THE
HOLIDAYS.

CITY MANAGER.

MY SUGGESTION WOULD

BETO -- THIS IS OFF THE TOP OF THE

HEAD, BUT SOMETHING LIKE SAY THE

CITY COUNCIL IS WILLING TO

SUPPORT EVENTS TO THE TUNE OF
LIKE $12,000 BETWEEN NOW AND THE

END OF THE YEAR AND USED TO

WAIVE FEES, TO BUY EQUIPMENT,

AND LIGHTS AND THOSE SORTS OF

THINGS, AND WE'LL FIGURE OUT THE

MECHANICS OF ANY BUDGET

AMENDMENTS BUT WE NEED YOUR

DIRECTION THIS IS WHERE YOU WANT
TO GO SO WE CAN FOLLOW THAT. AND THE OTHER PIECE IS JUST I

WANT TO ADD, WHICH WE CAN DO IS

THE SOCIAL MEDIA PUBLICITY
PIECE. WE WANT THE CONTENT WHOEVER IS

SPONSORING THE EVENT MAKE SURE
WE GET THE MESSAGE CORRECTLY.

SO I THINK WE MAY HAVE SOME

LIMITATIONS RELATED TO
ENDORSEMENT -- GO AHEAD, ALEX.

THAT IS NOT AGENDIZED FOR

TONIGHT, SO WE CAN HAVE THAT IN

A FUTURE AGENDA AND PROVIDE

DIRECTION SO I CAN COME BACK
LATER.

SO THE CITY COUNCIL IS TO

DIRECT THE AGENDA SETTING

COMMITTEE TO BRING BACK AN ITEM

THAT WOULD MAKE A PROPOSAL

REPORTING SUPPORT FOR BUSINESSES
OVER THE HOLIDAYS. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY

COUNCIL IS FEELING SUPPORT FOR
AT THE MOMENT?

I WANT TO MENTION, MY

UNDERSTANDING IS WE CAN'T

SUPPORT BUSINESSES WITH
GOVERNMENT MONEY. WE CAN SUPPORT THE AREA AND

SUPPORT THE DOWNTOWN IN THE

DISTRICT, BUT I JUST WANT TO

MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN'T SUPPORT

BUSINESSES WITH THE TAXPAYER
FUNDS.

UNDERSTOOD.

THEY CAN WORK ON SOME SORT OF
AGENDA.

THE QUESTION IS IF WE WANT TO
LOOK INTO THAT. I'LL JUST REMIND THE COUNCIL,
IT'S 8:15 AND WE WANT TO

REMINDEVERYONE IN THE ROOM WE WILL BE
GOING
TO ITEM NUMBER 8, THERESOLUTION ON THIS AS SOON AS
WE'RE ADDRESSING THIS ITEM. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
FEES ARE ABOUT. WHO IS PAYING WHAT FEES -- WHY?

SO WE INCUR COST FOR STAFF
TIME

FOR POLICE AND PUBLIC WORKSOVERTIME COSTS SOME DOING THEIR

DAY JOB, AND WE USUALLY CHARGE

THE RATES FOR THE STAFF IN
SPONSORING EVENTS.

SO IN ORDER TO SPONSOR AN

EVENT, THERE'S A COST -- YOU'RE

SAYING THERE'S A COST TO THE
CITY?

THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS CITY
SPONSORSHIP. LET'S SAY THE CHAMBER OF

COMMERCE WHEN THEY DO THEIR

EVENTS AND ONE WAY THE CITY CAN

SUPPORT THOSE IS WE DID THIS

EARLIER THIS YEAR, IS WAIVE THE

FEES OR PARTIALLY WAIVE THE FEES

THAT WE CHARGE AND THAT WOULD

COVER THE COST OF THE STAFF TIME

FOR THE EVENT, SO IT CAN BE

PUBLIC WORKS FOR CLEAN-UP OR

PUTTING ROAD BARRIERS OR POLICE

TIME TO MAKE SURE THERE'S POLICE

OFFICERS THERE, BUT YOU HAVE THE

AUTHORITY TO WAIVE THOSE COSTS,
WAIVE THOSE FEES.

SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO

BRINGUS BACK TO THIS SPECIFIC ITEM

THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS HERE,

WHICH IS WHETHER WE ARE GOING TO

APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION OF

ITEM PRIORITIZED BY OUR STAFF

HERE, WHICH ARE THE ITEMS AS

ALREADY NOTED UNDER THE HEADING

ADDITIONAL INITIATIVES UNDER THE

HEADING OF PROJECTS, PRIORITIES

REQUIRED BY LEGAL

ANDCONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS, NINE

ITEMS THERE, AND THERE ARE ABOUT
12 PLUS THE HOMELESSNESS ITEM
UNDER GROUP NUMBER 1. BRINGING US BACK TO WHAT'S BEEN

IDENTIFIED SO FAR, I HEAR A

GENERALIZED SUPPORT FOR A

CLEAN-UP OF DOWNTOWN AS AN ITEM

THIS COUNCIL WANTS TO ADD IN FOR

TASK FOR STAFF, AND WE HAVE
OTHER ITEMS TO DISCUSS. COUNCILMEMBER HINTON.

I MEAN I'M READY TO MOVE THE

ITEM WITH THAT ADDITION AND

MAYBE MARY CAN HELP US WITH

THAT, THAT WE'RE BASICALLY

ESTABLISHING THESE PRIORITIES

FOR THE NEXT FIVE MONTHS PRIOR

TO THE FEBRUARY GOALS WITH THE

ADDITION OF SPRUCING UP THE

DOWNTOWN DURING THE
HOLIDAYMONTHS. DOES THAT SOUND OKAY?

IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO
COUNCIL?

CAN WE MOVE THAT WHOLE ITEM
WITH ALL THE SUGGESTED THINGS?

IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, WE

NEED TO DISCUSS THE ITEMS IN
GROUP 3. ARE THOSE THE ITEMS YOU'RE

POINTING OUT, COUNCILMEMBER
McLEWIS, GROUP 3?
YEAH, NUMBER 7 IS THE LINEUP

ON SEBASTOPOL AND IT'S ABOUT
LIGHTING DOWNTOWN. I GUESS DECORATING IN THE
HOLIDAYS WILL COVER THAT.

SO WE ARE IDENTIFYING

CLEANING UP DOWNTOWN, AND I
THINK UNDER GROUP 3, AND THERE'S

THE LABYRINTH EVENT TO

CELEBRATESEBASTOPOL THAT HAD BEEN
DISCUSSED. COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS, ARE YOU

THINKING WE NEED TO DISCUSS ANY
OTHER ITEMS IN GROUP 3? THOSE ARE THE ONLY OTHER ITEMS
WE MENTIONED?
NO. I WOULD BE THRILLED IF WE COULD
GET NUMBER 3.

NUMBER 3 IS THE CLEAN-UP OF

DOWNTOWN AND TO LIGHT UP

SEBASTOPOL, SO I'M HEARING A

PROPOSAL THAT WOULD -- THAT WE

WOULD NOT DO THE EVENT TO

CELEBRATE SEBASTOPOL, BUT WE
WOULD PRIORITIZE UNDER GROUP 3,
ITEM 3, WHICH IS CLEAN UP

DOWNTOWN
AND ITEM 7 WHICH ISLIGHTING SEBASTOPOL.

STRIKE 7 /#.

SO ITEM NUMBER 3 CLEANING UP

DOWNTOWN AND ADDING IN SOME SORT

OF LIGHTING, IS THAT WHAT I'M
HEARING?
IT'S ON THERE.

ITEM 3 TO INCLUDE LIGHTING. THAT WOULD LEAVE OUT OF OUR

MOTION, COUNCILMEMBER MAURER,

YOUR IDEA OF THE EVENT TO

CELEBRATE SEBASTOPOL AND THE
LABYRINTH.

OKAY, I'M ASKING FOR THOSE

ITEMS NOT BE SCRATCHED AT THIS

TIME BUT NOT INCLUDED WITH THE
PRIORITIES OF THIS TIME. THEY'RE NOT ON HOLD OR SET
ASIDE. THEY'RE JUST NOT PRIORITIZED
RIGHT NOW.

SO TURN PROPOSAL FROM STAFF,

I THINK WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS

THAT IN THIS NEXT FIVE FOR

SIX-MONTH PERIOD, THOSE WOULD

NOT BE PRIORITIZED BUT PLANNED
FOR FEBRUARY GOAL SETTING.

SO WE ARE MOVING THIS PROJECT
FOR THE LABYRINTH FORWARD. WE ALREADY GOT A PROPOSAL. WE HAVE GOT A

DESIGNER, AND

WE'RE IN COMMUNICATION

WITHSTAFF AND THE COMMUNITY CENTER

AND PUBLIC WORKS, SO THIS IS AN

ITEM THAT IS KIND OF WALKING

ITSELF FORWARD, SO THE DESIGNER

IS OFFERING THE TIME, AND IT

WILL COME BACK AS AN AGENDA ITEM

PROBABLY THE FIRST OR THE SECOND
MEETING IN OCTOBER.

DO YOU HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT
THAT, CITY MANAGER?

I'M FAMILIAR WITH WHAT'S
GOING ON. I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMEONE

DESIGNATED AS A POINT PERSON FOR
THE PROJECT.

KIRSTEN. WHAT E-MAIL DID YOU SEND?
THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD, CITY

MANAGER, A POINT PERSON
DESIGNATED?

THERE'S FIND VOLUNTEERS OR
ORDER MATERIALS. THERE'S THOSE SORTS OF THINGS,

PROBABLY WHICH WOULD BE MORE

APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLIC WORKS

STAFF, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
VOLUNTEERING, SCHEDULING EVENTS. EVENT MANAGEMENT IS NOT OUR

STICK SO WE WANT A POINT PERSON

TO WORK WITH INSTEAD OF IT BEING
MORE AMBIGUOUS.

JUST A COMMENT. WE HAVE A THREE PERSON

COMMITTEE, SO THAT IS THE

DESIGNER, KENYON AND MYSELF FROM
THE COMMUNITY CENTER.

WILL THIS REQUIRE STAFF TIME?
NOT NECESSARILY. MAYBE A LITTLE TIME FROM PUBLIC

WORKS --

DANTE, CAN YOU COME TO THE

MICROPHONE QUICKLY AND WE'LL
WRAP THIS UP. WE NEED TO KNOW IF THIS IS

WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW, REALLY

QUICKLY, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU

EXPECT FOR THIS
LABYRINTHPROJECT?

THE LINE SHARE OF WHAT PUBLIC

WORKS DO IS TO TRY AND ATTEMPT

TO SAFELY REMOVE THE BENCH AND

PLACKS WE HAVE HERE NOW TO THE
NEW SITE.

ARE WE TALKING TWO HOURS,
THREE HOURS?
TWO STAFF MEMBERS, ONE DAY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT, AT THIS POINT, WE

NEED TO MAKE A DECISION AS A

COUNCIL HERE WHETHER WE WILL
SUPPORT THAT EFFORT. I WILL ASK CITY MANAGER

WHETHERGIVEN WHAT YOU'VE HEARD FROM

DANTE, YOU CAN ACCOMMODATE THE

CLEAN-UP OF DOWNTOWN, ITEM
NUMBER 3 AND THE LABYRINTH

PROJECT WITHOUT ABANDONING ANY

OF THE PROJECTS THAT YOU HAVE

PRIORITIZED IN YOUR STAFF
REPORT.

DANTE SHAKES UP AND DOWN. I WOULD COUNTRY SCORE WITH THAT.

OKAY, I'M GOING TO -- I WOULD
COUNTRY OCCUR WITH THAT.

WE
WOULD -- CONCUR WITH THAT.

IS THERE ANY WAY WE NOT DO IT

BUT PRIORITIZE THE WHOLE
DOWNTOWN, BECAUSE THAT IMPACTSSO MANY PEOPLE.

DANTE.

I SHOULD JUST STAY HERE. PRESSURE WASHING DOWNTOWN IS

MORE TIME --

IN GENERAL, I'M NOT

JUSTTALKING WATER BUT LIGHTS, YOU

KNOW, BEAUTIFYING THE DOWNTOWN

IN THIS SHORT TIME FRAME, SO I'M

JUST WONDERING IS THERE ENOUGH

STAFF TO DO THAT, OR IS THAT

SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE TALKING

ABOUT MAYBE GET DELAYED A
LITTLEBIT?

AS WE DO EVERY YEAR,

PUBLICWORKS STAFF TIME IS ALREADY
ALLOCATED TO DO THAT. WE START IN THE BEGINNING OF

NOVEMBER, AND WE'RE ALREADY

PLANNING OF DOING THAT,

FINISHING UP PROJECTS

RIGHT NOWCONSTRUCTION-WISE TO MOVE INTO

THIS TIME OF THE YEAR, WHICH WE
DO HISTORICALLY.

I'M SORRY, DANTE. ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU CAN

COMPLETE YOUR REGULAR

PRIORITIZED TASK AS CAPTURED IN

THE STAFF REPORT AND ALSO DO THE

SUPPORT FOR LABYRINTH AND THE
CLEAN-UP OF DOWNTOWN?
YES.

OKAY, SO I THINK THAT'S THE

MOST IMPORTANT ANSWER TO
OURQUESTION. SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE IN
TERMS OF A MOTION.

WELL, I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD

THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN THIS

EDITION BECAUSE IT SAYS NOT

CURRENTLY COUNCIL APPROVED, AND

WE ALL HAVE PROJECTS WE'RE
PASSIONATE ABOUT. WE NEED TO EITHER APPROVE THEM

AS A COUNCIL OR NOT AS A
PRIORITY.

OKAY, SHOULD WE GO THROUGH
EACH OF THE ITEMS IN GROUP 3 OR
THE ITEMS MENTIONED HERE?

I THINK ONLY THE ITEMS
MENTIONED.

SO I'LL ASK FOR A THUMBS UP

AND THUMBS DOWN FOR THE CLEAN-UP
IN DOWNTOWN. OKAY, UNANIMOUS. AND THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN ON THE LABYRINTH MEMORIAL?

IT'S NOT A PRIORITY FOR ME
NOW.

SO IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED,

APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION, BUT

THAT HAS NOT BEEN PRIORITIZED

FROM THE COUNCIL, SO WE WILL

MOVE FORWARD, I THINK WITH
THEMOTION THAT'S ALREADY BEEN MADE. OKAY AND CITY MANAGER.

ONE CLARIFICATION WE TALKED

ABOUT BUT I DIDN'T HEAR AN

ANSWER ABOUT WAIVING THE FEES
ASK COSTS. I KNOW WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT IN
DETAIL. SHOULD THAT COME BACK AS A
FUTURE AGENDA?
IT'S NOT PART OF MY MOTION.

WHAT DO WE DO WITH THAT?

LET'S DEAL WITH THE MOTION,
THANK YOU.

SO CAN WE PULL THE FLEET

ASSESSMENT OUT OF THIS SINCE

WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING
THAT MOMENT?

MY MOTION IS TO FOLLOW THE

CITY MANAGER'S ASSESSMENT AND

LET STAFF DECIDE WHETHER THAT'S

SOMETHING THEY SHOULD

PRIORITIZE, THAT'S THE MOTION AS

I SEE IT, AND IT'S UP TO DANTE
TO SEE IF WE CAN FIT IT IN.

WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THUMBS UP
OR THUMBS DOWN ON FLEET.

I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON IT
BEFORE YOU DO.

KEEPING THE FLEET ASSESSMENT
ON THE LIST. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT, CITY
MANAGER?
YES.

OKAY. DANTE, I THINK YOU CAN PROBABLY
SIT DOWN. SO WE HAVE THE MOTION FROM

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON, WHICH

WOULD BE ANTICIPATE THE PROPOSAL

FROM STAFF PLUS ADDING IN THE
CLEAN-UP OF DOWNTOWN.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR A SECOND.

SECOND.

ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE,MS. GOURLEY.

THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE

CITY COUNCIL THE RECOMMENDED

PRIORITIES FOR THE NEXT SIX

MONTHS AS PROPOSED BY STAFF SO
ITEMS 1 THROUGH 9, AFFORDABLE

HOUSING RENTAL MONITORING,

EMPLOYEE NEGOTIATIONS, THE FLEET

ASSESSMENT, THE FIRE

REORGANIZATION, HOUSING ELEMENT

IMPLEMENTATION, PUBLIC

EDUCATION, SOLID WAIST

PROCUREMENT, TRANSPORTATION

GRANT AND I'M ASSUMING WE'RE

DIRECTING STAFF TO CONTINUE WITH
THE GROUP 1 PROJECTS, WHICH IS

THE CITY COUNCIL PROTOCOL THE

COMMUNITY FIRE SAFETY, THE

MASTER PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY

CENTER, AND EOS ASSESSMENT,

SUPPORT PUBLIC ARTS, DISCUSSION
OF THE

PLANNING COMMISSIONDESIGN REVIEW BOARD SKATE

CON/DEDICATION AND TO ADD THE

CLEAN-UP OF THE DOWNTOWN BY

DOING THE FOLLOWING A THROUGH F

TO LIST BY STAFF FOR THE
HOLIDAYS, IS THAT CORRECT.

CORRECT.
[ ROLL VOTE].

THANK YOU FOR THAT DISCUSSION

AND THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO
HAS BEEN PATIENT.

CAN I ASK MY QUESTION.

I'M SORRY, CITY MANAGER.

I DIDN'T HEAR DIRECTION ON

POSSIBLE CONSIDERATION OF

WAIVING FEES FOR EVENTS OR

INCURRING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH

BUYING MATERIALS FOR LIGHTING
AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.

THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE

COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT THE

ITEM COME BACK CONSIDERING THE

WAIVER OF FEES OR OTHER

FINANCIAL OR SPONSORSHIP SUPPORT
FOR EVENTS DURING THE HOLIDAYS. THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT COME TO

US INDIVIDUALLY, SO EACH THING,

NOT JUST GIVE A BLANK CHECK FOR
THAT. I'D RATHER SEE IT PERSONALLY.

SO THE PROPOSAL WOULD BE THAT

STAFF COME BACK WITH A PROPOSAL

THAT WOULD INCLUDE --

COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD BRING
THE EVENT AS AN AGENDA ITEM.

SO THE FIRST SO I RECOMMEND

SEEING WHAT WE HAVE FOR AGENDA
REVIEW ON THURSDAY.

OKAY, THAT WORKS. WE HAVE A PROCESS SO NICE TO
RESPECT IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE DONE WITH THIS ITEM. COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE WE GOOD? WE NOW ARE MOVING ON TO ITEM
NUMBER 8 ON OUR AGENDA AND

THATITEM IS CONSIDERATION OF

RESOLUTION OPPOSING SONOMA
COUNTY INITIATIVE MEASURE J. THE ITEM WAS BROUGHT TO THE

COUNCIL BY TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS,
JILL McLEWIS AND LISA HINTON AND

WILL BE PRESENTING THE ITEM
TONIGHT. THEY WANT TO THANK THE AUDIENCE

HERE TO COMMENT ON THE ITEM ASK
LAY OUT THE PROCESS WILL BE. WE'LL HAVE A PRESENTATION HERE IN THE COUNCIL TABLE. THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR

COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ASK QUESTIONS

AND THEN WE WILL GO OUT TO

PUBLIC COMMENT, AND WE WILL TAKE

PUBLIC COMMENT, TWO MINUTES PER

PERSON IN THE ROOM AND ALSO ON

ZOOM BACK AND FORTH, SO EVERYONE

GETS AN EQUAL CHANCE, AND I

REMIND EVERYONE THAT AS IS

GENERALLY THE CASE IN THIS VERY

RESPECTFUL COMMUNITY, THAT WE

ALL NEED TO ACCEPT THAT

EVERYONE'S INDIVIDUAL OPINION

DESERVES A QUIET, CONSIDERED

RESPECT NO MATTER WHETHER YOU

AGREE WITH IT OR NOT, AND THAT'S

ALWAYS BEEN THE STANDARD IN

SEBASTOPOL, SO JUST AS A

REMINDER, BECAUSE IT CAN GET

PASSIONATE AND PEOPLE COULD GET

EMOTIONAL, SO I APPRECIATE
EVERYONE RESPECTING THAT. WHAT WE DO ON COMMENTS WITHIN

THE CHAMPS, WE'LL LOOK TO MARY
GOURLEY. WILL YOU BE RECOMMENDING THAT

PEOPLE LINE UP WHEN IT'S THE
OPPORTUNITY? I'D LIKE EVERYONE TO KNOW WHAT
THE PROCESS WILL BE.

SO THERE'S TWO WAYS WE CAN DO
THIS. WE ALWAYS GO TO CHAMPS FIRST AND
BACK TO ZOOM, BACK TO CHAMPS. WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS WE DO 10 AT A TIME SO WE'RE NOT

CREATING -- YOU KNOW THERE'S A

LOT OF PEOPLE HERE SO IT WILL

TAKE AWHILE SO EVERYONE GO AISLE

BY AISLE INSTEAD OF RUSHING TO
THE PODIUM. SO WE'LL GO STRAIGHT TO BACK AND

WE'LL MAKE SURE WE GET

EVERYBODY, I PROMISE AND GET
OBSERVE AND ZOOM. HOW DOES THAT WORK. THANK YOU FOR ACCOMMODATING THAT.

MARY GOURLEY WILL CALL IT
AISLE BY AISLE OR ROW BY ROW.

I'M SORRY, ROW BY ROW.

AND PLEASE FOR THOSE THAT MAY
NOT BEWARE, THERE IS NO LIMIT. EVERYONE CAN HAVE THEIR TWO MINUTES OF PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WON'T BE CUTTING IT OFF AT A

SPECIFIC TIME, SO WE'LL MAKE

SURE EVERYONE'S HEARD, SO WITH

THOSE COMMENTS, I THINK WE WILL

GO TO COUNCIL MEMBERS HINTON AND
McLEWIS TO INTRODUCE THIS TOPIC.

OKAY, THANK YOU. LET ME GET MY GLASSES ON. SO THE REASON THAT I BROUGHT

THIS FORWARD IS ONE, WEEKS AGO,

MAYBE MONTHS AGO NOW, I SERVE ON

THE SONOMA COUNTY LEGISLATIVE

COMMITTEE, AND WE ALL CAME

TOGETHER AND FELT THIS COULD

SEVERELY IMPACT EVERYONE IN THIS

COUNTY, AND SO -- FOR THOSE

DON'T KNOW THE LEGISLATIVE

COMMITTEE, IT CONSISTS OF ONE

COUNCILMEMBER FROM EACH CITY

REPRESENTING, AND WE ALL FELL WE

SHOULD COME TOGETHER AS A WHOLE

AND COME OUT ASK, YOU KNOW,

EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT FOR OUR

AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY, AND

THERE'S A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY,
BUT THIS IS SIMPLE FOR ME. THIS IS AN AGRICULTURAL

COMMUNITY, A COMMUNITY ACTUALLY

LEADING THE WAY IN SO MANY WAYS,

AND THE

FACT THAT ANYONE WOULDCOME IN HERE -- AND THERE ARE

MANY FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
WITHTHIS. IT'S ALL DOCUMENTED OUT THERE,

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT

PEOPLE HAVE TIME TO SPEAK, BUT
IT'S JUST SAL FOR ME. I LOOK AT -- I GO TO THE GROCERY

STORE AND I LOOK AROUND AND

THINK, WOW, SHOULD THIS

GETPASSED, WE COULD LOOK TALL

REFRIGERATORS IN THE GROCERY

STORE, AND WE WOULD NOT SEE

CLOVER OR STROUDS AND SO MANY

BRANDS THAT ARE LOCAL, AND
I'VEBEEN HERE FOR 10 YEARS, BUT I AM

PROUD TO LIVE HERE AND PROUD OF
THESE COMPANIES. THEY WERE DOING REGENERATIVE

FARMING BEFORE THAT WAS EVEN A
WORD. I KNOW THESE FOLKS, I WORK WITH

THEM CLOSELY, AND I KNOW THEM,

AND I KNOW THERE ARE PEOPLE ALL

OVER THE COUNTRY STRIVING TO DO

WHAT WE DO HERE, AND THE FACT

THAT THIS WOULD COME OUT AND TRY

TO SHUT THIS DOWN, IT JUST LEFT

ME SPEECHLESS, SO THAT'S WHY I

FELT -- AND IT ALSO IMPACTS
SEBASTOPOL. I UNDERSTAND I AM TALKING COUNTY
WIDE. WE HAVE 4H, FAA, A FARMERS

MARKET WHERE A LOT OF THE BRANDS
COME TO. WE HAVE A LOT OF FINANCIAL
IMPACT. WE HAVE THE FEED STORE, AND

EVENIF WE DON'T HAVE BUSINESSES

HERE, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT

LIVEHERE THAT COULD BE IMPACTED AND
A LOSS OF JOBS. THIS IS WHY I BROUGHT IT FORWARD

AND COUNCILMEMBER HINTON FELT

STRONGLY SO WE DECIDED TO COME

TOGETHER AND BRINGING IT FORWARD

TOGETHER, AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU

THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, AS
WELL.

I WANT TO SAY WHEN
COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS ASKED ME

ABOUT THIS ISSUE, I WAS WELL
AWARE OF IT. I'M AN APPOINTEE ON THE SONOMA

COUNTY FAIR BOARD AND VERY PROUD
OF THAT. I ALSO STARTED THE FARMERS
MARKET IN THIS TOWN IN 1990, SO

I REALLY WANT TO SUPPORT OUR

NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE RIGHT

OUTSIDE SEBASTOPOL AND SHOP IN
OUR AREA. WE'RE KNOWN FOR OUR

FOOD-TO-TABLE, AND I'LL MAKE
MORE EDITORIAL COMMENTS HAVE. S BE A BIPARTISAN ISSUE, THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS BEHIND IT. I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. I HAVEN'T TAKEN A POSITION THAT

I DON'T ALWAYS SUPPORT

PROCLAMATIONS TO JUST MAKE A

STATEMENT, BUT THIS IMPACTS OUR
COMMUNITY. THIS IMPACTS OUR LIFE, AND WHEN

YOU TALK ABOUT IS CLIMATE ACTION

POLICIES, THIS IS GOING TO MEAN

THAT FOOD WILL HAVE TO BE

DELIVERED FROM FARTHER AWAY, AND

THEY'RE GOING TO DRIVE UP THE

HIGHWAY AND DROP IT OFF IN OUR

GROCERY STORES, BECAUSE WE'RE

NOT GOING TO START EATING
DIFFERENTLY. WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO BE BE
SUPPLIED WITH LOCAL PRODUCT. I DON'T WANT TO TALK FOR

EVERYONE, BUT I THINK

THECOMMITTEE SHOULD LEARN ABOUT IT,

AND THIS IS ONE WAY BY

BRINGINGIT FORWARD TO HAVE THAT
EDUCATION.

THANK YOU FOR THAT
PRESENTATION. ANYTHING IN ADDITION THAT STAFF
NEEDS TO OFFER AT THIS POINT? OKAY, WE'RE NOW AT THE POINT

WHERE WE'RE TAKING

QUESTIONSFROM COUNCIL

MEMBERS, ANYQUESTIONS FROM COUNCILMEMBER

MAURER OR VICE MAYOR ZOLLMAN, GO
AHEAD.

YES, IN THAT PROPOSED

RESOLUTION, IT SAYS THIS IS IS A

STRICTLY OUT OF TOWN GROUP, THAT

THIS MEASURE IS FROM DXE AND

SAYS IT'S FROM OAKLAND, SO IT

KIND OF MAKES IT SOUND LIKE

IT'SNOT BEING SUPPORTED BY ANYONE
OTHER THAN THAT GROUP. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT, EITHER
ONE?

AGAIN, I DID NOT CREATE THIS
LANGUAGE. THERE IS THE UNDERSTANDING OF

THE PROCLAMATIONS, AND THIS IS

MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHO

BROUGHTTHE TAX MEASURE FORWARD FOR

SONOMA COUNTY AND WHO FILED IT,

SO IF THAT INFORMATION IS NOT

ACCURATE, AND SOMEONE HAS

ALTERNATE INFORMATION, I WOULD

BE WILLING TO ADJUST IT IN THE
RESOLUTION. I DON'T READ IT THAT THERE'S

OBVIOUSLY A ROOM FULL OF PEOPLE,

AND I SEE THE SIGNS IN TOWN, NOT

EVERYBODY FEELS ONE WAY OR
ANOTHER. WE'RE A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY, AND

WE CAN ALL VOTE FOR IT, BUT

THAT'S THE UNDERSTANDING I HAVE

OF WHO BROUGHT THE

BALLOTMEASURE AND GOT IT ON THE SONOMA

COUNTY BALLOT, BUT IF SOMEBODY

HAS ALTERNATE, I CAN CHANGE THAT
LANGUAGE. I'M FINE WITH THAT.

I SEE WHERE IT SAYS

BERKELEY,BUT I WAS JUST LOOKING WHERE YOU
WERE?

YEAH, IT WAS IN THE FIRST
PHOTOGRAPH. IT SEEMED TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO
ONE GROUP. MY UNDERSTANDING IT WAS
BROUGHTBY SEVERAL, SO OKAY, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. I DID HAVE A QUESTION. I'M CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT POSITIONS

OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN

SONOMACOUNTY HAVE TAKEN ON THIS
MEASURE?

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, EVERYONE HAS

SUPPORTED THE RESOLUTION THAT WE

BROUGHT FORTH EXCEPT FOR KATATI,
WHO HAS TAKEN NO POSITION. THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, BUT,

AGAIN, I CAN BE CORRECTED, BUT

BELIEVE THAT INCLUDES AND MAYBE
SOMEONE FROM THE PUBLIC KNOWS.

I BELIEVE THERE'S ONE MORE
CITY. SEASON IT ON THE AGENDA FOR ONE
MORE CITY THIS WEEK?

I BELIEVE WINDSOR IS TAKING
IT UP.

SO WINDSOR IS TAKING IT UP,

AND THE OTHERS WHO HAVE

CONSIDERED IT, CATATI IS NEUTRAL

AND THE OTHERS HAVE SUPPORTED
MEASURE J?
THAT'S CORRECT.

VICE MAYOR, DO YOU HAVE A
QUESTION.

I UNDERSTOOD THAT CATATI TOOK

IT UP AND DECIDED TO NOT TAKE A
POSITION.

THEY TOOK IT UP BUT NOT
TAKING A POSITION?
THEY ARE REMAINING NEUTRAL.

OKAY. A NEUTRAL POSITION. MARY GOURLEY, IF YOU

COULDPLEASE HANDLE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR
US.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. AS I
STATED, WE'LL DO CHAMBERSFIRST AND THEN ZOOM.

IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT, TWO TO

THE PODIUM AND JUST
MAKE A LINE,THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

FOR THOSE THAT DON'T NO MARY

GOURLEY, HE'S THE AWESOME, JUST
SAYING.

THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE THE

TIMER, OTHERWISE I'LL JUMP IN
WHEN YOU HAVE ABOUT 30 SECONDS
IF THAT WORKS FOR YOU.

FIRST ONE. GOOD EVENING. I CAN SEE IT, BUT I'LL HAVE TO

KEEP LOOKING OVER THERE SO LET
ME NO. I MIGHT NOT TAKE TWO MINUTES. GOOD EVENING. THANKS FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK. MY NAME IS WOODY HASTINGS

LIVEJUST SOUTH OF TOWN, AND I'M HERE

TONIGHT TO URGE YOU TO DO WHAT

CATATI DID AND NOT ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION. I SENT A LETTER EARLIER TODAY. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAD A CHANCE

TO READ IT, BUT WHAT I THINK IS

MORE IMPORTANT IS THAT EACH OF

YOU HAS READ MEASURE J BECAUSE
IT'S NOT VERY LONG. IT'S FAIRLY SIMPLE, NOT VERY

LONG, AND IT'S SUPER IMPORTANT

TO READ IT, BUT I THINK WHAT YOU

FIND WHEN YOU IMMEDIATE MEASURE
J IS A POLICY PERSPECTIVE. IT'S REALLY VERY SORT OF VERY

LIMITED AND

VERY -- YEAH,LIMITED AND MEASURED, BECAUSE SO
IT'S A LOW STANDARD. USUALLY CALIFORNIA GOES ABOVE

AND BEYOND WHAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT DOES. IT USED THE FEDERAL DEFINITION

AND ONLY IMPACTS -- I THINK AT
MOST, 21 LARGE OPERATIONS,

RIGHT, AND THAT'S WHAT THE
CONCERN IS. MY WIFE AND I MOVED TO SONOMA

COUNTY BECAUSE WE LOVE THE

AGAND SUSTAINABLE AG AND THE

LEADERSHIP SONOMA COUNTY HAS

SHOWN ON SUSTAINABILITY AND
WHATNOT, RIGHT. THESE ARE ABOUT THE LARGE ONES

THAT COME WITH THE BIG

WAREHOUSES THAT YOU DON'T SEE
VERY MUCH. IT'S TO PROTECT THE SMALL AND

MEDIUM AGRICULTURAL FOLKS ASK

PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT

WECHERISH AND THE WATER QUALITY IN

PARTICULAR AND TO HAVE MORE

HUMANE TREATMENT OF THE ANIMALS

RIGHT, SO I THINK THOSE ARE THE

MAIN POINTS I WANTED TO MAKE,

AND THERE'S A LOT MORE I
COULDSAY. I JUST REALLY DO THINK THAT, YOU
KNOW -- THAT'S IT. THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH. THANKS SO MUCH.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. WE'LL GO OUT TO ZOOM.

I'M GOING TO ASK THAT THE

PUBLIC NOT MONITOR THE TIME AND

WE DO HAVE A CITY CLERK HERE WHO

WILL MAKE SURE THAT THE TIME HAS

ENDED APPROPRIATELY, SO PLEASE

DO REMAIN QUIET WHILE OTHERS ARE
SPEAKING, THANK YOU.

SO I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. SUNNY, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE.

YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME.

I CAN HEAR YOU. CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
LET'S SEE -- SORRY. TOO MANY WINDOWS OPEN. YES, I CAN SEE THE TIMER NOW.

YES, I ACTUALLY ALMOST ALWAYS AM

ON THE SAME SIDE AS WOODY BUT I

SUGGEST YOU TAKE OPPOSING

MEASURE J BECAUSE OF THE HARM TO

THEOLOGICAL ECONOMY AND THE
RURAL CHARACTER OF OUR COUNTY. I AND MY FAMILY WE EAT MOSTLY

PLANT BASED BUT WHEN WE DO EAT A

LITTLE BIT OF ANIMAL PRODUCTS, I

REALLY LIKE TO SUPPORT OUR LOCAL
DAIRIES AND FARMS. ALL OF OUR DAIRIES GRAZE

THEIRPASTURES WHEN WEATHER PERMITS

AND MANY OF THE DAIRIES ARE
ORGANIC MAKING IT 41% OF THE

CALIFORNIA DAIRIES AND THE
LARGEST IS 1,200 HEAD AND THE
STATE IS 2500 AND ONE OF

THECHICKEN AND EGG BUSINESSES THAT

WILL BE BANNED UNDER MEASURE J

IS ONE TENTH OF THE SIZE IN IOWA

WHERE OUR EGGS COULD COME FROM
THE THEY GO OUT OF BUSINESS. SONOMA COUNTY DAIRIES ARE THE

MOST SUSTAINABLE AND MANY

PRODUCE DRY, HEALTHY BEDDING TO

ANIMALS OR APPLIED TO PASTURE

FOR FERTILITY AND USE OTHER

TECHNIQUES TO IMPROVE WATER
/P REGENERATION AND PROVIDE

WILDFIRE BUFFERS IN OUR CITIES

AND BEAUTIFUL OPEN SPACES, AND

I'M JUST VERY CONCERN END THIS

PASSES, YOU KNOW, WE'LL

LOSE -- IT WILL ALSO AFFECT MANY

FARM EQUIPMENT BUSINESS AND

DAIRY PROCESSES LIKE STRAUSS AND

CLOVER WILL LOSE THEIR BIGGEST
CUSTOMERS. THIS SEEKS TO RESTRICT LIVESTOCK
IN SIZE RESTRICTION AT A SCALE. THERE IS NO CORRELATION BETWEEN

ENVIRONMENTAL OR ANIMAL WELFARE

QUALITY AND RENATA WHO WORKS

WITH CALTRAN BUT SHE COULDN'T BE
HERE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. NEXT WE'LL COME BACK INTO
CHAMBERS, GO AHEAD.

HI, I'M BRANDON MURPHY, A
FARMER SOUTH OF SEBASTOPOL. I'D RATHER NOT SAY THE NAME OF

THE FARM BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO
PUT A TARGET ON MY BACK. SO I'M A SMALL ENOUGH FARMER

THAT I'M NOT NECESSARILY WORRIED

ABOUT THE REGULATIONS AFFECTING

ME IN THAT WAY, BUT SMALL

FARMERS, WE HAVE A VERY HARD
TIME MAKING A LIVING. WE DON'T NEED MEASURES COMING IN

AND LIKE REDUCING OUR NUMBERS IN
THIS COUNTY. WE NEED MORE OF US. I KNOW THESE ARE LARGER FARMS, SOME ARE LEGACY FARMS. I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE JOBS BEING

REMOVED, AND I'M WORRIED ABOUT,

YOU KNOW, LIKE THESE FARMS NOT

CONTRIBUTING TO THE FEED STORES

AND MAKING THE FEED STORES HAVE
A HARDER TIME TO EXIST. THESE FEED STORES HELP MORE THAN

JUST PEOPLE WHO ARE RAISING
MEAT. THEY HELP PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, LIKE

THE REHABILITATING ANIMALS OR

DEALING WITH THEIR OWN PERSONAL

ANIMALS, SO I THINK IT COULD
HURT US IN THAT WAY. I ALSO THINK I COULD CHARGE A

HIGHER PREMIUM BECAUSE
I'M

RAISING A VERY SPECIALIZEDREGENERATIVE LIVESTOCK BUT NOT

EVERYONE HAS THE MONEY TO BUY

THIS FANCY, REALLY AND

HEALTHY -- LIKE ETHICAL MEAT,

AND THE POOR PEOPLE HERE NEED

TOEAT NUTRITIOUS FOOD AND SO,

SURE, WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME

LARGER FARMS PRODUCING STUFF AT

A LOWER COST SO THEY CAN LIVE IN

SONOMA COUNTY, WHICH IS A HARD

COUNTY TO LIVE IN BECAUSE OF THE

COST OF LIVING, AND THIS IS JUST

GOING TO HURT MORE PEOPLE THAN

IT'S REALLY GOING TO HELP,
SOTHANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO SOON. ERIK, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE. THANK YOU, CAN YOU SEE
THETIMER?
YES.

GO AHEAD WITH YOUR
PUBLICCOMMENT PLEASE.

HELLO, GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS
OF THE SEBASTOPOL CITY COUNCIL. I AM ZOOMING TO URGE COUNCIL

MEMBERS TO VOTE AGAINST THIS
RESOLUTION. I CURRENTLY LIVE AND WORK

INSANTA ROSA, AND I'VE BEEN

VOLUNTEERING WITH THE COALITION

AND FACTORY FARMING SINCE DAY
ONE. SEBASTOPOL HAS A PROUD HISTORY

OF CHAMPIONING THAT MOVES

THISCITY FORWARD AND STANDING IN

CONFORMITY IN THE PURSUIT OF
WHAT IS RIGHT. I WANT YOU TO RECONSIDER THE

IMPLICATION FARMING PRACTICES,

YES, FACTORY FARMING HERE IN
SONOMA COUNTY. NO OFFENSE TO ANYONE, BUT IF YOU
HAVE 500,000 CHICKENS, THAT'S A

FACTORY FARM, WHICH CAN DISGUISE

ITSELF AS A FAMILY FARM SIMPLY
BECAUSE YOUR KID IS ON PAYROLL. IT WAS NOT ALLOWED THE NARRATIVE

OF LOCAL FAMILY FARM OPERATIONS

TO OVERSHADOW THE REALITY OF THE

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ETHICAL
IMPACTS. MEASURE J CAN IMPROVE ANIMAL

WELFARE BY REDUCING THE NUMBER

OF BODIES EXPECTED TO KNOW THE

WELFARE OF, BECAUSE HONESTLY,

HOW CAN ANYONE KNOW THE WELFARE
OF 100,000 INDIVIDUALS IN A
SINGLE BARN? IF ANIMAL WELFARE IS HONKY DORE

BECAUSE YOUR CATTLE GRAZED

ONPASTURE, AND IF YOU HAVE ONE

OFTHE LARGEST HERDS IN THE

COUNTY -- AND SUPPORTING MEASURE

J REFLECTS A COMMITMENT TO

AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES AND

PRIORITIZES ANIMAL WELFARE AND

BY VOTING NO OPPOSING MEASURE J,

YOU WOULD BE TAKING A STAND FOR

A FUTURE THAT HONORS THESE
PRINCIPALS. I URGE YOU TO CONSIDER THE

LONG-TERM IMPACT OF THIS

RESOLUTION, AND I'M NOT TALKING

ABOUT THE ECONOMIC DEVASTATION

SINCE HISTORY SHOWS US -- OKAY,
YOU'RE PAST TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT. NEXT, I WILL COME INTO CHAMBERS. CAN I HAVE THE SECOND ROW IF

ANYONE IN THE SECOND ROW WOULD

LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT,
IF YOU
COULD GO UP TO THE PODIUMPLEASE. GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

HEY, GUYS, I'M ZACH -- AND I

DIDN'T PREPARE ON

SPEAKINGTONIGHT AND I DIDN'T KNOW IS HOW

MANY WOULD SPEAK THAT
COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS AND

COUNCILMEMBER MAURER WERE IN

FAVOR OF, BUT THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING IT. I DON'T WORK IN AGRICULTURE. I MOVED HERE FROM L.A. THREE

YEARS AGO WITH VARIOUS DRAMAS

SINCE COMING INTO -- I USED TO
LIVE IN SEBASTOPOL. WE MOVED TO CATATI. I REALLY LOVE LIVING HERE, AND

IT'S ONE OF THE MOST BEAUTIFUL

PLACES IN THE COUNTRY, AND WE'RE

ALL SO LUCKY AND WE ARE THE

DEFINITION OF PRIVILEGE THAT WE
GET TO LIVE HERE, WE REALLY ARE. I REALLY DO WORRY ABOUT THE

FUTURE OF SONOMA COUNTY IN A

WORLD WHERE MEASURE J PASSES

JUST ENTREPRENEURIAL FROM THE
ECONOMIC STANDPOINT. I THINK IF YOU'RE SOMEONE WHO IS

EMPLOYED HERE, WHO HAS, MAYBE

OWNS A HOME HERE, WHO IS

CONCERNED ABOUT

OTHER PEOPLEBEING EMPLOYED AND, YOU KNOW

KEEPING THEIR HOME VALUES HERE

AND THEIR HOMES HERE, WE SHOULD

ALL THINK ABOUT THE MAJOR

IMPLICATIONS OF MEASURE J,

THEECONOMIC STUDIES HAVE BEEN DONE

CITING THE TRICKLE-DOWN EFFECTS

AND THIS IS NOT THAT BIG A
COUNTY TO SUCK THAT OUT OF IT.

YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS, ZACK.

IT WILL HAVE MAJOR RIPPLE

EFFECTS, SO I THINK IT'S

DECEPTIVE, AND I THINK IT'S MUCH
WIDER
RANGING THAN JUSTAFFECTING THE BIGGER FARMS. AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THEANIMALS WHEN THIS HAPPENS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT. NEXT WE'LL GO TO ZOOM. SAMANTHA, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? THANK YOU. CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
NO, BUT I'M GOOD.

I'LL JUMP IN WHEN YOU HAVE 30
SECONDS LEFT.

COOL, THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, I'M SPEAKING TODAY

AS A RESIDENT TO EXPRESS MY
GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT MEASURE J. THIS THREATENS TO DEVASTATE THE

VERY COMMUNITY AND LIKELIHOOD

THAT MANY FAMILIES HAVE WORKED

SO HARD TO BUILD OVER
GENERATIONS. A LOCAL FARMER, INCLUDING THOSE

SUPPLYING TO CLOVER AND SONOMA
COUNTY FAMILY ARE AT RISK. IF MEASURE J COULD FORCE THE

MULTI-GENERATIONAL FAMILY FARMS

OUT OF BUSINESS, HOWEVER, THE

RIPPLE EFFECTS OF MEASURE J
EXTEND BEYOND THE FARMS. THESE FARMS EMPLOY A SIGNIFICANT

NUMBER OF WORKERS MANY WHO LIVE

ON THE FARMS AS PART OF
THEIREMPLOYMENT F. MEASURE J PASSES,

NOT ONLY WILL THEY LOSE THEIR

JOBS BUT LOSE THEIR HOMES LEAVE

SOMETHING FAMILIES WITHOUT
INCOME AND CHERYL. BY SHUTTING DOWN CERTAINLY

AGRICULTURAL BUSINESSES IN

SONOMA COUNTY, IT WOULD CREATE

FOOD SHORTAGES ONLY ADDRESSED BY

TRUCKING AND SUPPLIES AND

REGIONS AND UNDOUBTEDLY LEAD TO

GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS DIRECTLY

CONTRICKING OUR COMMUNITY'S

COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP. MOREOVER WITH THE LOSS OF LOCAL

FARMS, THE COMMUNITY WILL FACE

INCREASED COST FOR CENTRAL

PRODUCTS AS WE DEPEND ON OUT OF

REGION SOURCES TO DRIVE UP

TRANSPORTATION COSTS AND IN

TURNTHE PRICES OF EGGS, MILK AND
POULTRY FOR US. AS SOMEONE WHOSE FAMILY HAS

LIVED AND BEEN PART OF

AGRICULTURAL IN SEBASTOPOL FOR

FOUR GENERATIONS, I ENCOURAGE

YOU TO CONSIDER THE LONG-TERM
DAMAGE THIS WILL CAUSE. . MEASURE J AFFECTS OUR

COMMUNITY'S LIFE SO PLEASE

PROTECT MEASURE J TO PROTECT THE
AGRICULTURE AND ECONOMY.

THANK YOU, SAMANTHA FOR THE
PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I'LL COME BACK TO CHAMBERS
IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN ROW 3 IF
YOU'D LIKE TO GO TO THE PODIUM.

WELL, GOOD EVENING MAYOR RICH
AND ESTEEMED COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DANA AND A RESIDENT OF SONOMA COUNTY. I APPRECIATE THAT YOUTH CHOSEN

TO CONSIDER THE RESOLUTION

OPPOSING MEASURE J AS THIS IS A

CRITICALLY DANGEROUS

ANDTHREATENING VALID INITIATIVE

THAT ABSOLUTELY AFFECTS

RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES OF

SEBASTOPOL ALONG WITH ALL OF
SONOMA COUNTY. IF THIS VERY UNNECESSARY MEASURE

PASSES, MULTI-GENERATIONAL

FAMILY FARMS WILL BE FORCED OUT

OF BUSINESS SIMPLY ON THE

RESTRICTIONS OF ANIMALS THEY CAN
HAVE. THEY ARE THIRD PARTY CERTIFIED

AND VERIFIED BY TRAINED

PROFESSIONALS TO DETERMINE THEIR
ANIMALS ARE WELL TAKEN CARE OF. IN ADDITION, MOST ARE ORGANIC

SOTHERE IS AN ANIMAL WELFARE

IMBEDDED IN THE RULES AND

PRODUCTION LAWS AS WELL AS

NATURAL RESOURCE
ANDENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS. THE LOSS OF THESE FARMS WILL

HAVE A TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT

TOANCILLARY BUSINESSES LIKE FEED

MILLS, VETERINARIANS AND ONLY TO

NAME A FEW, AND WHEN THOSE

RESOURCES ARE SQUEEZED, SO DOES

THE VIABILITY OF THE FARMS AND

MANY OF THE FARMS PROVIDE

HOUSING FOR THE FARM WORKERS AND

THAT GOES AWAY PUTTING THEM IN

AN ALREADY STRESSED HOUSING
MARKET. THIS IS A DIRECT THREAT TO THE
LOCAL FOOD SUPPLY. SONOMA COUNTY IS BLESSED TO HAVE

AN ABUNDANCE OF FOOD GROWN HERE,

AND THE CONSUMPTION OF THE

PRODUCTS WON'T GO AWAY BUT BE

TRUCKED FROM OTHER AREAS
INCREASING GREENHOUSE GASES. WE DO MORE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT --
YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS.

THANK YOU. I HOPE YOU WILL ENJOY THE

FEDERAL AND STATE AND COUNTY

OFFICIALS IN RECOGNIZING THE

DESTRUCTIVE IMPACT THIS HORRIBLE

MEASURE WILL HAVE IN THE ENTIRE
COUNTY. THE OPPOSITION TO THE MEASURE IS
BIPARTISAN. IT IS ALSO OPPOSED BY LAW

ENFORCEMENT, PUBLIC SAFETY,

ENVIRONMENTAL

ORGANIZATIONS,LABOR ORGANIZATIONS,

RESTAURANTS, SMALL
FARMERS, THELIST GOES ON. THIS DIVERSE GROUP KNOWS THIS IS

BAD FOR SONOMA COUNTY, AND I

HOPE THAT YOU WILL JOIN THEM AND

OTHER CITIES IN SONOMA COUNTY BY
OPPOSING MEASURE J.

THANK YOU, DANA, FOR YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT. INTERSECTION, I WILL GO OUT TO

ZOOM IF THERE'S ANYONE ON ZOOM

TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS
RESOLUTION. CARMEN, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF
PLEASE.

YES, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
I CAN HEAR YOU.

CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
I CAN SEE THE TIMER. THANK YOU.

GO AHEAD PLEASE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR

TIME THIS EVENING AND BRINGING

THIS FORTH AND I'M THE DIRECTOR

OF SONOMA COUNTY FARM TRAILS AND

I KNOW TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO ADOPT

THE RESOLUTION OPPOSING MEASURE
J. I'LL JUST SAY DITTO TO

EVERYTHING THAT DANA JUST SHARED

AND MENTION THAT THIS RESOLUTION

WAS CREATED BY PEOPLE WHO WANT

TO ELIMINATE ALL FORMS OF ANIMAL
AGRICULTURE. IT'S MISGUIDED AND MISLEADING. IT MISLABELS SMALL, ORGANIC

FAMILY FARMS AS CAFOS AND MAKE

OUR REGION MORE DEPENDANT ON OUT

OF AREA PRODUCTION DRIVING UP

FOOD COSTS, LIMITING FOOD

SECURITY AND MENTIONED

INCREASING GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS. IT WOULD BE DISASTROUS FOR

OURLOCAL FOOD COMMUNITY AND LOCAL

CONSUMERS WHO WANT TO EAT AND
VALUE QUALITY, LOCAL FOOD. IT CONFLICTS WITH FARM TRAIL'S

MISSION OF PRESERVING AND

KEEPING FARMS FOREVER IN OUR

COUNTY, AND SO WE URGE YOU TO

STAND WITH OUR FAMILY FARMERS

AND ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO VOTE NO
ON J.

THANK YOU, CARMEN, FOR YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT WE'LL COME INTO CHAMBERS.

HI, I'M VESTY, A CHEF, FARMER

AND RANCHER AND FARM IN WEST
COUNTY FOR ALMOST TWO DECADES. I CURRENTLY HAVE BLACK MEAT CODE

THAT USES PASTEURIZED PORK FOR

THE BACON AVAILABLE IN ANDYS,
AND WE BUY DIRECT FROM OVER 40
FARMS IN WEST COUNTY. THIS MEASURE IS SO MISGUIDED. MY LIFE'S

WORK HAS BEEN AGAINSTCAFASS AND WE AGREED ALL THE
ANIMALS WOULD BE PASTURE RAISED. THIS WOULD MAKE IT THERE IS NO

MORE CLOVE E, STRAUSS,

LIBERTYDUCK, INSTEAD WHAT WOULD BE

AVAILABLE IN THE MARKETPLACE IS
ALL CAFO MEAT FROM ELSEWHERE. I WOULDN'T WANT TO COOK HERE IN THIS COUNTY ANYMORE. I AM SO PROUD. I WAS ON THE STATE CALIFORNIA

COMMERCIAL RAVING ABOUT SONOMA

COUNTY'S ACCESS TO INCREDIBLE,

LOCAL FOOD THAT IS RIGHT FOR THE
PLANET. THIS MEASURE ONLY FOCUSES ON

HEAD COUNT, NOT ON HOW YOU TREAT
YOUR ANIMALS. WE HAVE GOT TO STAND UP

TOGETHERAND SUPPORT OUR SMALL FAMILY

FARMS THAT ARE DOING RIGHT BY

THE ANIMALS AND THE PLANET AND

HAVE IT NOT BE ABOUT HEAD COUNT,

BUT IF YOU WANT TO FIGHT AGAINST

CAFA, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR
MOUTH IS. SUPPORT THE LOCAL FARMER.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT.

NEXT, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. KYLE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
YES, I CAN.

THANK YOU. CAN YOU STILL SEE THE TIMER?
NO. YOU CAN LET ME KNOW.

OKAY GREAT. GO AHEAD PLEASE.

ONE, I WANT TO GO AHEAD AND

THANK OUR TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS

BRINGING SUCH AN IMPORTANT ITEM

BEFORE US, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE

JUST HEARD, A LENGTHY

CONVERSATION ABOUT THE

PRIORITIES THE COUNCIL HAS OVER

THE NEXT FIVE MONTHS, AND IT'S

SO GREAT WE CAN TAKE THE

OPPORTUNITY AND THE TIME TO

INVITE ALL THESE PEOPLE WHO WERE

REPRESENTING PLACES FAR OUTSIDE

OF SEBASTOPOL TO WEIGH IN ON

SUCH AN IMPORTANT TOPIC WHEN WE
HAVE AMAZING OTHER PRIORITIES. I WANT TO JUST PUT FORWARD IN

THE SPIRIT OF DEBATE AND

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE J,

NOT THAT I PERSONALLY AM

INFAVOR, BUT I THINK IT'S

IMPORTANT WHEN WE ARE IN DEBATE,

RATHER THAN GO INTO FEAR TACTICS

BUT GO TO DEBATE ARGUMENTS, SO I

EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR THE CAUTIOUS

WITH CAFOS LEADING TO SOCIAL

JUSTICE CONCERNS WITH WASTE THAT

EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF THE

SURROUNDING LANDS TO ABSORB

LEADING TO POLLUTION AND GROUND

RESOURCE AND LINKED THE SPREAD

OF BACKHAND, PATHOGEN AND

RESPIRATORY ILLNESSES AND THE
COMMUNITIES. THE COMMUNITIES ARE MOST AFFECT

READY LOW INCOME, REFERENDUM AND

DISPROPORTIONATELY --
YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS.

MORE OF THIS LOWERS PROPERTY

VALUES, DISRUPT ECONOMIES AND

DISINTEGRATE THE AREAS WHERE
THEY'RE DAMAGING. AND THIS CREATES LOWER MAINLAND,

FINANCIAL
BURDENS ON LOCALCOMMUNITIES AND THE PUBLIC.
[
HI EVERYBODY, I LOVE A GOOD POT STIRRER. I'M CHEF, I HAVE TWO RESTAURANT INS THE COUNTY. I WAS BORN AND RAISED A FARMER'S DAUGHTER AND BECAME A

CHEF AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS I'M MOST PROUD OF IS THE ABILITY TO COOK WITH GOOD LOCAL INGREDIENTS. TO BE ABLE TO GET MEAT, POULTRY, AND DAIRY IN OUR BACKYARD. I SPENT THE LAST WEEK WITH A BUNCH OF CHEFS. EVERY ONE OF THEM JEALOUS OF OUR ACCESS TO GOOD LOCAL PRODUCTS. SO I URGE YOU TO BE IN FAVOR. WE FEED MANY OF YOU IN THE COUNTY. INCLUDING YOU? SEBASTOPOL WHO COME TO MY RESTAURANT. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS MEASURE SHOT DOWN. I KNOW THERE ARE THINGS WE CAN DO TO CONTINUE TO IMPROVE. THE GOALS THE OTHER SIDE SITS UPON, I THINK WE ARE GOING ABOUT THIS IN THE WRONG WAY. BEING BORNENED A RAISED IN WISCONSIN, I KNOW. IT IS NOT IN SONOMA COUNTY. SO I THINK YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING NUMBERS HERE. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT HOW WE TREAT THE ANIMALS AND I'M PROUD TO BE ABLE TO SERVE PRODUCTS THAT COME FROM THIS COUNTY. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. LIZ, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
LIZ, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
YES.

THANK YOU. CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
NO, BUT JUST LET ME KNOW.

THERE YOU GO, GO AHEAD WITH PUBLIC COMMENT PLEASE.

MY NAME IS LIZ. AND I'M ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT TO STAND UP AGAINST THE COALITION TO END FACTORY FARMING AND SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR NO ON J. AS A RESIDENT OF SEBASTOPOL AND A SMALL RANCHER HERE. IN OUR COMMUNITY, IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT YOU STAND UP FOR OUR LOCAL FARMERS. I HAVE LIVED IN SONOMA COUNTY JUST OVER FIVE-AND-A-HALF YEARS. I HAD THE PRIVILEGE TO WORK WITH THE HIGHEST QUALITY WINERIES IN SONOMA COUNTY. CLOSE FRIENDS

WHO OWN RESTAURANTS HERE IN SEBASTOPOL THAT RELY ON PRODUCTS PRODUCED BY SOME OF THE MOST CARING FARMERS HERE IN THE STATE. MY WIFE AND I OWN A SMALL RANCHING OPERATION IN SEBASTOPOL. PRODUCING QUALITY BEEF AND LAMB. BOTH OF US ARE FIRST GENERATION FARMERS. AND WE STARTED OUR BUSINESS IN THE PANDEMIC. WITH THE CARDS ALREADY STACKED AGAINST US. SO WE COULD UNDERSTAND WHERE OUR FOOD COMES FROM AND HOW TO RAISE OUR ANIMALS IN THE HEALTHIEST AND MOST HUMANE WAY POSSIBLE. WE CARE FOR OUR ANIMALS AND TREAT THEM WITH RESPECT AND KINDNESS. MAKING SURE THEY ARE HEALTHY AND CARED FOR IS OUR TOP PRIORITY. FARMING IS NOT AN EASY TASK. IT REQUIRES PATIENCE, KINDNESS. GIVING YOUR WHOLE SOUL.

SOMETIMES THERE WILL BE CHALLENGES IN MAKING THOSE TOUGH DECISIONS.

FARMERS ARE THE BACKBONE OF OUR COMMUNITY. WE KEEP FOOD ON PEOPLE'S PLATES. AND IN THE TIME WE HAVE BEEN RAISING OUR ANIMALS, IT'S A THANKLESS JOB. WE HAVE BEEN FEATURED IN MULTIPLE COALITION AND FACTORY FARMING SOCIAL MEDIA VIDEOS AND HAVE NOT BEEN PAINTED IN THE BEST LIGHT.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 20 SECONDS.

WE HAVE FACED SCRUTINY FROM ALL TYPES OF PEOPLE FOR OUR CAREER PATH.

PEOPLE CALLING US MURDERERS, MAKING FUN OF US AND TELLING US TO ROT IN HELD. WE JUST REALLY WANT TO SEE YOU GUYS COME OUT IN SUPPORT FOR NO ON J. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT THING AND WE DO SEE.

LIZ, THAT'S TWO MINUTES.

OKAY, COOL, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, IN CHAMBERS.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DOUG. OWNER OF BERETTA FAMILY FARMS JUST OUTSIDE OF SEBASTOPOL. MY KIDS WENT TO SCHOOL HERE. I COACHED MULTIPLE SPORTS OVER HERE FOR MANY YEARS. THIS HAS BEEN MY COMMUNITY MANY YEARS. WE HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS OVER 70 YEARS. WE RUN 280 COWS SHIPPING MILK TO CLOVER. I URGE YOU TO READ THIS MEASURE. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANIMAL WELFARE. THIS IS ALL ABOUT NUMBERS. WE ALL KNOW THAT NUMBERS DON'T MEAN THAT WE MISTREAT OUR ANIMALS HERE IN SONOMA COUNTY. MOST OF US

ARE ALL THIRD PARTY MONITORED OR CERTIFIED THROUGH ANIMAL HUMANE PROJECTS. WE ARE ABOUT 90% OF US NOW ARE ORGANIC. AND THAT IS AS DANA

SAID EARLIER, THERE ARE THOSE RULES WITHIN THE ORGANIC PROGRAM THAT WE CAKE CARE OF OUR ANIMALS. RAISING THESE COWS HAS BEEN MY LIFE. I STARTED DOING THIS AT TEN YEARS OLD. MY GRANDFATHER AND FATHER TAUGHT ME HOW TO DO IT AND NOW I HAVE A NEXT GENERATION BEHIND ME I'M TEACHING. IF IT WASN'T FOR US TAKING CARE OF OUR ANIMALS WE WOULD NOT BE IN BUSINESS. I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO. EXCUSE ME. I ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THE INITIATIVE TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE J.

THANK YOU. NEXT BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE RIGHT NOW, I WILL COME BACK TO CHAMBERS.

I'M JENNIFER, DOUG'S DAUGHTER. FOURTH GENERATION DAIRY FARMER. OUTSIDE OF SEBASTOPOL. I DO ALL MY SHOPPING IN SEBASTOPOL. WE ARE THE MEDIUM

SIZED ONE THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS MEASURE REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE YES SIZE SAYS. BOTTLING MILK IS AN EXTREMELY LARGE TASK THAT COSTS A LOT

OF MONEY AND HAS A LOT OF REGULATIONS AND FOR US RIGHT NOW, IT'S SMARTER TO SHIP OUR MILK TO CLOVER SONOMA. THIS MEASURE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANIMAL WELFARE OR WATER QUALITY. THIS MEASURE IS A DIRECT ATTACK TO GET RID OF ANIMAL AGRICULTURE. AND IT IS A DIRECT ATTACK ON OUR RIGHT OF WHAT WE CHOOSE IN THE STORE AND HOW WE FARM. STORES ARE

GETTING THEIR LOCAL PRODUCT JUST OUTSIDE THE COUNTY AND EVERY CITY'S DEFINITION OF LOCAL IS DIFFERENT. SEBASTOPOL IS EXTREMELY FORTUNATE TO

HAVE CREAMERIES AND EGG PROCESSERS JUST IN THE NEXT TOWN OVER TO PROVIDE A GREAT PRODUCT AND IF THIS PASSES THAT WILL GO AWAY. WE KNOW THE PRODUCTS WON'T AND WE WILL BE SHIPPING THEM IN FROM FURTHER AWAY.

WITH THE HUGE CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE GOALS THEY HAVE TO REACH, THAT WILL AFFECT THOSE NUMBERS. THIS WILL DISPLACE WORKERS. WORKERS THAT HAVE BEEN ON THESE FARMS FOR YEARS. WE HAVE A WORKER WHO HAS BEEN THERE OVER 30 YEARS. THESE DAIRIES PROVIDE HOMES TO THEIR EMPLOYEES.

WHERE ARE THESE EMPLOYEES GOING TO GO IF THEIR JOBS ARE LOST? THE OTHER SIDE BASES THIS MEASURE OFF OF EMOTION. NOT FACTUAL DATA. WE IN AG LISTEN

TO RESEARCH AND FOLLOWING STANDARDS GIVEN TO US BY A TEAM OF VETERINARIANS AND INDUSTRY PROFESSIONALS. WE FOLLOW STRICT STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS TO MANAGE OUR MANURE AND ANIMAL WELFARE. I URGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO SUPPORT NO ON J BECAUSE THE IMPACT TO LOCAL FOOD ABILITY.

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT TO OUR CITY, AND OUR COUNTY IS TREMENDOUS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU JENNIFER. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYONE IS ON ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBER.

HI, MY NAME IS TOMMY HENRY. NOT MUCH OF A PUBLIC SPEAKER AND IT IS PAST MY BEDTIME. I'M A FARMER. I FARM FOUR ACRES IN PEN GROVE. I RAISE FOOD FOR

MY COMMUNITY AND TEACH OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO GROW FOOD AND I'M REALLY

DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW MEASURE J COULD AFFECT MY ABILITY TO CONTINUE DOING THAT. AND HOW IT WOULD AFFECT OUR LOCAL FOOD SUPPLY AND ECONOMY. I'M SIMPLY ASKING YOU TO OPPOSE IT.

THANK YOU. BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM. RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBERS.

GOOD EVENING. I'M DON. MY FAMILY MOVED HERE TO MARIN AND SONOMA COUNTY AND HAVE BEEN DAIRYING IN THIS AREA SINCE THE LATE 1800S. ON THE PRESENT RANCH WE ARE AT NOW SINCE 1914. WE HAVE FOURTH AND FIFTH GENERATION HERE TONIGHT. SIX AT HOME. FAMILY OPERATION. THIS IS NOT THE

AGRICULTURE THEY SHOULD BE ATTACKING BUT SUPPORTS AS ONE OF THE SMALLEST COMMUNITY FOR AGRICULTURE IN THE UNITED STATES. WORKING FROM THE BOTTOM END UP. AND WORKING BACKWARDS ON THIS WHOLE THING. WE WOULD APPRECIATE SOME SUPPORT TO KEEP OUR DAIRIES GOING. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU DON FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBERS.

HI, MY NAME IS DEBRA. I'M DON'S WIFE. MY STORY IS I WAS NOT AGRICULTURE IN THE VERY BEGINNING. WHEN I WAS IN PETALUMA HIGH SCHOOL I MET THE MAN OF MY DREAMS. I LEARNED A LOT ABOUT DAIRYING. SINCE THEN, WE STARTED WITH 24 HEAD OF CATTLE AND WERE UP TO 850. THEY ARE CALLING US A FACTORY FARM.

WE ARE NOT. WE ENJOY EACH AND EVERY ONE OF OUR ANIMALS. MY CHILDREN, MY GRANDCHILDREN ARE NOW A HUGE PART OF THIS. WE ARE IN FEAR WITH DRONES GOING OVER. PEOPLE DRIVING BY. WE HAVE DONE FIELD TRIPS. FAMILY AND FRIEND FIELD TRIPS. NOW TO HAVE SOMEBODY STEP ON, WE WILL BE SCRUTINIZED. WE HAVE POSTERS THAT HAVE OUR NAME ON IT NOW. SHOWING WE HAVE CAGED ANIMALS. OUR ANIMALS ARE NOT CAGED. THEY ARE IN LITTLE HOUSES, LIKE A CRIB YOU WOULD PUT A BABY IN. TO PROTECT THEM. WE DO NOT DO HARM. WE MAKE SURE WE WATCH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. WE KNOW

THE FAMILIES WITH THE DUCKS AND CHICKENS CARE FOR THOSE ANIMALS JUST AS WE DO. THERE IS NO HARM IN THESE RANCHES HERE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU DEBRA FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBERS. SO ANYONE IN THE

FOURTH ROW WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE STEP UP TO THE PODIUM PLEASE.

GOOD EVENING. I'M DON, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ATTORNEY HERE IN SEBASTOPOL. MY FAMILY, MY PATERNAL FAMILY HAS BEEN IN THIS AREA SINCE 1954. RAISING CHICKENS. I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH CHICKEN RAISING WITH THEM AS A KID. WHEN I MOVED AWAY. I HAVE RAISED BACKYARD HENS, BUTCHERED POULTRY FOR YEARS ON A SMALL SCALE. I'M NOT NAIVE ABOUT THESE THINGS. ONE THING OF CONCERN IS AVIAN FLU. THE KFOS ARE CONCENTRATING A LARGE NUMBER OF BIRDS IN ONE SINGLE AREA. AND WE HAVE KFO, AVIAN THROUGH IN THIS COUNTY. BIRD RESCUE. TALKS ABOUT THE ENORMOUS NUMBER OF BIRDS THEY ARE DEALING WITH, WITH AVIAN FLU. WE HAVE A REAL POTENTIAL PROBLEM HERE. IT IS LETHAL TO WILDLIFE AROUND THE WORLD. SEA MAMMALS.

SEA BIRDS. MANY, MANY SPECIES. THERE ARE NOW COWS AT EIGHT DAIRIES IN THE

CENTRAL VALLEY ACCORDING TO MERCURY NEWS HAVE COME DOWN WITH AVIAN INFLUENZA. WE MUST DO THINGS TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH. I'M CERTAINLY NOT IN FAVOR OF UNDERMINING AGRICULTURE. I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE IS SUBSTANCE. AND HOW THEY ARE BREEDING GROUNDS FOR VIRUS AND FOR MUTATION OF THE VIRUSES AS WELL IN THAT CONCENTRATED AREA. WATER QUALITY HAS BEEN DISCUSSED. EARTHQUAKE, SEVERE STORM CAN CAUSE IT TO OVERFLOW.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM.

SEEING NO HANDS I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS.

I'M KATHY FROM OCCIDENTAL. I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M A SUPPORTER OF MEASURE J AND I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE A FEW REASONS WHY. I WANT TO START WITH DOCUMENTED ANIMAL CRUELTY. I KNOW PEOPLE FROM THESE SMALL FARMS SAY THERE IS NONE. I'M TALKING KFOS. SONOMA COUNTY'S ANIMAL SERVICES HAVE

DOCUMENTED ANIMAL CRUELTY BUT AUTHORITIES AT THE LOCAL AND STATE LEVEL HAVE REFUSED TO ACT ON THIS EVIDENCE. IT SHOWS DEAD COWS LEFT BY THE GARBAGE. MATERIALS SHOWING STOCK PHOTO OF CUTE ANIMALS WHO ARE NOT EVEN SONOMA COUNTY. NEXT, WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM? THE OPPOSITION HAS RECEIVED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. THIS INCLUDES 300,000 FROM WESTERN UNITED DAIRIES. 75,000. $120,000 BETWEEN WEBER FAMILY FARMS AND SUNRISE FARMS. $50,000 GOES ON 49,000, ALMOST $50,000 FROM THE NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS IN IOWA. AND MORE. YES ON J WAS ACCUSED OF

HAVING NON-RESIDENTS WORKING ON PASSING THIS MEASURE, YET PLENTY OF

MONEY TO OPPOSE THIS MEASURE IS ALSO COMING FROM OUTSIDE SONOMA COUNTY. THEY CERTAINLY ARE NOT TRYING TO PROTECT SMALL FARMS BUT THEY

ARE TRYING TO PROTECT FACTUALLY FARMS AND THEIR PROFITS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE COMMUNITY. YES ON J, HOWEVER, IS FUNDED BY VOLUNTEERS AND INDIVIDUALS AND HAS RECEIVED NO MONEY FROM ANY PAC.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 25 SECONDS.

AS FAR AS THE ENVIRONMENT GOES, KFOS ARE DEFINED BY THE EPA, NOT MEASURE J BECAUSE THEY POSE A THREAT OF WATER POLLUTION. THE

AGRICULTURE SECTOR INCLUDING KFOSS THE LEADING CONTRIBUTOR OF POLLUTION TO LAKES AND RESERVOIRS. LAURA SPARKS SAID SHE HAD NEVER FELT SO PRESSURE AS SHE HAD TO COME OUT AGAINST MEASURE J.

TWO MINUTES.

THANK YOU.

I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. SEEING NO HANDS RAISED I WILL COME BACK TO THE CHAMBERS.

I'M GOING TO BE RIGHT AT THE TWO MINUTE MARK SO YOU CAN JUST YELL AT ME THEN. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TELL ME THE 30 SECONDS. MY NAME IS BONTE EDWARDS. WE ARE 5013C NON-PROFIT TO UNITE FARMERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS. I'M HERE TO ASK THE COUNCIL TO TAKE A FIRST STANCE AGAINST MEASURE J. I'M A THIRD GENERATION OF MY FAMILY TO RESIDE IN SONOMA COUNTY. THIRD GENERATION SHEEP AND CATTLE RANCHER AND I HAVE BEEN PART OF THE COMMUNITY IN SEBASTOPOL FOR 20 YEARS. I HAVE MENTORED FARMERS AND LGBTQ YOUTH. I WORKED IN SEBASTOPOL'S RESTAURANTS AND HARVESTED

ITS GRAPES AND GRAZED ITS ORCHARDS WITH MY SHEEP AND DONATED THE FOOD

I HAVE FARMED HERE TO GROUPS LIKE FARM TO PANTRY TO FEED OUR MOST IN NEED COMMUNITY MEMBERS. THIS BILL IS SUPPOSED TO BE ACT FACTORY FARMS.

SONOMA COUNTY AND SEBASTOPOL KNOWS BETTER WE DON'T HAVE FACTORY FARMS HERE. WE HAVE FAMILY FARMS. MANY OF WHICH HAVE SET THE STAGE NATIONALLY FOR CLIMATE SMART PRACTICES. THESE FARMS WILL BE ELIMINATED IF THIS PRESSURE PASSES. SHORTLY THERE AFTER, OUR LOCAL FEED COMPANIES AND LARGE ANIMAL VETS WILL BE UNABLE TO KEEP THEIR DOORS OPEN. THIS SERIES OF EVENTS PUTS FARMERS LIKE ME OUT OF BUSINESS. SINCE 2018, THIS

GROUP HAS BEEN PERFORMING MILITARY STYLE RAIDS ON SONOMA COUNTY'S FAMILIES. DOING THINGS LIKE TYING UP 911 LINES COUNTY WIDE. THIS GROUP IS NOT FROM HERE. THEY DO NOT CARE IF MY GRANDMOTHER IN OAKMONT HAS A HEART ATTACK AND THE 911 LINE IS BUSY. THEY DON'T CARE. THEY HAVE NO ISSUE

GETTING ONLINE TO SPEW HATRED AND HARASS WOMEN LEADERS LIKE LINDA HOPKINS, QUEER MEMBERS LIKE MYSELF. AS SOMEONE WHO HAS GIVEN MY HEART AND SOUL TO SEBASTOPOL, THIS IS A LAND GRAB BLANKETED IN BIGOTRY.

REGARDLESS OF WHAT PARTY YOU REPRESENT OR WHAT FOOD YOU CHOOSE TO PUT IN YOUR BODY, I HOPE I MADE ONE THING CLEAR. THAT THIS MEASURE IS NOT DESIGNED TO IMPROVE OUR FARMING COMMUNITY, IT IS DESIGNED TO DESTROY IT.

THANK YOU. THAT IS TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM, WE WOULD

LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, RAISE YOUR HAND, SEEING NONE, I WILL GO TO THE NEXT ROW. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM.

IS THIS LOUD ENOUGH? YES. OKAY. READY.

SO GOOD EVENING COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M SARA, IT IS NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN. I LIVE IN WINDSOR. I'M EDUCATED IN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND PART OF THE ORIGINAL FOUNDING COALITION TO END FACTORY FARMING IN SONOMA COUNTY. I HAVE NEVER LIVED IN BERKELEY. FUN FACTS, ALMA AG IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MORE

EMISSIONS, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THAN ALL GLOBAL TRANSPORTATION COMBINED. IT USES MORE THAN HALF OF THE HABITABLE LAND ON EARTH. JUST TO

SET A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ABOUT THIS ARGUMENT THAT THIS TRANSPORT

BRINGING STUFF IN FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE IS GOING TO INCREASE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. WE SHIP A LOT OUT OF THIS COUNTY. SO THERE IS NALOXONE.

BEFORE GOING VEGAN, I CONSUMED 100% HUMANELY RAISED ORGANIC MEAT, EGGS, DAIRY. GREW UP MEAT EATER. SO LIKE, WE ALL DID. MOST OF US ANYWAY.

MY LAST HOLD-OUT WAS STRAUSS DAIRY. I WAS TOTALLY CONVINCED THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING THE BEST AS IT CAN BE DONE. SO I WAS CURIOUS WHEN I WAS

THINKING ABOUT GOING VEGAN IF I COULD GO OUT THERE AND ACTUALLY GO TO A FARM AND SEE WHAT IS GOING ON. LOOK INSIDE THE MILKING PARLOR TO GET AN IDEA OF WHETHER OR NOT I WANTED TO MAKE A TRANSITION. I CONTACTED THE COMPANY. I WAS TOLD I SHOULD CALL BACK AFTER THE PANDEMIC AND I DID THAT. I WAS DENIED. SAID THAT NOPE, THE PUBLIC IS NEVER ALLOWED. THEY ARE SMALL FAMILY FARMS. IT IS PRIVATE. YOU CAN'T GO IN.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 25 SECONDS.

SO I ASKED FOR PHOTOS AND NEVER GOT A SINGLE ONE THAT SHOWED ANYTHING I WANTED TO SEE. SO I GUESS THE POINT I'M PRYING TO MAKE, KFOS, OBVIOUSLY, POULTRY IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE. BUT THEY ARE TAKING AWAY MINE AND OUR

FREEDOM OF CHOICE BY DENYING US THE RIGHT TO SEE WHERE OUR FOOD COMES FROM. WE NEED GREATER TRANSPARENCY. UNTIL WE GET THAT, THINGS HAVE TO CHANGE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. ANYONE WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, BACK IN THE CHAMBERS.

I'M CHASE. A LIFELONG SONOMA COUNTY RESIDENT. JEALOUS OF MY FRIENDS HERE IN SEBASTOPOL. THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE LARGE KFOS WE DO HAVE. BUT I HAVE HEARD A LOT FROM THE OPPOSITION AROUND THIS IS ABOUT NUMBERS AND NOT ABOUT NECESSARILY THE CARE OF THE ANIMALS. SO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE NUMBERS THAT THE EPA HAS SET FOR LARGE KFOS.

DAIRY COWS 700 HEAD. LAYING HENS DEPENDING ON HOW THEY HANDLE THEIR MANURE, 30,000 LAYING HENS IS A LARGE KFO. AND OTHER CHICKENS, WITHOUT THIS SYSTEM, 125,000. DUCKS AT 30,000 HEAD PER FARM IS WHAT THE EPA SETS AS THEIR LIMITS FOR LARGE KFO. NOW, THE EPA DOES NOT PROMOTE A VEGAN DIET.

THE EPA DOES NOT WANT TO SEE FARMS CLOSED. THE EPA IS HERE TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE NUMBERS, WE SAY THIS IS ABOUT NUMBERS, YOU'RE RIGHT. IT IS ABOUT NUMBERS. BECAUSE THERE IS NO PHYSICAL

WAY REGARDLESS OF THE GREEN WASHING YOU MIGHT PUT IN ABOUT CARBON

SEQUESTERING, THERE IS NO PHYSICAL WAY YOU CAN ACTUALLY MAKE A DAIRY, A CHICKEN LAYING FACILITY OF THAT SIZE ACTUALLY BE CARBON NEUTRAL. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. SO FOR THE REST OF MY TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO READ OUT SOME OF THE 21 FARMS AND THEIR ESTIMATED SIZE AND HOW THEY, THESE ARE THE 21 THAT WILL BE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED. THEY MIGHT BE CLOSED OR CAN CHOOSE TO ABIDE BY THE RULES SET IN MEASURE J.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 25 SECONDS.

SUNRISE WEBER FARM. 607,000. 20 TIMES OVER THE EPA LIMIT OF EGG LAYERS. 684,971 CHICKENS. OVER TWO TIMES THE EPA LIMIT. RED CART. DUCK FARM. THEY LIVE ON WIRE. THEIR WHOLE LIFE.

THAT IS TWO MINUTES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. JANE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? JANE, CAN YOU UNPOLLUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
GOT IT.

THANK YOU. CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
YES.

GO WITH YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT PLEASE.

THANK YOU. AS A LONG TERM RESIDENT AND VOTER I'M APPALLED ANY CITIER WOULD TAKE A STAND TO OPPOSE OR SUPPORT ANY BALLOT MEASURE. IT'S NOT

YOUR JOB AND I FIND IT HIGHLY UNETHICAL FOR A CITY COUNCIL TO TRY TO AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF A FAIR ELECTION. 37,000 SONOMA COUNTY VOTERS WANTED THIS ON OUR BALLOT. IT IS AN ISSUE FOR THE VOTERS, NOT THE CITIES. I

READ OVER ALL THE INFO YOU ATTACHED TO THIS AND I'M SHOCKED AN APPALLED OF ALL THE ECONOMIC CONJECTURES ARE BASED ON FALSE INFORMATION.

EVERYTHING YOU HAVE ATTACHED FROM UCCE AND THE AG BUSINESS REPORT ARE BASED ON ELIMINATING ALL ANIMAL AG FROM SONOMA COUNTY. TO QUOTE

UCCE REPORT, THIS STUDY EXAMINES THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH

THE LOSS OF ALL LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY PRODUCTION IN SONOMA COUNTY AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE. THIS IS A GROSS ERROR, THERE ARE 21KFOS THAT WILL BE AFFECTED. SONOMA COUNTY HAS FROM THE REPORT, HOUSES 50 DAIRIES, 84% CERTIFIED ORGANIC. THESE DO NOT QUALIFY AS KFOS. NONE OF THEM ARE ORGANIC SO NO ORGANIC DAIRIES WILL BE AFFECTED. THE ONLY OTHER

EFFECT FOR ANY FARM WILL BE THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE TO TREAT THEIR ANIMALS BETTER WHICH IS WHAT MOST PEOPLE WANT. MEASURE J WILL NOT CAUSE THE SKY TO FALL. I'M ALSO APPALLED AT THE HUGE AMOUNT OF OPPOSITION COMING FROM OUTSIDE OUR COUNTY AND OUR STATE. WHEN I ASK PEOPLE WHY THEY OPPOSE

MEASURE J, MOST HAVE NO ANSWERS OR I HEAR SO MUCH INFORMATION I FIND PUZZLING. I REALIZE THERE ARE NO TRUE REASONS TO OPPOSE UNLESS THERE IS MONEY INVOLVED. THE YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO THEIR BIDDING. I URGE YOU TO STAY NEUTRAL AND NOT OPPOSE OR ENDORSE MEASURE J. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL COME TO IN CHAMBERS.

I'M AMY, A PATIENT CARE COORDINATOR. BORN AND RAISED IN SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA AND SANTA ROSA HIGH. AND I ASSIST WITH PET CT EMISSION COMPUTERIZED SCANS FOR CANCER PATIENTS IN SANTA ROSA. AND UKIAH. THESE ARE VERY SPECIALTY TYPES OF SCANS DETECTING CANCER IN THE BODY. THIS IS

WHY I BELIEVE IN EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT ELEVATED CANCER RISKS OF KFOS. I WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT I FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT. WHICH IS THE MANURE LAGOON THE SIZE OF TWO FOOTBALL FIELDS IN PETALUMA. WE KNOW THAT MANURE LAGOONS CONTAIN UP TO 150 PATHOGENS WHICH CAN IMPACT HUMAN HEALTH. THESE PATHOGENS CAN BE SPREAD WHEN THE SLURRY IS SPREAD ON LAND. PEOPLE WITH WEAKENED IMMUNE SYSTEMS

SUCH AS MYSELF ALSO CHILDREN AND CANCER PATIENTS ARE AT HIGHER RISK FOR MORE SEVERE ILLNESSES AND DEATH DUE TO THESE PATHOGENS. EVERY AUDIT

SHOWS INTENSIVE FARMING SUCH AS KFOS HERE DISCHARGE LARGE AMOUNTS OF NITRATES WHICH CONTAMINATE DRINKING WATER FROM RUNOFF. A STUDY FOUND

THAT NITRATES CONTAMINATION IN WATER WAS LINKED TO TRIPLING THE RISK OF BLADDER CANCER. HIGH LEVELS OF NITRATES IN DRINKING WATER CAN ROUGHLY DOUBLE A PERSON'S CHANCE OF GETTING SEVERAL CANCERS. ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE CONCERNING TO MYSELF AS A RESIDENT OF SONOMA COUNTY.

AMY, 25 SECONDS.

THANK YOU. TRYING NOT ONLY TO PROTECT MYSELF, THE RESIDENTS OF SONOMA COUNTY, THE 33 PATIENTS I SCAN PER WEEK. I BELIEVE IT IS IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO PASS MEASURE J AND ELIMINATE THE 21 LARGE POLLUTERS AND THE FARMS CAUSING THE MOST CANCER RISK. PLEASE STAND WITH ME AND SUPPORT THIS MEASURE AND HELP LOWER THE RISK. THE CANCER RISKS AND THE POLLUTANTS AND HELP SONOMA COUNTY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU AMY FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

NEXT, WE WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. IF NOT, I'M COMING BACK INTO THE CHAMBER.

HELLO, I'M ANTHONY AND I LIVE IN GUERNEVILLE. I JUST LEARNED ABOUT MEASURE J TWO WEEKS AGO. FIRST THING I SAW WERE THE NO ON J SIGNS. AFTER THE READING, THOUGHT THAT WAS THE SIDE I WAS ON. I BUY WEEKLY PRODUCE FROM A SMALL TOWN IN FORESTVILLE. I BUY MY EGGS FROM A SMALL LOCAL FARM AT OCCIDENTAL. I SHOP AT THE FARMER'S MARKETS BECAUSE I LOVE SUPPORTING LOCALLY. AFTER DOING RESEARCH INTO THE ACTUAL MEASURE

ITSELF, I COME TO FIND THAT IT IS ONLY THE FACTORY FARMS THAT ARE TARGETED. YET, IT SEEMS A LOT OF SMALL FARMS ARE IN SUPPORT OF NO ON J.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY. IT WOULD BE NICE IF THERE WAS SOME

EXPLANATION ON THE ECO SYSTEM AND PROCESS AND HOW THE SMALL FARMS OPERATE AND HOW THEY ARE AFFECTED BY THE BIG FACTORY FARMS. AT LEAST IT WOULD GIVE ME SOME UNDERSTANDING. INSTEAD ALL I FEEL IS MISLED BY THE CAMPAIGN BEHIND NO ON J. ALL THIS TALK ABOUT FOOD SHORTAGE FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY, THAT IS OVERSELLING IT. WE SHOULD BE FINE. WE PRODUCE SO MUCH LOCALLY. HOW MUCH FOOD IS WASTED EVERY DAY FROM THE THINGS THAT DON'T SELL OFF THE SHELF IN STORIES? CAN WE NOT AFFORD TO DOWNSIZE AND STILL THRIVE AS A FARM TO FORK COUNTY? REAL LOCAL SMALL COUNTY FARMS.

NOT THESE BIG FACTORY FARMS THAT ARE UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF BIG AG. AND RECEIVE TONS OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM OUTSIDE OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY. I CAN'T JUSTIFY ANIMAL CRUELTY FOR CHEAP MEAT AND PROFITS. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE DOWNSIZING FOR BETTER CONDITIONS FOR THE ANIMALS. I HOPE THE BIG FARMS EXPLORE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 20 SECONDS.

YES ON J, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYONE ON ZOOM WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBERS.

HELLO EVERYONE, MY NAME IS ANNA. AND I'M THE GRANDDAUGHTER OF AN HONEST FARMER FROM MEXICO. I KNOW HOW IT IS TO DEPEND ON ANIMAL FARMING TO SUPPORT ONE'S FAMILY. AND NOW AS A HEALTH CARE PROFISSIONAL, I SEE THE EFFECTS ON KFOS AND PUBLIC HEALTH. UNFORTUNATELY, THEY ARE A PERFECT GREEING GROUND FOR DISEASE. LET'S REMEMBER HOW COVID-19 STARTED. FACTORY FARM MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS MAKE FOR GREAT PROFIT

FOR FARMERS BUT THEY ARE COSTING US OUR HEALTH AND GOVERNMENTS, TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS EACH YEAR TO MOP UP THE DAMAGE. THINK INSULIN. ONE

OF MY PATIENTS COULDN'T AFFORD INSULIN LAST WEEK SO HER BLOOD SUGAR SKYROCKETED TO 400. CHANGE IS SCARY BUT IT IS IMPORTANT THE THINK ABOUT OUR HEALTH AND THE HEALTH OF FUTURE GENERATIONS. IF YOU WANT TO

SUPPORT LOCAL, DRIVE AROUND SONOMA COUNTY AND YOU WILL FIND FARM STANDS AND ACTUAL FAMILY FARMS SELLING $5 EGG CARTONS. SONOMA COUNTY

RESIDENTS ARE RESILIENT AND CAN FIND MORE SUSTAINABLE WAYS TO PRODUCE FOOD. WE ARE THE LEADERS OF AGRICULTURE. THAT'S RIGHT. SO WE SHOULD SET

AN EXAMPLE FOR THE REST OF THE NATION AND IMPROVE THE STANDARDS OF ANIMAL FARMING. BY THE WAY, BERKELEY IS LOCAL. THEY DON'T HAVE FACTORY

FARMS IN BERKELEY SO THEY DO GET MOST OF THEIR MEAT AND DAIRY FROM SONOMA COUNTY. AND YEAH. WE SUPPORT MEASURE J. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. SEEING NO VIRTUAL HANDS RAISEDLY COME BACK TO THE CHAMBER.

THAT IS YOUR NAME?
I'M MARY.

CAN I HAVE A TEN SECOND WARNING IF THAT WOULD BE OKAY?
THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

I AM THE PROPONENT. IT WAS NOT ANYONE FROM OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE THAT IS NOT THE LEGISLATION WORKS. SO, FROM

NOW ON, WHEN YOU CONTINUE TO OPERATE AND TALK ABOUT MEASURE J, I

WOULD LIKE YOU TO SHOW ME A LITTLE BIT OF RESPECT BECAUSE I'M FROM HERE AND I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FROM HERE. I WORK ON A FARM HERE IN SEBASTOPOL. I

AM NOT A LANDED MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY AS IF THAT GIVES ME LESS OF A RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT. AS A PROUD AMERICAN, I'M GLAD THAT'S NOT THE WAY OUR GOVERNMENT WORKS. THE 21 FACTORIES THIS MEASURE AFFECTS CONTAIN 3 MILLION ANIMALS AND THE OTHERS CONTAIN UNDER 1 MILLION. THIS IS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATA AS I'M SURE YOU ARE AWARE.

HAVING READ IT BECAUSE YOU ARE INTELLIGENT AND EDUCATED LAWMAKERS.

THE IDEA THAT CONCENTRATION DOESN'T AFFECT ANIMAL WELFARE IS ASININE.

SMALL BUSINESSES ARE DEFINED BY THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT. THIS IS NOT A NEBULOUS CATEGORY. IT IS CLEAR WHO IS A SMALL FARM AND WHO IS NOT. SMALL BUSINESSES DO NOT NEED MONOPOLIES TO EXIST. THAT SUGGESTION IS ABSURD.

THE VERY FIRST STEP IN LOWERING FOOD PRICES IS BREAKING UP MONOPOLIES LIKE THESE. WESTERN FARM DOESN'T NEED WILCO TO EXIST. IT IS LITERALLY

BEYOND COMPREHENSION WHY ANYONE WOULD TAKE THE SONOMA COUNTY FARM BUREAU AT THEIR WORD ESPECIALLY DURING AN ELECTION CYCLE. IN 2020,

THE LAST ELECTION CYCLE THE SONOMA COUNTY FARM BUREAU CLAIMED THAT RETAINING FUNDING WOULD CUT FIRE RESPONSE TIME. CLEARLY THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED AND THEY HAVE NO QUALMS WITH LYING ABOUT IT. AT THE NO ON J CAMPAIGN LAUNCH EVENT.

I'M SORRY?
10 SECONDS LEFT.

THANK YOU. FINAL THOUGHT FOR THE TRUTH, CLOVER SONOMA IS 70% OWNED BY A COLOMBIAN AG GROUP.

NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYONE WANT TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. RAISE YOUR HAND. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO TO THE LAST ROW, IF

ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM.

HI, I'M KATHY. I AM THAT BIG KFO DAIRY FARM. OUR FARM STARTED IN 1905 WHEN MY HUSBAND'S GRANDMOTHER CAME THERE. SHE WITNESSED THE 1906 EARTHQUAKE THERE. AT THAT TIME, WHEN I CAME TO THE FARM, WE WERE MILKING ABOUT 350 COWS. I WAS INTERESTED IN ORGANIC AGRICULTURAL AND THE ENVIRONMENT SINCE I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL. WHEN ALBERT STRAUSS WENT ORGANIC I WAS SO INTERESTED AND I WANTED TO DO THAT. AND WE JOINED HIM.

WE WERE THE SECOND ORGANIC DAIRY IN THE STATE TO BECOME ORGANIC. AT THAT TIME, WE HAD ABOUT 350 COWS. OUR FARM GREW, NOW WE HAVE TWO DAIRIES. WE ARE LISTED AS BIG KFO BECAUSE THESE DAIRIES SHARE A FENCE LINE SO UNDER THE REGULATIONS WE ARE CONSIDERED ONE BIG KFO. WE MILK ABOUT 350 JERSEY COWS AT ONE DAIRY. ABOUT 450 COWS AT THE OTHER. THESE COWS GRAZE ON 2600 ACRES. WE ARE KFO BECAUSE DURING WET WINTER STORM EVENTS, WE DO LOCK OUR COWS UP IN BARNS TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. SO THAT THEY ARE NOT TRASHING THE PASTURES AND IT IS NOT ERODING INTO THE CREEKS.

YOUR COMMENT ABOUT NITRATES, WE ALL ARE UNDER A PROGRAM AT THE NORTH COAST WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD. OUR WELLS ARE MONITORED. WE ARE CHECKED AND WE DO NOT EXCEED LEVELS. REARE NOT ENDANGERING YOUR HEALTH. WE CARE ABOUT OUR HEALTH, OUR FARM, AND THE ENVIRONMENT.

YOU HAVE 20 SECONDS LEFT.

WE ARE NOT A FACTORY FARM. I WISH YOU WOULD STOP USING THAT TERM. IT IS SUBJECTIVE AND IT PLAYS ON PEOPLE'S EMOTIONS. AND IT IS NOT WHAT THE SITUATION IS. SO PLEASE, THANK YOU. I HOPE YOU AS THE RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT OUR NO ON J POSITION. THANK YOU.

THAT IS TWO MINUTES.

THIS IS THE SECOND TIME I HAVE HAD TO SAVE OUR FARM FROM BEING.

WE NEED TO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE ON.

JUST A SECOND. CAN I SEE IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM BEFORE YOU COME? IT'S OKAY. JUST CHECKING TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING NONE, THANK YOU.

I'M A LITTLE FIRED UP. MY NAME IS ANDY. GOOD EVENING. LONG TIME SON MO COUNTY RESIDENT AND A CURRENT VOTER IN SEBASTOPOL. I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THIS PLACE KEEPING IT LOCAL AND LIVABLE. I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL IS BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON SUCH A MISGUIDED RESOLUTION IS DEAD WRONG. PUN INTENDED. WHY ARE OUR ELECTED SONOMA COUNTY SUPERVISORS IN THE WORDS OF SARA SPARKS BULLYING COUNCILS TO DENOUNCE MEASURE J? HOW IS THIS OKAY? IN THE WORDS OF THE VICE MAYOR, I SIMPLY DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS THE CORRECT USE OF INFLUENCE AND I COULD NOT AGREE WITH WITH MORE. I

ENCOURAGE YOU TO RESPECT DEMOCRACY BY TAKING NO POSITION ON MEASURE J. RESPECT THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. I KNOW MANY OF US STRONGLY BELIEVE IN PROTECTING THE PLACE WE ALL CALL HOME. BUT IF WE CANNOT BREATHE OR DRINK CLEAN, MONEY IS WORTHLESS. THOSE PROMOTING THE OPPOSE. DUE TO INCREASED TRANSPORTATION. TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNTS FOR 1% OF THE ISSUE.

ANIMAL WASTE IS A HUGE AND MESSY ISSUE. RIGHT? LIMITING LARGE ANIMAL FARMS IS THE BEST WAY TO REDUCE THOSE EMISSIONS.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 25 SECONDS.

ACCORDING TO THE THE REGIONAL PROTECTION AUTHORITIES, 2020 SONOMA

COUNTY GHC EMISSIONS LIVESTOCK MANURE MANAGEMENT IS THE THIRD SOURCE OF GAS EMISSIONS IN THE COUNTY. ALSO METHANE. WAY MORE DAMAGING TO THE ENVIRONMENT. 80 TIMES MORE THAN TRANSPORTATION.

YOU ARE AT TWO MINUTES.

BUMMER.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM TO SEE IF ANYONE ON ZOOM WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO INTERRUPT FOR A MINUTE. I KNOW THIS IS AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE FOR MANY IN THE AUDIENCE. BUT MANY OF YOU HAVE ALREADY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENT AND NEUTRAL

WILLINGNESS TO ALLOW THOSE WHO STILL NEED TIME TO SPEAK TO SAY THEIR PIECE WHERE YOU AGREE WITH THEM OR NOT. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

SO I WILL GO INTO CHAMBERS.

I HAVE LIVED IN SONOMA COUNTY OVER 60 YEARS. AND MEASURE J WAS PUT ON THE BALLOT BY THE SIGNATURES OF 37,000 SONOMA COUNTY VOTERS PRESUMABLY TO SEE THE END OF FACTORY FARMS. THEY SIGNED IN GOOD FAITH THAT THE MEASURE WOULD BE TREATED DEMOCRATICALLY. BUT STARTING WITH

THE REMOVAL OF DESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE FROM THE BALLOT, THE SONOMA

COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BEGAN TO CONSPIRE WITH THE FARM BUREAU AND OTHER BAY AREA ELECTED OFFICIALS TO DEFEAT THE MEASURE. FINANCED BY LOCAL KFO OWNERS AND OUT OF STATE AG. THEY BEGAN A MISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN TO SCARE AND MISINFORM SONOMA COUNTY VOTERS. THEIR LOYALTY IS TO THE CORPORATIONS. THEY WANT SONOMA COUNTY RESIDENTS TO CONTINUE TO ENDURE INDUSTRIAL SCALE CRUELTY. RISK THE SPREAD OF DISEASE. TOLERATE POLLUTED WATERWAYS AND AIR. AND DANGEROUS METHANE EMITTING LAGOONS OF ANIMAL WASTE. THERE IS NO PROHIBITION ON EXPANSION OR THE PERMITTING OF NEW KFOS IN SONOMA COUNTY. THERE IS A BIG CHANGER OF SONOMA COUNTY BECOMING THE NEW CENTRAL VALLEY. IN CLOSING.

YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT.

YOU DON'T WORK FOR DAVID OR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, YOU REPRESENT US.

SO I'M COUNTING ON YOU TO STAND UP FOR DEMOCRACY AND FAIR ELECTIONS IN

SONOMA COUNTY AND THE WORLD BY REFUSING TO TAKE ANY POSITION ON MEASURE J. IT'S NOT YOUR JOB.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS.

HI THERE, I'M CURTIS. I LIVE IN PETALUMA. I HAVE HEARD A LOT OF MULTIGENERATIONAL AND THE WORD FAMILY THROWN AROUND. IF I HAVE A

MULTIGENERATIONAL FAMILY OWNED DOG FIGHTING RING, IS THAT AUTOMATICALLY OKAY? WE JUST SLAP MULTIGENERATIONAL IN FRONT OF SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE IT OKAY. I WANT TO ADDRESS THE POINTS YOU ALL MADE HERE TO START WITH. THIS IS A STRATEGIC DECISION. THE REASON THE GAY

RIGHTS MOVEMENT DIDN'T START IN ARKANSAS BUT IN SAN FRANCISCO, A PROGRESSIVE PLACE. A LOT OF TALK ABOUT STRAUSS AND CLOVER. CLOVER IS NOT LOCAL. IT IS OWNED BY MULTIBILLION DOLLAR CORPORATION OUT OF BRAZIL. THE WORD SPEECHLESS CAME UP. WHAT LEFT ME SPEECHLESS IS SEEING INSIDE THESE FACILITIES. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE CHECKED OUT THE KFOS. HOW THEY LOOK AND THE CONDITIONS THE ANIMALS ARE IN. IF THIS IS TREATED WELL, I DON'T WANT TO KNOW HOW SOME OF THESE PEOPLE TREAT THEIR ENEMIES. 4H AND FFA WAS BROUGHT UP. THE FACT THIS IS A BIPARTISAN ISSUE. BOTH SIDES OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM ARE OPPOSING THE MEASURE. BOTH SIDES ARE TAKING MONEY FROM OTHER BIG INDUSTRIES. BIG PHARMA. THE WAR MACHINE. BIG OIL

AND YES, BIG AGRICULTURE IS ONE OF THOSE BIG INDUSTRIES THAT GREASES BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE HERE.
30 SECONDS.

I WAS OUT CANVASSING TWO HOURS BEFORE THIS. SOMEONE, I KNOCKED ON THEIR DOOR. THEY SAID I'M NOT VEGAN OR VEGETARIAN, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING SOCIETY WILL LOOK BACK ON IN HORROR. THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID TO ME. I HOPE YOU ALL SEE THAT IS WHAT SOCIETY IS GOING TO FEEL ABOUT THIS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU CURTIS. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. SEE IF ANYONE IS ON ZOOM.

SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBERS.

HELLO, I'M DOMANIC. SONOMA COUNTY RESIDENT. FIFTH GENERATION. SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTURE. MY STORY IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. I GREW UP ON MY FAMILY'S FARM, BUT MY FAMILY STARTS WITH 4H. IT NOT ONLY HAS SHAPED WHO I AM. WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IN THE FUTURE, AND, EVERYTHING THAT IS ABOUT SONOMA COUNTY. WE TALK A LOT ABOUT LOCAL. THIS IS ON ISSUE THAT IS NOT ONLY PRESENT FOR U.S. AS AN OLDER GENERATION, MY GENERATION. THE NEXT GENERATION BEHIND ME. I HAVE DONE EVERYTHING I CAN TO GIVE AND TEACH AS FAR AS WE CAN TO THE YOUNGER GENERATION. WITHOUT AG IN OUR COUNTY AND

THE SUPPORT OF THE AG INDUSTRY, I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GO TO COLLEGE. I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TRAVEL WITH OUR JUDGING TEAMS.

AND TAKE THE OPPORTUNITIES TO FURTHER MY CAREER AND MY LIFE AND HOPE MY FAMILY ONE DAY STAYS IN SONOMA COUNTY AS LONG AS POSSIBLE. I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE ANYWHERE ELSE. WITHOUT AG, I THINK OUR COUNTY WOULD CHANGE A LOT. OUR ECONOMY WOULD ALSO CHANGE A LOT. AND I THINK

THAT IS SOMETHING I WANT YOU GUYS TO THINK ABOUT WHEN YOU VOTE TONIGHT. HOW MUCH OF YOUR DAY, YOUR WEEK, YOUR YEAR HAS DEPENDED ON AG IN SONOMA COUNTY. AND THINK ABOUT WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE WITHOUT IT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF

THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBERS.

GOOD EVENING. I'M ANTHONY. MY FAMILY HAS BEEN A PART OF SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTURE SINCE THE EARLY 1900S. WE ON AND OPERATE AN AGRICULTURAL SUPPLY COMPANY IN PETALUMA. A LOT OF OUR CUSTOMERS, SOME HERE TONIGHT WOULD BE DEVASTATED BY THE YES ON J VOTE. THE IMPACT IS IN THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. CREATING MORE OF THE ECONOMIC INEQUALITY THAT THE OPPOSITION HAS MENTIONED. THE LOSS OF THESE FARMS WOULD MAKE IT

NEAR IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE FEW FARMS THAT REMAIN TO SURVIVE DUE TO THE LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPLY THEM. WE HAVE THE PLEASURE OF ENJOYING THEIR BOUNTY. EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE THE HIPPIES AND THE COWBOYS

WE CAN BOTH COME AROUND THE TABLE AND ENJOY THE PROVISIONS BY THE LOW CAM FARMERS. THAT SAID, WE URGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO SUPPORT NO ON J TO

PROTECT THE SMALL FAMILY FARMS AND THE FREEDOM TO CHOOSE WHERE OUR FOOD COMES FROM.

NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. SYLVIA, CAN YOU UNMUTICOUS? YES. I WANTED TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR YES ON J. IT IS ACTUALLY WOULD BE HELPING NOT ALL ONLY THE ANIMALS BUT THE SMALL FAMILY FARMS. THERE IS A LOT OF MISINFORMATION. IT IS THE BEST THING FOR ANIMALS. THE BEST THING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT IS BEING PROMOTED BY BIG AGRICULTURE.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SYLVIA. NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS.

THANK YOU GUYS FOR HEARING THIS RESOLUTION. MEASURE J IS REALLY ABOUT CHOICE. EVERYONE SAW IMPORTANT LOCAL FOOD WAS DURING COVID. OFTEN TIMES THE ONLY ITEMS IN THE GROCERY STORE LEFT. JUST ONE FAMILY DELIVERING THEIR GOODS TO LOCAL STORES. I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE THE

COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE COMMUNITY WILL HAVE PRODUCT INS THEIR FRIDGES THAT COME FROM THE FARMS THIS MEASURE WOULD SHUT DOWN. WE ARE ONE OF THE FEW CHICKEN FARMERS IN THE COUNTY. WE WERE SCARED AND STILL ARE. MY DAD STARTED A CHICKEN FARM IN 1983. NOW MY BROTHERS AND I TAKE CARE OF OUR CHICKENS DAILY. WE WOULD NEVER WANT TO HURT OUR ANIMALS. MY DAD

STARTED HIS CHICKEN FARM WITH THE DESIRE TO RAISE THE CHICKENS CAGE FREE IN THE 1980s . WE WERE THE FIRST ORGANIC EGG LONG BEFORE MAINSTREAM. THIS

MEASURE WOULD DESTROY OUR LOCAL FOOD SHED AND MY FAMILY'S PAST AND FUTURE. SONOMA COUNTY IS A SPECIAL PLACE BECAUSE AGRICULTURE ROOTS

AND I HOPE THIS CONTINUES TO BE A FOCAL POINT OF THE COUNTY FOR YEARS TO COME. WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND HOPE TO KEEP FOOD LOCAL BY OPPOSING MEASURE J. AND EVERYONE DESERVES A LOCAL EGG. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM.

SEE IF THERE IS ANY HAND RAISED. SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK TO CHAMBERS.

MY NAME IS MAX. I WORK FOR AN EQUINE RESCUE. TALK ABOUT ANIMAL WELFARE. I CARE FOR THOSE HORSES WHO ARE ABUSED, ABANDONED, STARVED AND NEGLECTED. THIS MEASURE WOULD BE CATASTROPHIC FOR US. WE ARE STRUGGLING WITH THE RISE IN INFLATION. WE CAN BARELY AFFORD HAY. WE NEED ACCESS TO OUR BIG VETS. LOSING ACCESS TO THE FEED STORES MEAN WE LOSE THAT ACCESS TOO. PLEASE CONSIDER THE IMPACTS TO THOSE OF US OUTSIDE THE RANCHING AND FARMING COMMUNITY. CONSIDER THOSE OF US THAT CLEAN UP THE MESSES THAT HUMANS RATE FOR THEIR LACK OF CARE. OUR LIFE IS DEDICATED TO REHABBING ANIMALS AND WE DON'T DO IT FOR MONEY. NO ON MEASURE J.

I WILL GO AHEAD AND CONVENE BACK INTO CHAMBERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO START WITH A SHOW OF HANDS OF HOW MANY FARMERS WE HAVE IN THE ROOM. LEAVE YOUR HAND UP IF YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE YES ON J.

TWO? INTERESTING. MY NAME IS STEPHANIE AND I'M FIFTH GENERATION DAIRY FARMER HERE IN SONOMA COUNTY. MAY OUR FARM IS ORGANIC, CERTIFIED, PASTURE BASED. ANIMAL WELFARE CERTIFIED. LOVED FARM. 120 YEARS. THE 2006

UNITED NATIONS REPORT THAT YOU ALL ARE REFERENCING WITH GREENHOUSE GASES HAS BEEN RETRACTED WHEN DISPROVED IN 2009. STUDIES SHOW GREENHOUSE GASES ARE FAR LESS THAN WHAT YOU KEEP REFERENCING. WHO IS MEASURE J SUPPOSED TO HELP? THE ORDINANCE IS RIDDLED WITH THE FACADE THEY ARE HELPING THE COMMUNITY WITH THE AGRICULTURE. IF YOU READ THE

ORDINANCE WHICH I HAVE, YOU WILL FIND BROKEN SITES, NON-CREDIBLE BIASED

ARTICLES THAT ARE NOT CITED ON ANY KIND OF SCIENTIFIC DATA, I HAVE PULLED UP ALL OF THEM. IT DOESN'T ALLOW THEM TO DOWNSIZE AND COME BACK. THIS

MEASURE IS FROM A DXE BASED ORGANIZATION FROM BERKELEY AND THEY HAVE MADE A PROMISE TO FREE ALL ANIMALS INCLUDING PETS BY THE YEAR 2050.

WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH ONE OF ITS BULL POINTS IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. THE PURPOSE HERE IS NOT TO STRENGTHEN OUR AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY. THE

PURPOSE AND OBVIOUS REASON BEHIND THE ORDINANCE IS TO METHODICALLY

STRATEGICALLY POLITICALLY DESTROY AND GET RID OF ALL FORMS OF ANIMAL FARMING ACROSS THE UNITED STATES. WHICH IS WHY LARGE ORGANIZATIONS OUTSIDE OF SONOMA COUNTY ARE STEPPING IN TO HELP.

STEPHANIE, YOU ARE ABOUT 15 SECONDS.

PEOPLE WHO WANT TO IMPROVE AND INDUSTRY CHOOSE TO INCENTIVIZE. THEY DO NOT CREATE A CALCULATED ORDINANCE FORCING CLOSURES. THE ORDINANCE CREATES A PHASE-OUT. CURRENT KFS.

THAT IS TWO MINUTES.

THEY ARE STUCK WITH NO WAY OUT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. PLEASE VOTE NO.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYONE IN ZOOM NALOXONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT.

MARY, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
OKAY.

GO AHEAD.

OKAY. I AM VOTING NO ON J. HOWEVER, I AM NOT SURE WHAT THIS COUNCIL VOTES IS GOING TO MATTER. BUT, IF THIS COULD BE A TOWN HALL FORUM FOR THE WHOLE COUNTY, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE REALLY HELPFUL TO VOTERS. BECAUSE SO MANY VOTERS ARE REALLY CONFUSED ABOUT IT. THAT'S IT. THANKS.

THANK YOU MARY FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

NEXT, I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS IF THERE IS ANYONE ELSE IN CHAMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? PLEASE.

HI. I'M JUNE. AND I WOULD JUST ASK YOU ALL TO ACTUALLY READ MEASURE J.

BECAUSE I'M HEARING ALL THESE EXAGGERATIONS AND ALL THESE FEARS AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE THROWING AROUND A LOT OF DIFFERENT INFORMATION. BUT

IF YOU READ MEASURE J, YOU WILL SEE THE ECONOMIC FRENZY OF HOW THIS WILL

GET RID OF ALL ANIMAL AGRICULTURE IN THE COUNTY AND CREATE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF DAMAGE IS JUST NOT ACCURATE. READ MEASURE J. IT IS VERY CLEAR ON WHAT IS IMPACTED. WHAT IS NOT ALLOWED WHAT WHAT IS ALLOWED. 21 FACILITIES YOU CAN FIND IN THE COUNTY MEET THE DEFINITIONS. AND EVEN THE ECONOMIC REPORT, YOU GET 57 PAGES HERE, READ THE FIRST FEW PAGES OF THE PACKET. WHEN YOU READ THAT REPORT, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REPORT.

THE UCC REPORT, IT ADMITS IT ONLY IDENTIFIED 11KFOS. LARGE KFOS. DIDN'T REALLY LOOK BEYOND THAT. IT SAID WELL, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT MIGHT BE AFFECTED BEYOND THAT. SOME THINK IT MIGHT BE EVERYBODY. SO WE ARE GOING

TO DO THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS BASED ON ALL ANIMAL AGRICULTURE GOING OUT OF BUSINESS. AND THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT YOU GUYS CITE HERE, 238 MILLION.

AND IT IS GOING TO IMPACT ALL ANIMAL AGRICULTURE AND OF COURSE, THIS IS

THE KIND OF EXAGGERATION WHY YOU HAVE REALLY GOOD PEOPLE THAT LOVE LOCAL AG. UP HERE SAYING OH MY GOD, VOTE NO. WELL OF COURSE. IF THAT WERE TRUE, WE WOULD ALL BE AGAINST IT. IF YOU ACTUALLY READ THE MEASURE YOURSELF AND I WOULD SAY DON'T TRUST ANYBODY, READ IT YOURSELF. IT WON'T TAKE YOU THAT LONG.

YOU HAVE 20 SECONDS.

READ IT YOURSELF AND I THINK I WISH THAT COUNCIL WOULD BE YES ON MEASURE J. BUT I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU LET THE VOTERS DECIDE AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE TO RECOMMEND A YES ON J TONIGHT. I HAVE THE VOTERS TO READ MEASURE J. READ THE ECONOMIC ROTES THAT PUT OUT THE NUMBERS.

NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. NIKKI, WILL YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF?

I HAVE READ THE MEASURE AND IT DOES NOT SPECIFY HOW IT MEANS TO PROMOTE ANIMAL WELFARE. IT WILL ONLY CLOSE FARMS DOWN. THE FARMS IN CALIFORNIA

AND NATIONWIDE HAVE THE SAME STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS WHERE YOU HAVE 1,000, 1,000 COWS. 2300 COWS. THE AVERAGE IN SONOMA COUNTY IS ONLY ABOUT 350. AND LARGEST FARM HAS ABOUT 1,000 WHICH IS STILL FAR BELOW THE STATE AVERAGE. SO, THAT IS EVEN SMALL IN COMPARISON. REGARDLESS ON THE

HEAD COUNT, THE SPACE IN WHICH THE ANIMAL IS THE SAME, IT IS A LARGEST

FACILITY ON A LARGER PIECE OF LAND IF THERE ARE MORE ANIMALS WHICH IS SCALED TO THE SIZE OF THE OPERATION. THIS MEASURE DOES NOT TAKE ANY OF THAT INTO ACCOUNT. THEY WANT TO PLACE AN ARBITRATE CAP ON THE SIZE OF THE FARM REGARDLESS OF ANIMAL WELFARE CONDITIONS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU NIKKI FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBERS. IF THERE IS ANYONE FURTHER THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT THAT HAS NOT. COME UP TO THE PODIUM. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM ONE LAST TIME. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU FOR ENGAGING IN WHAT HAS BEEN A VERY RESPECTFUL SESSION OF

PUBLIC COMMENT THAT ALLOWED PEOPLE TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS ON BOTH ENDS OF THE SCALE. SO THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR PATIENT AND RESPECT FOR THE FIRST AMENDMENT. WE ARE BACK AT THE COUNCIL TABLE FOR DISCUSSION. LOOKING AT MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE ISSUE BEFORE IT IS WHETHER WE SUPPORT A RESOLUTION AGAINST MEASURE J.

I'M GOING TO GO OUT EARLY ON THIS ONE. THIS COUNCIL HAS TAKEN MANY POSITIONS. I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL EIGHT YEARS.

PROCLAMATIONS ON THINGS THAT BACKED OUR COMMUNITY. THAT WE FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT. I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE A POSITION TONIGHT AND I DON'T FEEL ANY PRESSURE FROM ANY BOARD OF SUPERVISOR OR ANYONE ELSE. I'M A STRONG PERSON WHO HAS BY THE WAY READ THE MEASURE. FULLY. AND I FIND THOSE KINDS OF COMMENTS REALLY INSULTING. PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR ME PUT ME HERE. WE STAND UP FOR THINGS WE BELIEVE IN. AND I BELIEVE IN OUR LOCAL AG COMMUNITY. I GREW UP IN 4H MYSELF. MY SON TOOK AG SCIENCE. BECAUSE HE WAS A HANDS ON LEARNER INSTEAD OF TAKING THE TYPICAL COLLEGE COURSES.

WE HAVE 72 DAYS OF RAIN IN SONOMA COUNTY ANNUALLY. AND YOU CAN ONLY HAVE ANIMALS ACCORDING TO THIS MEASURE INSIDE FOR 45 OF THOSE. MY CHICKENS WHICH I DO RAISE WANT TO GO INSIDE WHEN IT RAINS. IT IS JUST LIKE THAT'S SO PRACTICAL TO ME. I ALSO NEED TO SAY THAT I SERVED ON AG AND OPEN

SPACE FOR SIX YEARS AND SO MANY OF OUR AG AND OPEN SPACE ARE ACTUALLY FARMING THAT LAND. AND THE OTHER THING IS I GOT TO SAY THE YES ON J FOLKS, I HAVE SEEN SOME BAD ACTOR STUFF GOING ON. I SAT AT THE SONOMA COUNTY

AIRPORT WITH A STICKER THAT WAS SCATTER ALL OVER THE BENCHES KEN I FLEW IN AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE PAID FOR BY LOGO. THAT STUFF UPSETS ME.

BECAUSE I'M CURRENTLY RUNNING MY OWN CAMPAIGN AND I FOLLOW ALL THE RULES. [ CAPTIONER CHANGE ] I AM ONLY ONE OF FIVE. I WANTED TO RESPECT MY

COLLEAGUES, LISTEN TO EVERYBODY, WELL, MEANINGFUL SUPPORT FOR THIS MEASURE, AND THAT SAYS IT ALL TO ME, BECAUSE YOU ARE OUR COMMUNITY. WE ARE YOUR ELECTED LEADERS. THANKS.

NEXT COMMENT, GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS.

YES. DITTO , BUT I ALSO HAVE A FEW THINGS THAT I WANT TO SAY, BUT I DO SUPPORT WHAT COUNCILMEMBER HINTON HAS SAID. I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S SUPPORT, WITH THE 40 PUBLIC COMMENTS HERE, KEEPING TRACK SO I CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND. I THINK WE SHOULD BE CELEBRATING -- I TOOK SOME NOTES HERE -- WE SHOULD BE CELEBRATING OUR AGRICULTURAL IMMUNITY, NOT VILIFYING IT. I

BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE THE LEADERS IN AGRICULTURE, AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD TAKE A STANCE HERE. WE HAVE TAKEN A STANCE AND OTHER MEASURES,

AND THAT IS WHY I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR US TO BRING THIS FORTH,

AND THE TRICKLE-DOWN EFFECT WILL AFFECT SEBASTOPOL, AND DESPITE WHAT

MANY PEOPLE ARE SAYING, IT DOES HAVE FINANCIAL IMPACTS, AND HONESTLY,

TO SAY, YOU NEED TO READ IT, I READ IT, I BROUGHT IT FORTH, AND DISAGREEING WITH SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU ARE IGNORANT OF SOMETHING. I TOOK

THE TIME TO READ IT, AND I DON'T AGREE WITH IT, AND I DON'T LIKE, THINK, THAT

WE SHOULD BE INSULTING WHEN WE ARE DISCUSSING AND DISAGREEMENT THINGS,

AND THOSE ARE INSULTING COMMENTS, AND SITTING UP HERE AS AN ELECTED

OFFICIAL, I TRY TO RESPECT EVERYONE'S VIEW, AND I WOULD LIKE THE SAME, AND THEN, ALSO, I JUST THINK THAT THIS MEASURE IS MISGUIDED. IT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH OUR CLIMATE GOALS HERE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE I HEARD A LOT OF DIFFERENT COMMENTS ABOUT, BUT IT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THAT.WHY WOULD WE TAKE AWAY THE FORMS THAT WE HAVE HERE AND THEN TRUCK STUFF IN? THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME WHATSOEVER.WE HAVE ALL THE ORGANIC

FARMERS HERE, AND AGAIN, WHEN I STATED EARLIER, THEY ARE LEADING THE WAY. OTHER PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY ARE TRYING TO FOLLOW WHAT WE DO HERE, AND TO DISCONTINUE THAT WOULD BE AN EGREGIOUS THING. SO, I ALSO WANT TO STATE THAT I HAVE NOT BEEN BULLIED BY ANY SUPERVISORS. I HAVE NOT EVEN SPOKEN WITH HIS SUPERVISOR ABOUT THIS. I CAN TELL YOU THAT I HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH ANY OF THEM. BROUGHT THIS FORTH, BECAUSE I TRULY BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD OPPOSE MEASURE J. SO, I AM IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS

RESOLUTION, AND I HOPE THAT OUR COLLEAGUES WILL AGREE, BECAUSE IT WILL

IMPACT SEBASTOPOL, AND CLEARLY, WE HAVE MANY PEOPLE IN THE ROOM HERE FEELING THE SAME WAY. SO, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS, VICE-MAYOR, FEEL FREE.

OKAY. THIS IS REALLY TOUGH, HAVE TO SAY, IT IS REALLY HARD, BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES. THE WAY I SEE IT IS THAT SEBASTOPOL IS A CITY WITH 7500 OR 7800 RESIDENTS, AND I AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE CITY BEING,

LIKE, THE ACTIVIST TELLING PEOPLE HOW TO VOTE, BECAUSE, FRANKLY, I HAVE

FRIENDS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE, AND, BECAUSE OF THAT, IT FEELS SORT OF

DIVISIVE TO SAY THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE VOTING ONE WAY, BECAUSE THE CITY IS 7000, SO MANY PEOPLE, AND THEY DON'T ALL FEEL THAT WAY, SO, I AM NOT

COMFORTABLE SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOULD ALL VOTE A CERTAIN

WAY, BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY FEELS THAT WAY, AND, I DO FEEL THERE IS

PRESSURE, JUST BECAUSE OF THE ACTIONS ALL THE OTHER CITY COUNCILS AND OUR SUPERVISORS -- AND I RESPECT THEM. I RESPECT THEIR WORK, I RESPECT MY

COUNCILMEMBERS HERE, I RESPECT THE FARMERS HERE, IN THIS ROOM, I LOVE

THIS CITY, I LOVE THIS COUNTY, AND I AM SO GRATEFUL FOR THE ORGANIC FOOD THAT WE CAN GET, INCLUDING ORGANIC MEATS, EGGS, AND SO PEOPLE FOR THAT.

THE WOMAN FROM ZAZULA, WOW, INCREDIBLE RESTAURANT. I THINK WE HAVE SUCH AN INCREDIBLE LOCAL RESTAURANT SITUATION. SO, I ALSO HAVE GREAT

RESPECT FOR SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN A STAND AGAINST IT. FOR EXAMPLE, THE CCOF, THE SONOMA CONSERVATION ACTION MOVE FOR

OCCIDENTAL ARTS AND ECOLOGY, THEY HAVE COME OUT OPPOSED TO THIS, AND I

HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR ALL OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS, AND THERE WERE MANY MORE. I DID LEARN THAT THE SIERRA CLUB WAS OPPOSED TO KPO'S DID NOT SUPPORT MEASURE J. I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT IS, BUT THE FACT IS THAT, FOR ME,

TO REALLY DIG IN AND FEEL CONFIDENT THAT THAT RESOLUTION AND THE CLAIMS

BEING MADE ARE ACCURATE, I DID NOT HAVE THE TIME TO PROVE IT, SO, I CANNOT SAY FOR SURE THAT THOSE CLAIMS ARE ACCURATE. I HAVE SPENT THE LAST

WEEKS SINCE THIS AGENDA ITEM CAME OUT STUDYING GARBAGE PROPOSALS, AND

THAT HAS TAKEN A HUGE AMOUNT OF TIME, AND SO, I DON'T FEEL CONFIDENT, YOU

KNOW, I JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE TIME TO DO IT, AND I ALSO CROWD SOURCE SOME ANSWERS BEFORE THIS. I ASKED A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT I CHECKED IN WITH TO

SEE WHAT IS YOUR FEELING ON THIS OR THAT, AND SEVERAL PEOPLE SAID, IT IS

NOT SEBASTOPOL'S BUSINESS TO TAKE A STAND ON THIS, AND THERE WERE A

COUPLE OF COMMENTS THAT RESONATED WITH ME, IT IS NOT OUR JOB TO TRY TO

AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF AN ELECTION, AND WE NEED TO RESPECT THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. IT IS NOT A CORRECT USE OF INFLUENCE, SO, IT IS NOT

EASY, BECAUSE I DO HAVE A GOOD -- MUCH RESPECT -- FOR OUR FARMERS, ET

CETERA, IT IS JUST THAT I CAN'T PROVE THE CLAIMS IN THE RESOLUTION, I DIDN'T

HAVE TIME TO STUDY IT, AND SO, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS COUNCIL, FOR ALL THE REASONS I JUST STATED, TAKE A NEUTRAL POSITION ON THIS.

THANK YOU. VICE-MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
YEAH. I WILL DEFINITELY HAVE TO SAY, AND SECOND WHAT COUNCILMEMBER BAUER SAID, STOP BY SAYING, THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS. WE ALL FIND OURSELVES IN IT, INCREDIBLY SAD.AS MANY PEOPLE -- HOPEFULLY MANY OF YOU -- WILL REMEMBER, I DID VOTE FOR A RESOLUTION TO PROTECT ANIMALRIGHTS, AND IT WAS PROBABLY LESS THAN A YEAR AGO, AND THE REASON WHY I

BROUGHT THAT UP WAS BECAUSE A PROMINENT LOCAL LAWYER, OMAR FIGUEROA,

DEFENDED AT LEAST TWO, IF NOT THREE WHO WERE BEING CHARGED AS A RESULT

OF GOING INTO THE FACTORY FARM IN PETALUMA, RELATED TO ABUSE OF CHICKEN

AND DOGS, AND IT WAS BECAUSE OF HIM, WHICH -- TO ME -- THE BUSINESS OWNER,

AGAIN, PROMINENT LOCAL ATTORNEY, THAT I DID GET INVOLVED, AND THOSE

PICTURES ARE, LIKE, RIGHT THERE, IN THE FOREFRONT OF MY MIND, AND HAS BEEN SINCE THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD FOR OUR CONSIDERATION. WHAT RING TRUE TO ME THAN ACTUALLY RINGS TRUE TO ME NOW. ALL OF THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. WHAT LED THOSE ACTIVISTS TO DO WHAT THEY DID, AND WHAT

CRIMINAL CHARGES THEY ENDED UP FACING, WHICH INCLUDED JAIL TIME, WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY. ALL THOSE FARMS HAD TO DO WAS JUST SAY, COME IN, TAKE PICTURES, TAKE TAPES, WE WILL OPEN. RIGHT?

THERE WERE PUBLIC COMMENTS HERE TONIGHT, WHERE IT IS LIKE, ALL I WANT TO

DO IS JUST SEE WHERE MY FOOD IS PRODUCED THAT IS ALL I REALLY WANT TO SEE, JUST WHERE MY FOOD IS PRODUCED. SO, WHAT IS THE BIG SECRET? WHAT IS THE BIG SECRET? IF EVERYTHING IS HUNKY-DORY IN ALL OF OUR FARMS, BIG OR SMALL, OPEN THE DOORS. LET US ALL SEE. RIGHT? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW THAT OLD ADAGE

IS BANTERED ABOUT IN OUR SOCIETY, IF YOU GOT NOTHING TO HIDE, THEN JUST OPEN THE DOORS. LET US SEE. RIGHT? SO, FOR ME, IT IS VERY CONCERNING THAT,

RIGHT NOW, WE ARE ALL SORT OF PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER WHEN, ULTIMATELY, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE LIKE, WELL, WE CARE ABOUT THE ANIMALS.

WELL, WHO HERE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE ANIMALS? SO, LET'S JUST SEE IT.

RIGHT? BUT APPARENTLY, THERE AREN'T INTERESTS THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO

SEE, THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE US SEE WHAT REALLY IS GOING ON ON ALL OF THESE FORMS. SO, FOR ME, THAT IS REALLY, REALLY CONCERNING. IT WAS VERY CONCERNING A YEAR AGO, IT STILL IS VERY CONCERNING FOR ME. SO, I, TOO, FEEL

A LOT OF PRESSURE FROM VARIOUS -- I SAID AT THE MAYOR'S GATHERING WHEN

MY SUPERVISOR CAME IN HOT AND ACTUALLY BROUGHT IN A REPRESENTATIVE

FROM ONE OR TWO OF THE FORMS, AND IT HE WAS, LIKE, PRETTY STRAIGHT ON

WHERE IT IS, LIKE, THIS IS JUST THE WAY I SEE THE WORLD, AND, YOU KNOW, IT

WAS COUCHED IN A WAY THAT IS, LIKE, THIS IS JUST ONE AGAINST THE OTHER, OR, IT IS LIKE, WHY DID IT HAVE TO BE THAT WAY? YES, SO, I DO FEEL A LOT OF

PRESSURE, AND I DO EMPATHIZE WITH WHAT A COUNCILMEMBER PREVIOUSLY

APPARENTLY SAID, PRESENTED US FROM QATAR DEAL IT IS NOT JUST THE MAYOR

OF HIS THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE THERE FROM KENTUCKY AND THE PRESS, AND AS

A RESULT, THEY TOOK A POSITION, TOOK A STANCE OF HAVING NO POSITION ON

THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY FELLOW ELECTEDS TO DO IT COUNCILMEMBER MAURER SUGGESTED, TAKE NO POSITION. I HAVE A FEELING

THAT MY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL NOT DO THAT, AND IF THEY DON'T TAKE

THAT POSITION THAT COULD HOTTY HAS TAKEN, I WILL VOTE TO NOT SUPPORT THIS POSITION TONIGHT. SO, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THAT LEAVES IT IN MY HANDS. THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE, AND I STRUGGLED WITH IT MIGHTILY, AS PEOPLE WERE SPEAKING. I DON'T VIEW THIS AS A COMMUNITY THAT SUPPORTS, STRONGLY, ONE POSITION. ME BE 40 PEOPLE WHO

SPOKE TO AMO'S OFFICE OPPOSE MEASURE J, A LOT OF VOICES OUT THERE ARE SPEAKING TO SUPPORT MEASURE J, SO, IT IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE. AS AN ELECTED, I

STRUGGLE OFTEN WITH THE CONFLICT BETWEEN WHAT I'M I PERSONALLY FEEL AND WHAT I FEEL IS BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY. WE LIVE IN A RURAL COMMUNITY,

FACE ECONOMIC PRESSURES, HEAR ALL THE TIME ABOUT LOSING JOBS, ABOUT OUR ECONOMY STRUGGLING, ABOUT THE NEED TO SUPPORT OUR BUSINESSES. WE ENJOY THE BENEFITS OF THAT RURAL COMMUNITY. FOR ME, IT IS ALWAYS ABOUT WHAT IS

BEST IN THE COMMUNITY, NOT NECESSARILY HOW I WOULD VOTE INSIDE THE BALLOT BOX, BUT WHAT IS BEST FOR MY COMMUNITY. THIS IS A POLICY DECISION

THAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO MAKE, A POLICY MESSAGE THAT WE ARE BEING

ASKED TO MAKE AS COUNCIL, AS VICE-MAYOR ZOLLMAN POINTED OUT, WE HAVE

DONE THIS IN THE PAST, AND THIS POINT WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON, SO, IT IS NOT FOR ME, ABOUT PRESSURE FROM OUTSIDE INTERESTS. IT IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY COMING FROM OUTSIDE. IT IS NOT ABOUT ANY SORT OF

MISGUIDED, MISINTERPRETATIONS IT IS ABOUT THE LOCAL NEEDS, AND WHEN I

LOOK AT OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY AND THE MESSAGING THAT WE NEED TO GIVE,

AS A CITY COUNCIL, TO OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY, THAT IS A RURAL COMMUNITY, I

END UP SIDING ON THE SIDE OF SUPPORTING THIS RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE MEASURE J, AND I WILL TELL YOU, THAT IT IS NOT AN EASY DECISION THAT I MAKE.

FOR A LOT OF PERSONAL REASONS. BUT, I VOTE FOR MY TOWN. I WAS ELECTED TO

SUPPORT MY TOWN, AND THIS MESSAGE THAT WE SUPPORT RURAL IS, I THINK, A REALLY IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR OUR TOWN. SO, I WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS MEASURE, TO OPPOSE MEASURE J. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BEFORE WE TAKE A FORMAL VOTE?

I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, TONIGHT, WE TOOK A POSITION APPROXIMATELY A

YEAR AGO, AND WE'RE TAKING A POSITION TONIGHT, AND SO, WITH THAT, I WOULD

LIKE TO MOVE THE PROCLAMATION FORWARD, OR THIS RESOLUTION, OPPOSING

MEASURE J, AS INDICATED IN OUR PACKET TONIGHT, --
AND I WILL SECOND IT.

IS THAT ALL YOU NEED FROM US, MARY?
ROLL CALL THAT, PLEASE, MARY GURLEY.

THANK YOU, MARY. SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION OF OPPOSITION TO MEASURE J. COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
AYE.

COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
NO.

COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS?
YES .

VICE-MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
NO.

MAYOR RICH?
YES.

MOTION PASSES 3-2 WITH CULT MEMBERS HINTON, McLEWIS AND MAYOR IN

SUPPORT, AND COUNCILMEMBER MAURER AND VICE-MAYOR ZOLLMAN IN OPPOSITION.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR YOUR PATIENCE, FOR YOUR RESPECT -- PLEASE -- AND LET'S NOT APPLY. OKAY? PLEASE, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE UNHAPPY ABOUT THIS VOTE. PLEASE, BE RESPECTFUL. THANK YOU. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A FIVEMINUTE BIO BREAK, AND THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. [ THE EVENT IS ON A RECESS. THE SESSION WILL RECONVENE AT 10:20 P.M. PST. CAPTIONER ON STANDBY. ] THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE NOW BACK TO CONTINUE OUR COUNCIL MEETING TONIGHT. WE TOOK A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK, AND WE ARE NOW GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 10. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONSIDERATION OF

APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH BAKER TILLY FOR FLEET MANAGEMENT ASSET STUDY TO AMEND THE BUDGET FOR AN INCREASE OF $18,900. I BELIEVE THIS IS BEING PRESENTED, INITIALLY, BY OUR CITY MANAGER? YES, IT IS. SO, I WILL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED?
YES. I'M SORRY. DO WE HAVE A CONSULTANT PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM? ANDY BELKNAP IS AVAILABLE ON ZUNE.

OKAY. I WILL NOT, FOR PURPOSES OF THE COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION, OUR CITY

MANAGER IS HOPEFUL THAT WE WILL GET THROUGH NOT JUST THIS ITEM, BUT THE NEXT ONE. I KNOW THAT IT IS 10:20, SO, I WILL JUST LEAVE THAT WITH THE COUNCIL. AT 10:30, ANY ONE OF US COULD ELECT TO CALL IT A NIGHT. GO AHEAD, CITY MANAGER.

I BELIEVE ONE OF THE REASONS YOU HIRED ME FOR THIS POSITION WAS TO HELP APPROVE THE CITY'S FINANCES AND THE SCHOOL PRACTICES. TO ME, THIS ITEM IS

REPRESENTATIVE OF THAT, IT IS PART OF THE FOUNDATION OF A STRONG

FINANCIAL PRACTICES TO KNOW WHAT YOU OUGHT TO BE PUTTING ASIDE FOR

YOUR MANAGING MAJOR ASSETS LIKE A FLEET, AND WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE IN

THE BANK ALREADY TO REPLACE THE FLEET, AS IT IS GOING TO NEED TO BE PLACED. TO ME, THIS PROJECT WILL GIVE US SOME VERY PRACTICAL TOOLS,

ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS OF HOW MUCH WE NEED NOW, ANNUALLY, TO GIVE US

A MODEL THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO USE TO KEEP THE INFORMATION UPDATED,

AND IT WILL GIVE US AN OUTSIDE EXPERT OPINION ON HOW WE CAN IMPROVE OUR FLEET OPERATIONS. TO ME, THOSE ARE ALL GOOD REASONS TO DO THE PROJECT IN THE FIRST PLACE. THE TIMING IS IMPORTANT, IN THAT DANTE THE PEREZ IS KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THIS TOPIC. I DON'T THINK IT IS SOMETHING HIS SUCCESSORS WILL BE KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT FOR QUITE SOME TIME. FINALLY, I

KNOW THERE'S CONCERNED SOMETIMES ABOUT THE USE OF CONSULTANTS AND CONTRACTORS ARE TO ME, THERE'S TWO LEGITIMATE REASONS TO DO THAT. ONE IS WHEN YOU LACK THE EXPERTISE, SECONDLY, WHEN YOU LACK THE BEEN WITH. I

THINK WE LACK BOTH OF THEM IN THIS CASE, AND I THINK IT IS A WORTHWHILE

INVESTMENT TO HELP OUR NEW PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, AND AS A PART OF STRONG FISCAL PRACTICES.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE AT THE COUNCIL TABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. COUNCILMEMBER HINTON ?

ONE QUESTION, WILL THIS INCLUDE OUR FLEET AS PART OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT?
NO, WE EXCLUDED THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IN ANTICIPATION -- [ INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ]

DOES IT COST THE CITY AT CHURCH TO SUPPORT THEM, AS IT APPEARS TO IN THE FLEET STUDY?

THAT INFO ALONE --
THEY'RE AWARE OF IT. IT HAS BEEN MONTHS SINCE WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT THEY'RE AWARE OF THIS.

THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE FIRE -- WHETHER THE FIRE FLEET COULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE COST QUOTED.

NO, THE ORIGINAL COST QUOTED WAS ABOUT 2000 OR $3000 MORE, ALTHOUGH WE MIGHT NOT HAVE THE PARTICULAR NUMBER, IT IS IN THAT RANGE.

THIS WOULD EXCLUDE THE FIRE?
YES.

AND ALDRICH IS AWARE OF THAT, YOU SAID?
YES.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

WE'RE LOOKING AT EACH OTHER, THINKING, IT SHOULD INCLUDE OTHER FIVE --

FIRE VEHICLES -- SINCE WE CURRENTLY ON THEM, AND OUR OBLIGATIONS BEING

FOR THE FUTURE --
WE'LL COME BACK FOR DISCUSSION. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? I'M SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER MAURER, I'M SORRY.

SO, YOU GET THIS STUDY DONE, AND DANTE HELPS -- YOU ARE SAYING, DANTE

WILL MOSTLY MANAGE IT -- THEN, BUT YOU NEED INFORMATION FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. RIGHT? THEN, IT COMES BACK TO WHO, THEN, IS IN CONTROL OF

THIS DOCUMENT, AND HOW DO OUR RESIDENTS BENEFIT FROM THIS INFORMATION, HOW DO WE BENEFIT FROM THIS INFORMATION.

THAT IS THE FIRST QUESTION, THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR HERE, ACTING IN

THAT ROLE, WILL BE A MERRY POINT PERSON FOR THE PROJECT, AND OUR ONGOING

RESPONSIBILITY AFTER DANTE DEPARTS, AND I BELIEVE, OUR RESIDENTS BENEFIT

BECAUSE WE WILL IMPROVE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE

SPENDING ON FLEET, NOW, WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE SET ASIDE, AS WELL AS WHAT

WE WILL NEED TO BE DOING IN THE FUTURE, AND IT WILL JUST GIVE US A MODEL

TO MOVE FORWARD TO MAINTAIN THAT DATA AND BE WELL INFORMED, AND POTENTIALLY, HELP PREPARE FOR PRACTICES. I LOOK AT IT IS KIND OF ANOTHER IN THE WALL OF FISCAL MANAGEMENT FOR SEBASTOPOL. IT IS NOT THE SINGLE MOST

IMPORTANT THING, BUT IT IS A WORTHWHILE THING, IT IS A TIMELY TOPIC, BECAUSE OF THE DEPARTURE.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER .

CONSIDERING.WHO'S LEAVING -- I WILL HELP FULLY UNDERSTAND THE ANSWER BY ASKING THE QUESTION AGAIN. WHO, THEN, WHERE DOES THE STUDY GO? IT

DOESN'T JUST INCLUDE PUBLIC WORKS, IT ALSO INCLUDES POLICE DEPARTMENT VEHICLES. WHO, THEN, HAS A DOCUMENT, AND HOW -- ARE YOU THE PERSON THAT

THAT DOCUMENT THEN WOULD BE RESTING, IN TERMS OF -- I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT, HOW THAT WORKS.

PUBLIC WORKS HAS THE LARGEST NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND MOST EQUIPMENT,

AND I WOULD SEE THE LEAD RESPONSIBILITY FOR FLEET MANAGEMENT RESIDES, TO MY MIND, IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. POLICE HAS A SIGNIFICANT

NUMBER AS WELL, A GOOD PART OF IT, FROM A POINT PERSPECTIVE,

ACCOUNTABILITY PERSPECTIVE, FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC WORKS AND ALLOWING THEM TO KIND OF OWN THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT MANAGEMENT PORTION.

SO, IT WILL START WITH DANTE, THEN IT WILL MOVE TO THE, THE NEW PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR?
YES.

OKAY, THEN, TO CLARIFY, THE POINT HERE, THE POINT HERE IS TO GET AN

INVENTORY OF OUR FLEET, IDENTIFY THE FUTURE NEEDS IN TERMS OF MAINTENANCE AND PLACEMENT FOR OUR VEHICLES?
IT IS NOT SO MUCH GETTING INVENTORY. WE HAVE THAT. IT IS MORE LOOKING AT

HOW MUCH LIFESPAN IS LEFT, HOW MUCH SHOULD WE HAVE SET ASIDE, IF WE WERE TO REPLACE THAT PARTICULAR SCHEDULE.WE PUT, I THINK, $1 MILLION

THOUSAND INTO THE RESERVE FUND FOR FLEET, BUT THAT IS A RESERVE FUND INCLUDING FLEET TECHNOLOGY.

SO, CITY MANAGER, I WILL INTERRUPT YOU. I AM WATCHING THE CLOCK.I WOULD

LIKE TO GET THE PUBLIC COMMENT, AND HOPEFULLY, COME BACK FOR A DECISION AT LEAST ON THIS ONE ITEM. MAYOR GURLEY, PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE? THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONTRACT FOR THE FLEET ASSESSMENT FOR THE CITY. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT PUBLIC COMMENT, WE WILL GO TO CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO THE ZOOM. IF YOU

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONTRACT FOR THE FLEET ASSESSMENT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. BECKY, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE? THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT NOW?
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE TRYING TO DO WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO. REALLY, REGARDING WHAT YOU USED ABOUT AUNTIE OWING THE

RESPONSIBILITY -- DANTE -- FOR THE CONDITIONS OF THE VEHICLES -- ALL OF THE

VEHICLES -- YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC WORKS, YOU KNOW, THE THING IS, YOU KNOW,

DANTE HAS SHOWN THAT HE DOES NOT OWN THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT HE LET HIS DEFICIT OF $5.6 MILLION BE A BIG PART OF WHAT THE FOCUS FOR A SURVEY FOR

THE WIRELESS WATER METERS, WHICH ARE NOW FEELING, AND NOBODY, HE OF ALL

PEOPLE, ARE NOT ADDRESSING IT, AND HE IS SOLELY, WITH DIANE RICH,

RESPONSIBLE FOR ANOTHER DISASTER, AND ANOTHER DEFICIT, WHICH WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REPLACE THESE ILL-ADVISED WIRELESS WATER METERS AT $2.2 MILLION, AGAIN, WHICH WE WILL BE PAYING FOR FOR THE NEXT 12 YEARS, PLUS,

SO, ANYWAY, I JUST DO NOT TRUST DANTE'S JUDGMENT OR HIS RESPONSIBILITY, OR DIANA YOU KNOW? REALLY, FOR ANYTHING, BECAUSE THEY'RE EASILY LED ASTRAY BY FINANCIAL INTERESTS. IT IS DANTE WHO KEPT TELLING HER, AND SHE KEPT SAYING, NO COSTS, NO COSTS.

YOU HAVE ABOUT 25 SECONDS.

OKAY. HIS DEALING WITH THE VEHICLES WOULD BE ANY DIFFERENT. I KNOW FOR A

FACT THAT THE VECTOR CONTROL PEOPLE, THEY KEEP THROWING MONEY -- OUR

PARCEL TAX DOLLARS -- AND NEW VEHICLES EVERY YEAR, WHETHER THEY NEED THEM OR NOT. I DON'T THINK THAT IS PROBABLY THE CASE.

LINDA, THAT'S TWO MINUTES.

YOU GET MY DRIFT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS.

SEEING NONE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NO FURTHER HANDS RAISED, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED ON THIS ITEM.

OKAY.

I WOULD LIKE TO PULL THE COUNCIL HERE .IS THERE -- I'M HOPING THAT THE COUNCIL IS WILLING TO COMPLETE THIS ITEM, BUT IT IS 10:30.

COMPLETE THIS. IS EVERYONE OKAY WITH THAT?

WITH THAT, AND EVEN IF THE COUNCIL WANTED TO GO TO THE NEXT ONE AND WIPE IT OUT, THAT WOULD BE -- THROWN QUICK.

FINAL ITEM IS FOR THE SELECTION OF A FACILITATOR FOR GOALSETTING, JUST PULLING THE COUNCIL. ANYONE FEEL THE NEED TO END THE MEETING BEFORE WE GET TO THAT? EVERYONE WILLING TO CONSIDER MOVING ON TO THE FLEET? NO? I WILL DO THIS.

THIS ITEM, YES.

BUT IN TERMS OF THE NEXT ITEM? I'M HEARING NO FROM TWO COUNCILMEMBERS.

OKAY. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. SO, LET'S FINISH UP THIS ITEM. WE ARE NOW BACK AT THE COUNCIL TABLE I WILL TURN TO THE CITY MANAGER. WANT TO EXPRESS ANY CONCERN? I'M SORRY. LET ME ASKED THE QUESTION, THE FACILITATOR ITEM WOULD BE PUT ON WHICH AGENDA? NOVEMBER -- THE OCTOBER -- THE FIRST OCTOBER AGENDA. OKAY. WELL, THE COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN ON THIS. I THINK WE JUST NEED TO RESPECT THAT. LET'S HAVE COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THE FLEET ITEM. COUNCILMEMBER ?
I HAVE A COUPLE OF DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF ABOUT THIS PROJECT. MY FEELING

OF IT IS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE HOW MANY DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON, AND

DANTE MIGHT DO THIS, THEN HE IS LEAVING, THEN YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A

NEW PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR WHO IS THEN GOING TO BE HAVING TO LEARN SO MANY THINGS. IT JUST FEELS LIKE THERE'S ALREADY TOO MUCH GOING ON, SO, I

THINK THAT THIS PROJECT, TO DO A FLEET ASSESSMENT, SHOULD BE DELAYED UNTIL NEXT YEAR. THAT IS MY FEELING, AND, YEAH. BUT, WE HAD A STAFFING

STUDY DONE A COUPLE YEARS AGO, AND NOW, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REDO

IT, AND WE DIDN'T USE THAT STAFFING STUDY, SO, BY THE TIME SOMEBODY GETS

AROUND TO DOING THE FLEET ASSESSMENT, THEN, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THAT INFORMATION DOESN'T HAVE TO BE BE DONE? BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ENOUGH TIME TO GET TO IT, SO, THAT IS IS MY FEELING ABOUT IT. I DON'T SUPPORT THIS ITEM, AND I UNDERSTAND THE REST OF YOU. I JUST NEED TO SAY THAT.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER MAURER. ANY COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS?
HEARING COUNCILMEMBER MAURER , I HAVE A QUESTION. ULTIMATELY, WHAT WILL WE DO WITH THIS? IS IT IS GOING TO BE ANOTHER FILE SITTING SOMEWHERE?

BECAUSE, I DO SEE THIS A LOT, AND I AM LIKE, HOW IS THIS GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN OUR DAY-TO-DAY OVER THE NEXT YEAR IF IT WERE DELAYED?

I WILL GIVE YOU WHAT I SEE AS THE ABSOLUTE WORST CASE SCENARIO, THAT WE

WILL HAVE A MUCH MORE INFORMED, BETTER INFORMED DECISION TO MAKE,

ABOUT HOW MUCH TO EITHER PUT INTO OR WITHDRAWN FROM THE RESERVE FUND FOR THE FLEET AND EQUIPMENT. WE DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION RIGHT

NOW, AT LEAST NOT AS GOOD AS I WOULD LIKE, TO DECIDE HOW MUCH WE SHOULD

PUT IN AND HOW MUCH WE SHOULD BE TAKING OUT, AND THAT WILL HELP INFORM OUR BUDGET DECISIONS FOR NEXT YEAR AND THE FUTURE YEARS. THAT IS THE

WORST CASE SCENARIO, BECAUSE, I AM IMAGINING IF THE CREATIVE MODEL WOULD EVER USE IT, THEN, THAT IS BAD NEWS. I AM HOPING WE WOULD USE IT. I'M

HOPING WE WOULD HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN OPERATIONS, BUT GETTING SOLID

NUMBERS ABOUT WHAT WE OUGHT TO BE PUTTING ASIDE FOR SIGNIFICANT CITY ASSETS AND INVESTMENTS THAT WE MAKE, I THINK, IS A VALUE IN AND OF ITSELF.

THAT IS THE WORST CASE SCENARIO, WE WILL MAKE BETTER DECISIONS.

OKAY. I GUESS, I AM FEELING SWAYED, SIMPLY BECAUSE AS WE SIT HERE AND

TALK ABOUT THE TAXES, HOW WE ARE GOING TO USE EVERYTHING, THEN, I AM LOOKING AT THIS, LIKE, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THIS? WE CAN'T EVEN AFFORD -- YOU KNOW -- CAN WE AFFORD TO CHANGE ANYTHING? I DON'T KNOW. I

AM FEELING A LITTLE BIT SWAYED ABOUT THIS, WONDERING IF DELAYING IT ISN'T AN OPTION.

COUNCILMEMBER?
I AM FEELING SWAYED NOW TOO. FIRST OF ALL, I AM NOT HAPPY THAT THE FIRE VEHICLES ARE NOT IN IT. I THINK IT IS PREMATURE TO PULL THEM OUT, AND SO, I

DON'T KNOW IF WE COULD EVEN VOTE ON IT TONIGHT, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A

QUOTE FOR THEM TO BE IN IT, AND WASN'T ON OUR RADAR FOR ROLLING THEM OUT

IN OUR SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS, SO, THAT IS A CONCERN, THEN, WE DO HAVE A

CONCERN, EVEN THOUGH, YEAH, I ONE HAND, YOU COULD SAY, DANTE IS HERE AND

HE KNOWS IT, BUT I HAVE ALSO SEEN DANTE'S SHEETS, HAVING SERVED ON THE

BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE, AND THEY'RE NOT A CONSULTANT, AND MAY BE AS A

PROFESSIONAL, BUT THEY HAVE ALL THE VEHICLE YEARS, AND I REMEMBER, I

HATE TO SAY, GOOGLE, BUT IT DOES GIVE YOU REPLACEMENT, LIKE, SOME INFO,

AND MAYBE THIS IS BETTER TO HAVE THE NEW PUBLIC WORKS PERSON MANAGE

THIS PROJECT AFTER THE FIRST OF THE YEAR IF WE ARE REALLY SWAMPED, AND, IT

STILL SHOULD INCLUDE, I THINK, THE FIRE VEHICLES, BUT, THAT IS KIND OF MY THINKING. I AM FEELING SWAYED AS WELL, THAT MAYBE WE DON'T WANT TO APPROVE THIS TONIGHT.

VICE-MAYOR?

NO, I MEAN, I THINK I FOLLOW THE LOGIC OF HAVING DANTE, EVEN WITH THE

SHEETS, LIKE TO WEIGH IN WITH THESE ON TWO SETS AND CAPTURE THE KNOWLEDGE BEFORE HE LEAVES, AND ALSO, WITH THE FIRE, I DON'T KNOW. I

MEAN, WITH THE OTHER ASSESSMENTS, WITH US CONTRACTING WITH THEM TO DO

THEIR BUILDING, THEN, I THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR US TO

ACTUALLY DO THAT FOR THE FLEET, SO, I GUESS I WAS NEVER REALLY EXPECTING THEM TO DO THE FLEET. I ALWAYS FIGURED THAT THAT WOULD BE THE REASON WHY THEY REVIEWED OUT OF THIS. SO, I DON'T KNOW. I AM LEANING MORE

TOWARDS THE FAVOR OF JUST DOING IT SO THAT WE HAVE THE DATA, AND HOPEFULLY, WE CAN PROJECT BETTER WITH OUR BUDGETS MOVING FORWARD.

SO, MY INPUT IS THAT I THINK IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT DANTE PROVIDE AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE ON THE FLEET. APPARENTLY, WE HAVE AN INVENTORY

LIST, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT HE COULD BE ABLE TO, AS A TRANSITIONAL EFFORT,

PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE FLEET, AND

WHAT HIS THOUGHTS ARE, IN TERMS OF MAINTENANCE REPLACEMENT, THAT KIND OF THING. BUT, THE EXAMPLE OF THE STAFFING STUDY, HONESTLY, REALLY

RESONATES WITH ME, AND WE DO HAVE A NEW PUBLIC WORKS LEAD COMING IN AT SOME POINT. AND SO, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, YEAH, I THINK IT IS WORTH WAITING,

AND NOT WORTH PRETTY -- PUTTING TOGETHER A REPORT -- OR MY GOVERNMENT

WOULDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE INPUT OF AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD BE LEAVING THAT DEPARTMENT IN THE FUTURE. HOWEVER, I WOULD WANT TO GET

THE INPUT OF OUR CITY MANAGER AND ASK HIM WHETHER HE WANTS TO MAKE SOME SORT OF FINAL PLEA TO US. YOU ARE HEARING THAT WE REALLY DON'T THINK THAT THIS SHOULD BE DONE RIGHT AWAY.

FIRST, ON THE FIRE POINT, WE COULD ADD THAT TO THE SCOPE FOR, I THINK, LESS THAN $3000, AS YOU CALL IT ON THE KNOBS, IS THAT RIGHT, ANDY? IT WOULD BE EASY TO ADD THAT BACK IN. FRANKLY, VERY COST-EFFECTIVE TO ADD IT BACK IN.

SO, CITY MANAGER, THIS IS LATE. THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY FOR A LAST PLEA. IT IS CLEARLY GOING AGAINST THE FLEET FOR THE VOTE. SO, GIVE US YOUR 30- SECOND PITCH.

YOU ASKED ME TO COME AND HELP YOU FOR FINANCES. THIS IS A TOOL THAT WILL

HELP ME MANAGE THE CITY'S FINANCIAL SITUATION BETTER NEXT YEAR WHEN WE PREPARE THE BUDGET. I WILL HAVE BETTER INFORMED DECISIONS, AND WE THINK WE WILL HAVE A TOOL TO USE THE LONG RUN. NOW IS THE TIME TO DO, AND DARREN IS HERE TO OFFER HIS EQUITIES AND CRITIQUE. IT WILL BE A LONG

LEARNING CURVE FOR THE POSITION FOR THE NEW PERSON THAT WILL DO A

PAINFUL, INCREDIBLE JOB FOR THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME WHEN THEY GET STARTED. I THINK NOW IS THE RIGHT TIME. IT IS VERY COST-EFFECTIVE AND THEY WILL NEED IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILMEMBER?

IN RESPONSE, SINCE IT IS NOT GOING TO BE REALLY USED UNTIL NEXT YEAR FOR THE BUDGET, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH DELAYING IT .

I WOULD NOT ASSIGN THIS TO A NEW PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR WITHIN THE 1ST6 OR 12 MONTHS OF THEIR JOB.

I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND JUMP IN ONE MORE HERE.

GO AHEAD.

I WILL MOVE THE CONTRACT. AMENDMENT NUMBER 1, RECORD TO CONDUCT ANALYSIS FOR FLEET FUNDING NEEDS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE OPERATIONS.

I'M SORRY, YOUR MOTION IS TO APPROVE?
YES.

OKAY. SO, THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE. WE ARE LOOKING FOR A SECOND. NOT SEEING A SECOND. SO, THE MOTION HAS FAILED, AND THAT ITEM HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED. WE NOW ARE WAY BEYOND 10:30. ANYTHING THAT STAFF WANTS TO SHARE WITH US, OR THAT WE NEED TO DO BEFORE WE CLOSE THIS MEETING? OKAY.

THEN, WE ARE ENDING THIS MEETING. APPRECIATE EVERYONE PUTTING THEIR EFFORT INTO MAINTAINING UNTIL NOW, AND WE GOT A LOT DONE.SO, THANK YOU, EVERYONE.

OLIVER, THERE UNTIL THE BITTER END. THANK YOU, PHIL. [Event Concluded]

Sebastopol City CouncilSeptember 17, 2024

Sebastopol City Council
September 17, 2024