MEETINGS ARE HELD AT 425 MORRIS STREET, SEBASTOPOL, CA 95472 (SEBASTOPOL YOUTH ANNEX) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTICED
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 20, 2025
As Approved by the City Council at their regular meeting of June 3, 2025
Please note that minutes of meetings are not meant to be verbatim minutes and are meant to be 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.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Zollman called the meeting to order 6:00 pm ROLL CALL:
Present: Mayor Stephen Zollman
Vice Mayor McLewis (arrived at 6:03 pm)
Councilmember Phill Carter
Councilmember Neysa Hinton
Councilmember Sandra Maurer
Absent: None
Staff: Acting City Manager/Assistant City Manager/City Clerk Gourley City Attorney Alex Mog
Administrative Services Director Kwong
Building Official Brown
Public Works Director/City Engineer Director Rincon Ibarra Community Development Director Theriault
SALUTE TO THE FLAG : Mayor Zollman 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)). Assembly Bill 2302 (2024) (“AB 2302”) revises rules for when members of local legislative bodies may participate in meetings remotely. Specifically, it amends the number of meetings that may be attended remotely for just cause and under emergency circumstances and clarifies the definition of the term “meeting,” for purposes of remote attendance. AB 2302 caps the number of remote meetings a member can attend each year based on the frequency of a legislative body’s meetings: Five meetings per year for those meeting twice a month. There was no request.
PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS:
The following was presented:
• Proclamation – Proclamation Recognizing the Sebastopol Rotary Club 100 Years Reference Order Number: 2025-152
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 none stated.
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. None 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 aloud the title of each consent item (either full agenda title or a simplified version of the agenda title), and 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 two (2) minutes on the entire consent calendar and request at that time that an item or items 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. Council Members 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.
Mayor Zollman read the consent calendar.
Mayor Zollman asked if any Councilmember wanted to remove a consent calendar item. There was none.
Mayor Zollman opened for Public Comment(s). The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment: None
Mayor Zollman called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Maurer moved and Vice Mayor McLewis seconded the motion to approve consent calendar items 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
1. Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes – Regular Meeting of May 6, 2025 (Responsible Department: Assistant City Manager/City Clerk) There is no fiscal impact associated with approval of this item City Council Action: Approved City Council Meeting Minutes – Regular Meeting of May 6, 2025 Minute Order Number: 2025-153
2. Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes – Special Meeting/Closed Session Meeting of May 12, 2025
(Responsible Department: Assistant City Manager/City Clerk) There is no fiscal impact associated with approval of this item City Council Action: Approved City Council Meeting Minutes – Special Meeting/Closed Session Meeting of May 12, 2025
Minute Order Number: 2025-154
3. Approval of Letter of Support for SB 346 – Durazo. Local agencies: transient occupancy taxes:
short-term rental facilitator. This bill would authorize a local agency, defined to mean a city, county, or city and county, to enact an ordinance to require a short-term rental facilitator, as defined, to report, in the form and manner prescribed by the local agency, the assessor parcel number of each short-term rental, as defined, during the reporting period, as well as any additional information necessary to identify the property as may be required by the local agency.
The bill would authorize the local agency to impose an administrative fine or penalty for failure to file the report, and would authorize the local agency to initiate an audit of a short-term rental facilitator, as described. The bill would require a short-term rental facilitator, in a jurisdiction that has adopted an ordinance, to include in the listing of a short-term rental any applicable local license number associated with the short-term rental and any transient occupancy tax certification issued by a local agency. The bill would state these provisions do not preempt a local agency from adopting an ordinance that regulates short-term rentals, short-term rental facilitators, or the payment and collection of transient occupancy taxes in a manner that differs from those described in the bill.
(Requestor: Vice Mayor McLewis (Legislative Representative)/Responsible Department:
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk)
There is no fiscal impact associated with approval of this item City Council Action: Approved Letter of Support for SB 346 – Durazo. Local agencies: transient occupancy taxes: short-term rental facilitator. This bill would authorize a local agency, defined to mean a city, county, or city and county, to enact an ordinance to require a short-term rental facilitator, as defined, to report, in the form and manner prescribed by the local agency, the assessor parcel number of each shortterm rental, as defined, during the reporting period, as well as any additional information necessary to identify the property as may be required by the local agency. The bill would authorize the local agency to impose an administrative fine or penalty for failure to file the report, and would authorize the local agency to initiate an audit of a short-term rental facilitator, as described. The bill would require a shortterm rental facilitator, in a jurisdiction that has adopted an ordinance, to include in the listing of a shortterm rental any applicable local license number associated with the short-term rental and any transient occupancy tax certification issued by a local agency. The bill would state these provisions do not preempt a local agency from adopting an ordinance that regulates short-term rentals, short-term rental facilitators, or the payment and collection of transient occupancy taxes in a manner that differs from those described in the bill.
Minute Order Number: 2025-155
4. Resolution Declaring Weeds a Public Nuisance and Setting Public Hearing Date (Responsible Department: Fire)
There is no fiscal impact associated with approval of this item City Council Action: Approved Resolution Declaring Weeds a Public Nuisance and Setting Public Hearing Date
Minute Order Number: 2025-156
Resolution: 6663-2025
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. Discussion and Consideration of Action Plan for City Council Goals/Priorities. Item is to review and consider the Action Plan tied to City Council’s established goals and priorities. Item includes the proposed action plan detailing:
a. Specific objectives
b. Proposed initiatives or projects
c. Timelines
d. Responsible departments or personnel
e. Estimated budgets and funding sources
(Responsible Department: Acting City Manager)
Fiscal impacts will be determined by the action taken at this meeting. It is recommended that for those projects that have budgets associated with the item, that the Council direct staff to return those items to the budget committee for inclusions into the upcoming FY budget discussion.
Acting City Manager Gourley presented the agenda item recommending the City Council consider the Action Plan tied to City Council’s established goals and priorities. Item includes the proposed action plan detailing:
a. Specific objectives
b. Proposed initiatives or projects
c. Timelines
d. Responsible departments or personnel
e. Estimated budgets and funding sources
Mayor Zollman asked for questions from the Council. The Council asked questions of staff.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke: None City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council provided thumbs up/thumbs down as shown in the attached document.
City Council Action: Provided thumbs up/thumbs down as shown in the attached document.
Minute Order Number: 2025-157
6. Budget Amendment – Payment of Lease for Fire truck. Approve the allocation of Measure H funds towards purchasing a new Type 1 fire engine as agreed upon through the reorganization process. The City of Sebastopol is projected to receive approximately $840,000 in Measure H sales tax revenue this fiscal year. As part of the reorganization negotiations with the Gold Ridge Fire Protection District (GFD), a plan was developed to complete the purchase of a new fire engine to limit future obligations, thereby streamlining reorganization efforts. Both entities' Fire Ad Hocs agreed to share the cost of these payments. The City will contribute one payment using Measure H funds, while GFD will fund the other. The City’s total contribution toward the final payoff is $231,335.50. (Responsible Department: Fire/Administrative Services) Fiscal impact: Staff is requesting a budget adjustment of $231,335.50 from the Measure H fund to settle the City’s debt financing obligation
Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the City Council approve the resolution for Budget Amendment – Payment of Lease for Fire truck; approving the allocation of Measure H funds towards purchasing a new Type 1 fire engine as agreed upon through the reorganization process.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions from the Council. The Council asked questions of staff.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke: None City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
No further discussion.
MOTION:
Vice Mayor McLewis moved and Councilmember Maurer seconded the motion to approve the resolution for Budget Amendment – Payment of Lease for Fire truck; approving the allocation of Measure H funds towards purchasing a new Type 1 fire engine as agreed upon through the reorganization process.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the resolution for Budget Amendment – Payment of Lease for Fire truck; approving the allocation of Measure H funds towards purchasing a new Type 1 fire engine as agreed upon through the reorganization process.
Minute Order Number: 2025-158
Resolution Number: 6664-2025
7. Budget Amendment – Payment of Lease on Fire station - Fire building collateral payoff with Trust Bank - On May 16, 2006 the City adopted a resolution authorizing lease financing in the amount of $2,880,000 for various public improvements and utilized the Fire Station as collateral for the refunding lease agreement. The lease funding was used to fund City projects that have since been completed such as replacement of the sewer force main; construction of the Skate Park; and installation of solar panels to name a few of the projects. On May 18, 2021 the City adopted a resolution authorizing the refinancing of the City lease in the amount of $1,109,000. This lease was scheduled to be paid in full on June 30, 2026; however, the fire station is the collateral for the current financing debt and because ownership of the fire station will be transferred to the Gold Ridge Fire Protection District on July 1, 2025 as part of the fire reorganization, staff has recommended paying-off the debt early.
(Responsible Department: Fire/Administrative Services)
Fiscal impact: Budget adjustment of $210,000 to cover this early debt service obligation payment in FY 24-25.
The budget adjustment will be allocated as follows:
• General Fund: Account code 100-99-71-6100 for the principal amount of $56,700 • Park in Lieu Fund: Account code 212-99-71-6100 for the interest amount of $27,300 • Water Fund: Account code 500-99-71-6100 for the interest amount of $67,200 • Wastewater Fund: Account code 510-99-71-6100 for the interest amount of $58,800 Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the City Council approve the resolution for Budget Amendment – Payment of Lease on Fire station - Fire building collateral payoff with Trust Bank.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions from the Council. The Council asked questions of staff.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke: None City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
There was no further discussion.
MOTION:
Vice Mayor McLewis moved and Mayor Zollman seconded the motion to approve the resolution for Budget Amendment– Payment of Lease on Fire station - Fire building collateral payoff with Trust Bank.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved resolution for Budget Amendment– Payment of Lease on Fire station - Fire building collateral payoff with Trust Bank.
Minute Order Number: 2025-159
Resolution Number: 6665-2025
8. Approval of proposed 3rd of July Fireworks and Music Festival Special Event Permit and request for fee waiver/Temporary Use permit for road closures. $6,930.00 (Responsible Department: Public Works)
Fiscal impact: Application Fee: $150.00, Daily Use Fee: $500.00, Amplified Sound Use Fee:
$50.00. Bouncehouse User Fee: $30.00, Public Works Staff Time: $2,500., Police Staff Time:
$2,700. A fee of $1,000.00 would be allocated against our New Garbage Franchise Agreement allowance of $10,000., for waste carts, portolet rentals and handwash stations.
City Engineer/Public Works Director Rincon presented the agenda item recommending the City Council approve the proposed 3rd of July Fireworks and Music Festival Special Event Permit and request for fee waiver/Temporary Use permit for road closures. $6,930.00 Mayor Zollman asked for questions from the Council. The Council asked questions of staff.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke:
Craig
Patrick
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the request.
MOTION:
Councilmember Carter moved and Councilmember Maurer seconded the motion to approve the proposed 3rd of July Fireworks and Music Festival Special Event Permit and request for fee waiver/Temporary Use permit for road closures. $6,930.00 Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the proposed 3rd of July Fireworks and Music Festival Special Event Permit and request for fee waiver/Temporary Use permit for road closures. $6,930.00 Minute Order Number: 2025-160
9. Consideration of Partial Waiver of Fees: Peacetown Summer Concert Series: $1,550.00 (Responsible Department: Public Works)
Fiscal impact: Special Event Fee: $150.00, Amplified Sound/Stage Fee: $1,400.00.
City Engineer/Public Works Director Rincon presented the agenda item recommending the City Council approve the Partial Waiver of Fees: Peacetown Summer Concert Series: $1,550.00.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions from the Council. The Council asked questions of staff.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke: None City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the request.
MOTION:
Councilmember Maurer moved and Councilmember Hinton seconded the motion to approve the Partial Waiver of Fees: Peacetown Summer Concert Series: $1,550.00.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the Partial Waiver of Fees: Peacetown Summer Concert Series: $1,550.00.
Minute Order Number: 2025-161
10. Consideration of Approval of a reduction of Special Event Permit Fees for the Many Moons Festival Sponsored by the Asian American Pacific Islander Coalition of North Bay.
Total Reduction Fees: $725.00. If approved, this reduction would allow the applicant to pay the resident fee of $1,125.00 instead of $1,850.00.
(Responsible Department: Public Works)
Fiscal impact: Application Fee: $100.00, Daily Use Fee: $550.00, Amplified/Stage Use Fee: $75.00.
City Engineer/Public Works Director Rincon presented the agenda item recommending the City Council approve a reduction of Special Event Permit Fees for the Many Moons Festival Sponsored by the Asian American Pacific Islander Coalition of North Bay. If approved, this reduction would allow the applicant to pay the resident fee of $1,125.00 instead of $1,850.00.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions from the Council. The Council asked questions of staff.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke:
Janet
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the request.
MOTION:
Councilmember Carter moved and Mayor Zollman seconded the motion to approve reduction of Special Event Permit Fees for the Many Moons Festival Sponsored by the Asian American Pacific Islander Coalition of North Bay. Total Reduction Fees: Waiver of $1200 from the $1850; with final payment of $650.00 required.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved reduction of Special Event Permit Fees for the Many Moons Festival Sponsored by the Asian American Pacific Islander Coalition of North Bay. Total Reduction Fees: Waiver of $1200 from the $1850; with final payment of $650.00 required.
Minute Order Number: 2025-162
11. Approval of Adoption of Resolution of intention to levy and collect the annual assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-26 for the City of Sebastopol Street Lighting Assessment District, preliminarily approving the annual Engineer’s Report and setting the date of the Public Hearing in accordance with provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. (Responsible Department: Administrative Services/Public Works) Fiscal impact: The proposed annual assessment charge of $35.00 for each ESD is expected to generate approximately $140,100 in revenue with corresponding expenses estimated at around $139,300.
Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the City Council approve the resolution of intention to levy and collect the annual assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-26 for the City of Sebastopol Street Lighting Assessment District, preliminarily approving the annual Engineer’s Report and setting the date of the Public Hearing in accordance with provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions from the Council. The Council asked questions of staff.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke: None City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
There was no further discussion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Maurer moved and Councilmember Carter seconded the motion to approve the resolution of intention to levy and collect the annual assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-26 for the City of Sebastopol Street Lighting Assessment District, preliminarily approving the annual Engineer’s Report and setting the date of the Public Hearing in accordance with provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the resolution of intention to levy and collect the annual assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-26 for the City of Sebastopol Street Lighting Assessment District, preliminarily approving the annual Engineer’s Report and setting the date of the Public Hearing in accordance with provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972.
Minute Order Number: 2025-163
Resolution Number: 6666-2025
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. None COUNCILMEMBER(S) REQUESTS FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS: None
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. Departmental Reports
Reference Order: 2025-164
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)
14. Council Communications Received (Information/Meetings/Correspondence Received from the General Public to Councilmembers)
CLOSED SESSION: NONE
ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor Zollman adjourned the City Council Regular Meeting of May 20 th
, 2025 at 9:20 pm.
May 20, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting was adjourned to the next Regular City Council Meeting of Tuesday, June 3, 2025 at 6:00 pm, Sebastopol Youth Annex, 425 Morris Street, Sebastopol, CA.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary C. Gourley
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk
City Council Meeting - May 20, 2025
COUNCILMEMBER CARTER? COUNCILMEMBER HINTON ? COUNCILMEMBER MAURER ? MAYOR ZOLLMAN ? VICE MAYOR McLEWIS IS ON HER WAY BUT RUNNING LATE .
THANK YOU. WOULD YOU JOIN ME FOR THE SALUTE TO THE FLAG? THANK YOU.
TONIGHT WE HAVE ONE PROCLAMATION, AND COUNCILMEMBER CARTER WILL BE READING.
RECOGNIZING THE SEBASTOPOL ROTARY CLUB 100th ANNIVERSARY. WHEREAS THE SEBASTOPOL ROTARY CLUB WAS FOUNDED IN 1925. TODAY BOASTS MORE THAN 100 MEMBERS WHO EMBRACE THE TIME-HONORED ROTARY MOTTO, SERVICE ABOVE SELF. THROUGH THEIR GENEROUS SUPPORT OF NUMEROUS CHARITABLE CAUSES, AND WHEREAS IN 1984, THE SEBASTOPOL ROTARY CLUB ESTABLISHED
THE LEARN TO SWIM PROGRAM, WHICH HAS OFFERED FREE LESSONS TO ALL SECOND GRADERS IN THE SEBASTOPOL AREA, WHICH IS NOW SEEN 13,000
CHILDREN LIKE MINE, AND EDUCATE THEM NOT ONLY TO SWIM, BUT ALSO TO BE AWARE OF THE HAZARDS IN THE WATERWAYS OF SONOMA COUNTY. AND, WHEREAS IN 2010, THE SEBASTOPOL ROTARY CLUB ESTABLISHED THE PROGRAM
THAT RECOGNIZED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS THAT ENCOUNTERED ADVERSITY BUT WERE ABLE TO SUCCEED IN GRADUATING LOCAL HIGH SCHOOLS. WHEREAS THE
ROTARY CLUB PROVIDES LEADERSHIP TRAINING, COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
SKILLS IN MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS THROUGH THE ROTARY YOUTH LEADERSHIP AWARDS. WHEREAS THE SEBASTOPOL ROTARY CLUB HAS
ALSO AWARDED INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITY GRANTS TO VARIOUS LOCAL ENTITIES,
INCLUDING COMMUNITY KITCHEN, LITTLE LEAGUE, AND OTHER WORTHY
ORGANIZATIONS, WHEREAS THE SEBASTOPOL ROTARY CLUB HAS ESTABLISHED
TEACHER GRANTS WHICH AWARDS GRANTS TO AREA TEACHERS TO HELP THEM IMPROVE THEIR CLASSROOM EFFORTS. NOW, THERE BE IT RESOLVED THAT MAYOR ZOLLMAN DOES HEREBY RECOGNIZE THE SEBASTOPOL ROTARY CLUB 100th ANNIVERSARY.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CARTER. IF THERE IS SOMEONE FROM ROTARY
THAT WOULD WANT TO COME UP, WE WILL SHAKE HANDS AND PRESENT THE PROCLAMATION. THANK YOU. ALWAYS A GREAT WAY TO START MEETINGS. WE HAVE TO MOVE RIGHT ALONG TO STATEMENTS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. I WANT TO LOOK TO MY RIGHT WITH MY COLLEAGUES, TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY.
AND TO MY LEFT. SEEING NONE, WE WILL PROCEED OVER TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. MARY?
THANK YOU, MAYOR, AS GESTATED, THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE PUBLIC FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, IT IS A TWO-MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WILL GET HER
CHAMBERS FIRST AND THEN OUT TO ZOOM, SO IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.
THANK YOU, MOVING ALONG TO OUR CONSENT CALENDAR. THE FIRST OF WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 6, 2025.
THE SECOND ONE, APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, SPECIAL MEETING CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF MAY 12, 2025. NUMBER THREE, APPROVAL OF LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR SB 346 DURAZO LOCAL AGENCIES. AS FOR THE
TRANSIT OCCUPANCY TAX AND A SHORT TERM, AND THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL FACILITATOR. THERE IS NO FISCAL IMPACT WITH THAT OR THE TWO BEFORE THAT. AND NUMBER FOUR, RESOLUTION DECLARING WEEDS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATE. AND THERE IS NO FISCAL IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM. TURNING TO MY RIGHT TO SEE IF ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WOULD LIKE TO PULL ANY ITEMS. SEEING NONE, TO MY LEFT. COUNCILMEMBER CARTER.
I JUST HAVE A QUESTION, IF I DON'T UNDERSTAND SOME OF THESE CONSENT ITEM THINGS, AND I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. I DON'T EATABLE THEM, I JUST WOULD LIKE SOME MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THEM. WHAT DO I DO?
IF IT IS A SIMPLE QUESTION, WE CAN ADDRESS IT WITHOUT PULLING IT. BUT IF IT'S GOING TO BE A LONGER CONVERSATION WE SHOULD ALL THE ITEM TO DISCUSS.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS? SO MOVE.
IN QUEUE. IS THERE A SECOND?
THIS IS JUST ON THE AGENDA ITEMS. THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE PUBLIC COMMENT.
THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION TO APPROVE? IF NOT I WILL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A SECOND.
I CAN SECOND.
THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. ROLL CALL?
SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER MAURER AND SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR McLEWIS TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR.
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON? COUNCILMEMBER MAURER? VICE MAYOR McLEWIS? MAYOR ZOLLMAN? PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
CARRIES, WE HAVE NONE. MOVING ALONG TO THE FIRST OF OUR REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS. THIS IS THE DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF ACTION PLAN FOR CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES. ITEM IS TO REVIEW AND
CONSIDER THE ACTION PLAN TIED TO THE CITY COUNCIL'S ESTABLISHED GOALS AND PRIORITIES. ITEM INCLUDES PROPOSED ACTION PLANNING, WHICH ARE ADOPTED THE GOLDEN PRIORITIES FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR. THESE ARE FOR JUNE OF 2026. THERE IS $1.2 MILLION WE PUT IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET COMING BACK IN A HOLE IN JUNE FOR THE ENTIRE COUNCIL CONSIDERATION. SOME OF THESE GOALS HAVE ALREADY BEEN INCORPORATED INTO IT. 51 TOTAL GOALS, OF THOSE THERE ARE 19 THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO GET DIRECTION FROM THE
COUNCIL, WHETHER TO DIRECT THOSE GOALS BE PLACED, DIRECTED BACK TO THE
BUDGET COMMITTEE TO INCLUDE THOSE ESTIMATES OF THE GOALS INTO THE
BUDGET FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR, OR TO GET MORE INFORMATION AND BRING THOSE I WAS BACK AT REVIEW. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION AS WE GO THROUGH EACH OF THOSE ITEMS. YOU WILL SEE THAT SOME OF THOSE ITEMS ARE LINED OUT. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE GOAL HAS BEEN ILLUMINATED. THAT JUST MEANS THAT THE GOAL HAS HAD NO
BUDGET IMPACT OR HAS ALREADY BEEN INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET TO BE DISCUSSED IN THE JUNE BUDGET HEARINGS. IF THERE'S ANY
QUESTIONS WE CAN ADDRESS THEM IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH THE SLIDES, IF YOU CAN JUST GO ME A MINUTE TO SHARE. CAN THE COUNCIL SEE THAT? I ALSO HAVE RENTED COPIES AT THE DAIS. AS I JUST SAID, TONIGHT ACTION
IS TO REVIEW THE ACTION PLAN FOR THE GOALS AND PRIORITIES, AND THEN TO
CONSIDER THE RECOMMENDATION FOR BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS FOR THOSE ITEMS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN YET PLACED INTO THE UPCOMING FISCAL BUDGET.
THIS IS NOT THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET OR THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET
FOR THOSE ITEMS, THIS IS JUST DIRECTION TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER THOSE ITEMS IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET. AND THEN THERE IS TWO
GOALS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS REMOVING, THEY WERE PART OF THE SEPTEMBER GOALS. THEY WERE NOT BUDGETED FOR PREVIOUSLY, WE ARE NOT
RECOMMENDING THAT THEY GET BUDGETED FOR UPCOMING, AND AS WE GO THROUGH THE MALL WE WILL LET YOU KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE. SO, AS I JUST STATED, TONIGHT'S ITEM, THERE ARE 30 ITEMS THAT STAFF IS PROPOSING THAT
ARE CURRENTLY WITHIN THE BUDGET, AND AGAIN, I KNOW I'M GOING TO REPEAT MYSELF THROUGH THIS, BUT I WANT TO MAKE MYSELF REALLY CLEAR. THESE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE UPCOMING PROPOSED BUDGET. AS WE GO
THROUGH THEM YOU WILL SEE THAT THESE ARE LINED OUT BECAUSE THERE IS NO
BUDGET IMPACT, AS I GESTATED, TWO ITEMS HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN THAT WE GO
THROUGH THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND REMOVING AS WE DON'T HAVE A
PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THEM AND WE DON'T RECOMMEND IS A PRIORITY AT THIS TIME, AND THE GOALS. AND WE WILL BE GOING THROUGH THE 19 ITEMS THAT DO
NOT HAVE THE BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THEM OR MAY HAVE A BUDGET
ASSOCIATED WITH THEM BUT HAS NOT BEEN PLACED IN THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR. SO, RIGHT NOW, ON GOAL NUMBER ONE AS A COMMUNITY VITALITY, THE
FIRST ITEM THAT WE WOULD LIKE DIRECTION ON IS THE LABYRINTH
CONVERSATION, THAT IS THE GOAL, BACK IN APRIL WE PUT THIS INTO THE GOAL IT WAS A $5000 CONSIDERATION, THERE WAS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM COUNCILMEMBER MAURER WHO PROVIDED , OR PRESENTED THIS ITEM. BASED
UPON THAT WE WORKED WITH PUBLIC WORKS, AS WELL AS WE HAVE NOT WORKED WITH A DESIGNER YET, BUT WE WORKED WITH PUBLIC WORKS, A $6000 COST FOR MATERIALS AS WELL AS 25 HOURS OF PUBLIC WORKS TIME. THIS HAS NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR. SO THIS WOULD BE AN ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION, TO BE PLACED IN THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR.
AND I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER MAURER HAS A COMMENT.
THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO HAVE A CLARIFICATION IN TERMS OF OUR BUDGET, I'M ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. SO I CAN GET THE LAST CHECK, THE LAST WE DISCUSSED THIS, WE WERE DOING PRETTY GOOD. WE WERE ABLE TO SET ASIDE 300 THOUSAND. AND IN THE BUILDINGS FUND, WE HAD A 70,000 IN THE POSITIVE. IS THAT STILL CORRECT, OR HAS THAT CHANGED?
I'M GOING TO CLARIFY WITH OUR DIRECTOR, BUT I BELIEVE WE ARE AT 190 IN THE SURPLUS RIGHT NOW. BUT THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THIS. WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, THE BUDGET, IT WASN'T THAT. AND WE WENT THERE AND LOOKED AT ITEMS, AND GOT MORE ACCURATE. 190,000 RIGHT NOW.
FANTASTIC. THAT'S GREAT NEWS. I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE IN TERMS OF THAT. THAT IN TERMS OF THE LABYRINTH, I DID HEAR FROM THE DESIGNER TODAY AND I DID RECHECK HER PROPOSAL. THE PROPOSAL WAS MADE, IT'S AN EIGHT-MONTH-OLD PROPOSAL, SHE ALSO INCLUDED IN AS LEADER OF 656.
SO SHE KIND OF ALREADY INCLUDED THAT POTENTIAL FOR COSTS GOING UP AT THE TIME. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. AND ALSO THAT SHE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE FINE, SHE HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH IT. I WORKED WITH WEBSTER AND
THE DESIGNER, SO I HEARD BACK FROM OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR AND OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR WHO BOTH CONFIRMED THAT THE SITE PROPOSED IS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.
WE WOULD GO TO THE ITEMS WITH ACTION ITEMS AND GO THROUGH IT AT THAT POINT.
THANK YOU. THE SECOND ITEM WAS EVENT SPONSORSHIP. THIS DOES NOT NEED ANY ACTION, THIS IS SOMETHING WE CURRENTLY DO. SO YOU WILL SEE THAT IT IS LINED OUT. THE NEXT ITEM IS THE GOAL OF PUBLIC ART AND UPDATING THE CITY WEBSITE AND LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT. WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH
GREAT AND ON THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT INFORMATION, THAT HAS ALSO BEEN REQUESTED FOR A $3000 FOR AN ART MURAL THAT WOULD HONOR THE POMO . IT IS NOT IN THE BUDGET AT THE TIME, SO THIS WOULD BE AN ACTION THAT COMES BACK AT THE END FOR CONSIDERATION. THE NEXT ITEM IS FOR GRAFFITI, THIS IS IN THE PUBLIC WORKS BUDGET, IT IS LINED OUT. THIS IS AN ONGOING STAFF ITEM. THE NEXT ITEM WE WILL NEED DISCUSSION UPON IS
ACTIVITIES, HOLIDAY EVENTS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
AND PUBLIC WORKS TO WORK WITH THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO REVIEW AND DISCUSS PLANS FOR POTENTIAL HOLIDAY EVENTS.
THERE IS NO BUDGET CURRENTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THIS YET INTO THE BUDGET, AND WE DO NOT HAVE COST ESTIMATES YET. IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOUT HAVING THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN DONE FIRST.
SO THAT WILL COME BACK FOR DISCUSSION, WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO INCLUDE ANY FUNDING. AT THE END. NEXT ONE IS A GRANT WRITER. WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO SONOMA STATE, SANTA ROSA JC. THERE ARE CAREERS, THERE IS
NO OFFICIAL GRANT WRITING COURSE, BUT THEY SAID THERE COULD POTENTIALLY BE STUDENTS THAT MAY BE INTERESTED IN IT. I HAVE NOT HEARD
BACK FROM THEM, BUT THIS WILL BE ONGOING, SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT
SINCE THERE IS NO BUDGET FOR THIS, WE LIGHTED OUT, BUT WE WILL
CONTINUALLY SEEK RANT WRITERS AND SEE IF THERE ARE VOLUNTEERS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE THE GRANT WRITER. SO THAT'S IT FOR GOAL ONE. SO, GOAL TWO IS THE PUBLIC SAFETY. THE FIRST ONE, YOU WILL SEE LINED OUT, IT EXPLORES WAYS TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS. THIS, THERE IS A $40,000 ALLOCATED WITHIN THE UPCOMING BUDGET FOR THE WEST COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES, THAT THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE. AGAIN, WE
HAVE LINED THROUGH IT, BECAUSE IT IS IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FULL DISCUSSION COMING BACK IN JUNE BUDGET HEARINGS. THE NEXT ONE IS TO PURSUE NO ADDITIONAL COSTS OR LOW-COST SOLUTIONS TO HOMELESSNESS. THIS
IS ALSO LINED OUT, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE COUNCIL LIAISON AND STAFF TO WORK
TOGETHER TO SEE IF THERE'S AN ACTION PLAN TO COME UP, SO THERE'S NO FUNDING REQUIRED FOR THAT AT THIS TIME. THE NEXT ITEM IS NUMBER THREE, TO REVISIT INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE BACKUP CITY EMERGENCY SYSTEMS. WE HAVE PROPOSED THIS IN THE UPCOMING FISCAL BUDGET, AS WELL. THERE'S A $20,000 IN THE CIP FOR THE STUDY, AS WELL AS A 130 FOR THE ACTUAL TEMPORARY FIX FOR THE EMERGENCY OPERATION CENTERS. THAT, AGAIN, IS
WITHIN THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT'S GOING TO COME BACK WITH IN JUNE FOR DISCUSSION. THE NEXT ONE IS THE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN. THIS IS ALSO LINED OUT, YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE IS A BUDGET OF $50,000, 40,000 FOR THE EOC ASSESSMENT, DOWN AT THE POLICE STATION, AND $10,000 FOR THE UPDATE OF OUR HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN. SO THAT IS WITHIN THE UPCOMING BUDGET. THE NEXT ONE IS A DISCUSSION THAT THE COUNCIL WILL HAVE THE END, REGARDING THE COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM.
THERE'S TWO ISSUES TO THIS. ONE IS THE NO-COST TRAINING, SO THERE IS NO BUDGET FOR THAT FOR THE COUNTY TO PROVIDE THE TRAININGS. THE SECOND ONE IS WE DID RECEIVE A REQUEST THROUGH GROUP TO HAVE $2700 SET ASIDE FOR THE REQUEST. THERE IS MORE INFORMATION THAT NEEDS TO BE ON THIS
ITEM, SO THE COUNCIL CAN DETERMINE IF THEY DO WANT TO SET ASIDE IN OR IF YOU WANT MORE INFORMATION TO COME OUT. SO THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AT THE END OF THIS ITEM. NEXT WAS THE COALITION OF HOUSING, KEEPING THE COUNTY REVIEWING NONPROFIT OR CHANGE AGENCIES. THIS IS ALSO LINED OUT BECAUSE THIS IS NOT REQUIRED ANY TYPE OF BUDGET. THIS IS STAFF SIMON COUNCIL LIAISON. SO WE WILL WORK TOGETHER ON THAT. THE NEXT ONE IS ALSO LINED THROUGH. KEEPING DRUGS OUT OF TOWN. DRUG ENFORCEMENT EXCHANGE. THIS IS NOW CURRENTLY BEING DONE BY A POLICE DEPARTMENT AS FAR AS FOOT PATROLS. TRYING TO DO EDUCATION AS THEY ARE WALKING THROUGH. SO THIS IS GOING TO BE PART OF THEIR NORMAL BUDGET.
THANK YOU.
THE NEXT ONE IS GOAL THREE, CITY INFRASTRUCTURE. YOU WILL SEE THE
SUSTAINABLE GRANT TRANSPORTATION LINED OUT, THAT IS IN THE CURRENT BUDGET. THERE IS A GRANT MATCH THAT WE HAVE, THERE IS 27,602 PAY FOR THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE, AND OUR MATCH IS THE ESTIMATED EXPENSES OF 3000. SO WE HAVE 24,000 LEFT IN THE BUDGET THAT IS CURRENTLY BUDGETED. THE NEXT ONE IS POTHOLES AND STREET RESURFACING. THERE'S $500,000 IN THE CIP, SO THAT IS WHY YOU WILL SEE THAT WHEN LINED OUT, AS WELL. THAT IS IT FOR THE BUDGET DISCUSSION WHEN IT COMES BACK FOR THE CIP JUNE 3rd. THE NEXT ONE IS THE SAME, WASTE WATER PIPES, INFRASTRUCTURE MASTER PLAN. THERE IS $100,000 APPROVED IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AND 157,000 IN THE CIP. THAT IS ANOTHER ITEM THAT IS IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. THE NEXT ONE IS COUNCIL
DISCUSSION, AT THE END THERE IS A STORM DRAIN PLAN REMOVER OF SILT FROM CALDER CREEK PIPELINE. IT'S GOING TO COST ESTIMATED AT 200,000 FOR THE DESIGN AND 2 MILLION FOR THE DREDGING WORK. THIS IS NOT WITHIN THE BUDGET. SO THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD LIKE TO
DIRECTED BACK TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO LOOK TO SEE IF WE WANT TO PUT
THAT DESIGN INTO IT THE NEXT IS FOR PHASE ONE OF THE NATURALIZATION OF CALDER CREEK AND IVES PARK. IT IS GOING TO TAKE A WHILE BEFORE WE KNOW
IF WE GET THE GRANT, SO WE WILL WAIT AND SEE IF WE HEAR FROM THAT AND BRING IT BACK SOONER THAN THAT. THERE IS NO BUDGET FOR THIS, WHICH IS WHY YOU WILL SEE IT IS LINED OUT. AND IF I'M GOING TOO FAST, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. WELL FOUR UPDATES, YOU WILL SEE THAT IT IS LINED OUT. THERE IS NO BUDGET FOR IT AT THIS TIME AS WE ARE STILL IN LITIGATION. SO I WOULD
RECOMMEND THIS ONE COMING BACK ONCE WE HAVE MORE DEFINITIVE INFORMATION ON THAT. THE CYCLE ON THE BIKE LANES AND THE PLANNED CYCLE TWO, WE DON'T HAVE MONEY SET ASIDE FOR THIS ONE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE CALL FOR PROJECTS WILL BE COMING OUT UNTIL THE FALL OF 2025. SO WE
CAN REVIEW IT AT THAT TIME, OR THE COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER SETTING IT ASIDE. BUT BASED ON STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THEY WOULD LIKE TO WAIT UNTIL THE CALL HAS COME OUT TO SEE WHAT IS ELIGIBLE. THE NEXT ONE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IS EI FD. AS YOU ARE AWARE WE HAVE BEEN IN THE PROCESS, WE DON'T KNOW THE FUTURE COST RIGHT NOW. WE ARE STILL DOING THE PHYSICAL ANALYSIS. THE COUNTY WILL BE LOOKING AT THIS AT ONE OF THEIR MEETING IN JUNE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. SO WE WILL BE BRINGING THAT BACK
AFTER WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION BASED UPON WHAT THE COUNTY DECISION IS IN JUNE. THE NEXT ONE IS THE A.D.A. WALKWAY AND IVES PARK. WE DID PLACE THIS INTO THE CIP BUDGET, WHICH YOU WILL SEE HAS BEEN LINED THROUGH. THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE IVES PARK MASTER PLAN, AND IT IS GOING TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE A.D.A. ISSUES IN IVES PARK WITH HIS WALKWAY. THE NEXT ONE IS A DUPLICATE WITH NUMBER THREE ABOVE, WHICH IS WHY WE LINED OUT THE WATER ZERO MASTER PLAN. HOWEVER, THERE IS A CALL
FOR THE CITY BUILDING PLAN, THERE IS NO FUNDING SET ASIDE FOR THIS THE CITY BUILDINGS ASSESSMENT. SO THOSE WILL BE A CONVERSATION AT THE END
OF THIS ITEM, WHETHER OR NOT TO INCLUDE ANY FUNDING IN THE BUDGET FOR THAT. GOAL NUMBER FOUR IS THE HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONS.
ACHIEVING STAFFING AND PROGRAM TARGETS THAT MATCH STANDARDS. YOU
WILL SEE THAT THIS IS LINED OUT, THERE IS NO BUDGET AS THIS WILL BE ONGOING. WE LIKE TO DO TRANSITIONS, CONSOLIDATION, AS PERSONNEL DEPART AND GET PROMOTED. SO THIS WILL BE ONGOING, SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET IS AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE POSITIONS ARE. SO WE WILL CONTINUE TO BRING THESE FORWARD ONCE WE KNOW MORE. THE CITY COUNCIL PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES HANDBOOK, THIS IS ONGOING, AS WELL. THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, THIS IS JUST STAFF TIME. THIS NEXT ONE IS
THE ONE I AM RECOMMENDING THAT WE CONSIDER, AGAIN, IT WILL BE AT THE END THAT THIS IS A MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF FINANCIAL PRACTICES. IT WAS GOING TO BE A REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT PRACTICES. WAS NOT BUDGETED IN
SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR, AND WE HAVE NOT PROPOSED A BUDGET IT WOULD THIS YEAR. WE DON'T THINK IT'S A NEED AT THIS TIME, SO THAT AN ITEM WE WILL BE RECOMMENDING AT THE END TO REMOVE. RFP FOR HR MANAGEMENT, THERE IS NO BUDGET FOR DOING RFPS. WE ARE CONSIDERING BRINGING BACK
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RFPS THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH THREE YEARS, FOUR YEARS, WE HAVE NOT DECIDED YET. BUT THAT WILL BE COMING BACK IF THERE IS NO COST TO THE ART IS FOR CONTRACTS. THE NEXT ONE IS TO AVOID THE BUILD A REMEDY. NO BUDGET REQUIRED FOR THIS, AS THIS CAN BE DONE WITH STAFF TIME. THAT IS WITHIN THE STAFF DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET. SAME THING WITH THE HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND THE PARTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THIS
IS ALL BEING DONE WITH EITHER A GRANT OR WITHIN STAFF TIME, SO THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THE SCHOOL. THE NEXT ONE WAS FROM A PREVIOUS,
WHICH IS TO EVALUATE THE PLACEMENT OF THE SMART GUV PERMITTING SYSTEM. THIS IS NOT BUDGETED AT THIS TIME, STAFF IS NOT LOOKING TO REVIEW
IT AT THIS TIME, BUT IT'S A COUNCIL DECISION WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO CONSIDER OTHER PROGRAMS. SAME THING WITH ITEM BELOW IT, WHICH IS THE CIP SOFTWARE. LOOKING TO WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD REPLACE THAT SOFTWARE, WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING IT THIS YEAR. BUT IT IS A CONSIDERATION ONCE WE LOOK AT OUR AUDIT. THAT IS WHY YOU WANT TO POSTPONE THESE TWO ITEMS. NEXT IS RESTORING PUBLIC TRUST. THIS SHOULD BE AN ONGOING EVERYDAY ITEM. WE ARE ENSURING THAT WE ARE INCORPORATING
THAT WITHIN OUR ONGOING EVERYDAY ITEM BY BETTER COMMUNICATION, GETTING MORE INFORMATION OUT OF THE PUBLIC. ANYWAYS THAT WE CAN HELP
GET MORE INFORMATION OUT THERE, WE ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS INCLUDED IN ANYTHING THAT WE DO. MOVING FORWARD. THE I.T. AUDIT WHICH I JUST DISCUSSED, WE HAVE SUBMITTED RFPS, WE ARE WAITING FOR RESPONSES.
ONCE WE HAVE THOSE WE WILL BRING THOSE BACK, WHETHER OR NOT TO MOVE FORWARD. THE NEXT ONE IS ONE THAT WAS ALSO A GOAL, OH.
WE CAN FOLLOW ALONG.
PAGE 16 AND 24. SORRY. YEAH, I'M SORRY.
WHICH NUMBER IS IT?
PAGE 16 OF 24, SORRY, I JUST WENT PAST IT. SORRY, PAGE 15 OF 24, NUMBER 11.
PAGE 16 AND 24 IN THE RED, BOTTOM LEFT.
IT WOULD BE ONLINE, IF THAT'S NOT GOING THROUGH WOULD BE ONLINE. I CAN GO SLOWER. CAN YOU SEE IT ON THIS SCREEN?
YEAH. THAT IS PAGE 16 OF 24, DOWN IN RED ON THE BOTTOM LEFT COLUMN.
MINE IS 15 OF 24, NUMBER 11, THE EVALUATION OF THE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. THIS IS
IT'S IN YOUR PRESENTATION. IT DID NOT GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH? YEAH, IT IS THE SLIDE DECK.
PAGE 15 OF 24, NUMBER 11, THE EVALUATION OF THE RECORDS MANAGEMENT.
IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT, AT THE VERY END.
YEAH, IT'S AT THE VERY END.
OKAY, WE ARE ON PAGE 15 OF 24. IT IS NUMBER 11, WHICH IS THE EVALUATION OF THE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. THIS IS BASICALLY FOR THE CITY TO BEGIN THE PROCESS TO GO PAPERLESS. THIS WOULD MEAN SCANNING EVERY DOCUMENT IN EVERY DEPARTMENT. THE INITIAL COST IS $80-$100,000. IT IS TYPICALLY ABOUT 20 TO 30,000 PER DEPARTMENT, BUT AS SOME HAVE MORE RECORDS IT WILL BE A LOT MORE THAN THAT. AND THERE IS ALSO A YEARLY COST TO THIS. I WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THIS. I THINK THAT WE ACCESS OUR RECORDS JUST FINE. WE
HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE WE CAN PULL UP PRA'S AND ANYTHING LIKE THAT WITHOUT TAKING A DETAILED AMOUNT OF TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS. IT WOULD TAKE A LOT OF STAFF TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS, AS WELL. SO THIS
WILL COME BACK FOR CONSIDERATION BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE A RECOMMENDATION TO REMOVE. I DO NUMBER 12, IMPROVING PUBLIC RELATIONS.
THE SHOULD BE ONGOING. WE DO HAVE 50,000 IN THE BUDGET FOR COMMUNITY OUTREACH CONTRACT. THAT IS LINED THROUGH BECAUSE YOU WILL SEE IT IS IN
THE BUDGET, BUT TO GET IT WILL BE COMING THAT FOR THE JUNE CITY COUNCIL HEARINGS. NEXT ONE IS NUMBER 13, WHICH IS SHARED SERVICES. THIS IS
REACHING OUT OTHER CITIES TO SEE IF THERE ARE POSITIONS THAT WE COULD UTILIZE WITHIN OUR CITIES. I HAVE RESHOT OUR LOCAL CITIES AND THERE ARE NONE RIGHT NOW. BUT THIS WILL BE AN ONGOING THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO
REACH OUT TO SEE IF THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES IF WE ARE SHORT ON STAFF OR IF THEY ARE SHORT ON STAFF. THEN WE ARE ABLE TO DO THAT. THE NEXT ITEM IS
THE CROSS TRAINING OF STAFF FOR ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, AND ACTIONS ALSO FROM THE COMP STUDY. SO PART OF IT IS LINED OUT BECAUSE WE ARE DOING
CONSOLIDATION OF DEPARTMENTS, SO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WITH THE
FIRE REORGANIZATION WILL BE COMING DOWN TO CITY HALL, SO THAT WOULD
ALLOW US TO UTILIZE ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF FOR CLERICAL WORK AND ALL THAT. AS PART OF THAT, THEY DID RECOMMEND A $10,000 FOR SCANNING OTHER MAPS. WE DID NOT RECOMMEND IT IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR BECAUSE IT
WOULD STILL NEED TO FALL UNDER A RECORDS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, SO WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT. AND THAT WILL COME BACK AGAIN FOR DISCUSSION AT THE END. GOAL NUMBER FIVE, LONG-TERM FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY. A BALANCED BUDGET. THERE IS NO STAFF TIME TO ADDRESS A
BALANCED BUDGET, IT IS STAFF TIME TO BRING IT FORWARD WITH THE COMMITTEE. SO WE HAVE LINED THIS OUT AS THIS IS A ROUTINE WITHIN OUR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORTING,
AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS DONE QUARTERLY AND CAN BE DONE WITHIN THE STAFF BUDGET, SO THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. THE
MEASURE PRIORITY RESOLUTION THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPTED, THIS WILL BE REVIEWED WITHIN THE BUDGET PROCESS. AGAIN, LINED OUT BECAUSE THERE IS NO STAFF TIME ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. THERE IS NO FINANCIAL RECORD, IT IS BASICALLY KEEPING A REPORT OF HOW THE MEASURE FUNDS ARE USED. ITEM NUMBER FOUR ON PAGE 17 OF 24, THIS IS PUBLISHING REPORTS OF THE BUDGET ILLUSTRATED BUDGET, BASICALLY A BUDGET AT A GLANCE. WE DID A QUICK INITIAL CALCULATION FOR A 12 PAGE BUDGET, ABOUT 5000. FOR 24 PAGES, ABOUT 7000. SO WE CAN DISCUSS MORE ABOUT THAT AT THE END OF THE MEETING. I'M SORRY, AT THE END OF THIS AGENDA ITEM. DIVERSIFY THE CITY REVENUE BASE.
THIS IS, THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED IN THIS. WE WOULD NEED MORE
INFORMATION AS FAR AS WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO DO DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO WE DO NOT HAVE THE COST OF THAT. SO THIS WILL BE ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COME BACK MIDYEAR. THE
NEXT ITEM IS LINED THROUGH, THIS IS UPDATING OUR FINANCIAL POLICIES AND ENSURING IT MEETS REQUIREMENTS. THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, THIS IS STAFF TIME TO MAKE SURE OUR POLICIES ARE DRESSED. NEXT ITEM IS INCREASING THE REVENUE BASE. THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE ITEM YOU JUST SAW.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE COST WOULD BE. WE WANT TO DO AN RFP TO GO OUT AND SEE WHAT THE COSTS IS AND BRING THIS BACK. ANOTHER ITEM THAT
WAS DISCUSSED IS THE UPDATE OF OUR IMPACT FEES, OUR LAST FEE WAS DONE IN 2021. THEY SHOULD, THEORETICALLY, BE DONE EVERY FIVE YEARS. THE COST IS ABOUT 50 TO 70,000. THIS HAS NOT BEEN PLACED IN THE BUDGET, BUT THIS IS A
CONSIDERATION THAT WE WILL NEED TO DISCUSS AT THE END, WHETHER OR NOT TO PUT IT IN OR TO REVIEW IT DURING MIDYEAR. NEXT ITEM IS GRANTS FROM REGIONAL BODIES. THERE IS NO FUNDING ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. THIS IS REALLY
STAFF TIME AND WE ARE GOING TO BE RELYING ON OUR REPRESENTATIVES FROM
THE CITY WHO ARE SITTING ON THESE BODIES AS WELL AS THE COUNCIL TO KEEP UPDATED AS FAR AS WHAT GRANTS ARE AVAILABLE AND PROVIDE THE GRANTS.
WE WILL ALSO BE WORKING REGIONALLY WITH OTHER CITIES, IF THERE IS WAYS FOR US TO DO GRANTS TOGETHER WITH OTHER CITIES. SO WE ARE WORKING ON THAT CURRENTLY. THE NEXT ONE IS REVIEWING ZONING CODES FOR STREAMLINING. THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, JUST THAT TIME.
AND THERE IS FUNDING ALLOCATED WITHIN THE CODE UPDATES AS WELL AS PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THAT IS WITHIN THE BUDGET FOR DISCUSSION. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A REQUEST FOR GROWING BUSINESSES TOGETHER, WHICH IS AN ECONOMIC GARDENING PROGRAM.
IT HAS BEEN ABOUT, IT'S REQUEST FOR $3000, AND IN 28 HOURS OF STAFF TIME. SO
THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION AT THE END AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO PLACE THIS INTO THE BUDGET. AND THEN THE PRESENTATION FROM THE NEW COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANS, STRATEGY AND RESPONSIBILITY. THIS IS ALSO FOR DISCUSSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AGAIN, WITH THAT RFP WE DO NOT HAVE THAT, SO WE WOULD NEED MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. AND THE LAST ONE, AS YOU WILL SEE LINED THROUGH, THE FINALIZATION OF THE BARLOW. WE JUST ADOPTED, THE COUNCIL JUST APPROVED THE BARLOW DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WE
ARE FINALIZING BACK, AND THEN THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE ONCE WE GET THE
DEVELOPMENTS DONE AND RECORDED, THE AGREEMENTS RECORDED, THEIR NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO SUBMIT THE BUILDING PLANS. SO, MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS. COUNCIL, ASK QUESTIONS. THEN WE GOT A PUBLIC
COMMENT AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK AND GO THROUGH THE ITEMS THAT WE
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE DIRECTION ON AND I CAN PULL THOSE UP AS WE GO THROUGH THEM. AND WE CAN VOTE ON THEM, THE DIRECTION TO BE TO RETURN TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR INCLUSION. OR TO DEFER AND WAIT FOR MIDYEAR GETTING MORE INFORMATION.
THANK YOU, THAT WAS AMAZING. ALL THE HARD WORK, MUCH APPRECIATED.
AND YES, THANK YOU FOR THINKING THROUGH THE NEXT STEPS. AT THIS POINT I'M TURNING TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR QUESTIONS.
CAN I ASK FOR PROCESS? IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO GO THROUGH EACH ITEM AND SEE IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS? OTHERWISE WE ARE GOING TO BE ALL OVER THE PLACE. IS THAT HOW YOU ARE WORKING?
DO YOU WANT TO GO FOR EACH ONE, LIKE AS WE LINE THROUGH? THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING. CAN WE HAVE AN ORDERLY WAY? OTHERWISE WE ARE GOING TO BE BOUNCED AROUND ALL OVER THE PLACE.
I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU GO TO REACH GOAL, BUT IF THERE IS QUICK
CONSENSUS THAT IT IS ALREADY IN THE BUDGET, MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A WAY
TO STREAMLINE IT, IF THE COUNCIL IS ACCEPTING OF THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN LINE THROUGH CURRENTLY IN THE BUDGET, THAT 1.2, WE CAN JUST GO THROUGH EACH GOAL AND HAVE THE ITEMS IN DISCUSSION.
THAT SOUNDS GOOD. GO AHEAD.
NO, YOU GO.
I WAS GOING TO SAY MAYBE WE COULD GO TO THE BLUE ONES, AND AS WE HIT
THE GREEN ONES OR THE HIGHLIGHTED ONES WE CAN HAVE QUESTIONS, BECAUSE I HAVE GOT A QUESTION FOR EACH. SO THAT MIGHT BE CHAOTIC, TO ALL GO THROUGH THEM AT ONCE.
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
YES, I WANTED TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS GROWING BUSINESSES TOGETHER. WE CAN COME TO THAT WE GET THERE, THAT'S FINE.
KIND OF TALK TO THE PROCESS.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO THROUGH THEM SLOWLY AND KIND OF CHECK THEM OFF, DECIDE IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM. WHY
CAN'T WE JUST GO THROUGH THEM IN ORDER INSTEAD OF JUMPING ALL OVER THE BOARD?
THAT'S WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING. THAT MAKES SENSE.
ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT PROCESS? OKAY. CAN YOU TAKE US BACK TO THE TOP?
YES, I JUST WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION. ARE WE DISCUSSING THE ONES THAT WE
HAVE ALREADY PROPOSED TO BE IN THE BUDGET, THAT WILL BE COMING BACK FOR THE BUDGET HEARINGS ON JUNE 3rd AND JUNE 17th? SO THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WE HAVE LINED THROUGH THAT WE AND THROUGH.
SO, SINCE THREE OF US ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS, I THINK WE SHOULD AT LEAST SAVE THEM AND SEE IF WE HAVE SOME FEEDBACK ON THEM. BECAUSE
EVEN THOUGH THE BUDGET COMMITTEE HAS REVIEWED THEM AND MADE RECOMMENDATION, THIS IS NEW TO US. AND THEY MIGHT BE A PRIORITY TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE HAS TO HEAR ABOUT.
I WAS THINKING, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD WAS THOSE THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN LINED OUT WERE ALREADY IN THE BUDGET. THAT'S GOING TO COME BACK, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. THE BUDGET HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED. STAFF HAS PUT
INFORMATION INTO THE BUDGET PREVIOUS TO THE GOALS, SOME OF THESE GOALS HAVE BEEN REFLECTED OF STAFF'S PRIORITIES. AND THE ONES THAT ARE IN
THERE, WE CAN GO THROUGH THERE IF YOU DON'T WANT THEM INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. WE WOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE IF THE COUNCIL IS, WE CAN GO TO THE ONES LINED OUT, IF THAT IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL.
THAT'S FINE BY ME.
WE WILL GO FROM THE START. LET ME GO BACK. AND I WILL GRAB IT. JUST FOR A SECOND.
YES, SORRY.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT WE ARE STILL ASKING QUESTIONS, RIGHT? YES, WE ARE NOT MAKING DECISIONS. WE ARE GOING TO ASK QUESTIONS AND
THEN WE WILL GOT A PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THEY WILL COME BACK TO GET DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL. LET ME DO A SHARED SCREEN REALLY QUICK SO WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. OKAY. THE FIRST ONE IS THE LABYRINTH.
QUESTIONS?
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
DO WE HAVE AN AVERAGE COST WITH A LABOR IS? IT SAYS 25 HOURS BUT THERE IS NO AVERAGE. AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT REALLY EQUATES TO IN SPENDING. AND NUMBER TWO, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IF WE'VE GOT MONEY IN OUR ART IN LIEU FEE THAT THIS COULD POSSIBLY BE COVERED BY.
SO, I HAVE A PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR THEY CAN ADDRESS THE STAFF TIME. AND THEN WE WILL ANSWER HOW MUCH MONEY IS IN IT.
I HAVE A QUESTION ATTACK ON THE BACK, SO YOU MIGHT AS WELL. WHEN WE
ORIGINALLY VOTED ON THIS IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS MONEY WAS GOING TO BE DONATED, AND THERE WOULD BE NO COST TO THE BUDGET. SO NOW
I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYONE TALK ABOUT THAT, SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THE DONATIONS WORK GIVEN. BECAUSE I VOTED ON IT BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO COST TO OUR BUDGET.
CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MIC? IS IT ON?
HELLO? FOR THE LABOR COST ESTIMATE, IT IS TWO LABORERS, BASICALLY, FOR 25 HOURS. ABOUT A DAY AND A HALF OF MOVING THE TRACTOR BACK AND FORTH.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE BILLING RATES ARE ON LABORERS FOR THE CITY.
HOW MUCH DO THEY MAKE PER HOUR APPROXIMATELY, JUST AN AVERAGE SO WE CAN DO THE MATH?
LIKE $50 AN HOUR.
OKAY, THANK YOU.
AND VICE MAYOR, YOU HAD THE ADDITIONAL QUESTION ABOUT DONATIONS? CAN YOU LET US KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY IS IN THE PUBLIC ARTS IN LIEU FUND? I'M LOOKING IT UP RIGHT NOW.
I REMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER MAURER SAYING THAT THIS WOULD BE COVERED THROUGH DONATIONS, THAT IS WHAT I RECALL. SO I WONDERED IF THAT ACTUALLY CAME TO FRUITION.
IT STILL MAY COME THROUGH. IN TERMS OF WHAT I HAVE HERE, IT'S JUST THE ACQUISITIONS OF HOLDERS AS TO SURROUND THE AREA.
I MEAN, I DON'T NEED ALL THE DETAILS, I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF IT'S COVERED BY DONATIONS OR NOT.
UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME.
I CAN ANSWER THAT. MONEY WOULD HAVE TO BE RAISED. SO THE COMMUNITY
CENTER HAS AGREED TO BE A PLACEHOLDER FOR MONEY, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE RAISED. IF WE ARE GOING TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION IT HAS TO COME FROM THE COMMUNITY. YEAH.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MARY OR OTHER STAFF?
AND THE ART IN LIEU FOR NEXT YEAR PROJECTED IS ONLY $1000 LEFT IN THAT FUND?
SINCE WE ARE ADOPTING THIS PROCESS, WOULD YOU SUGGEST DOING THUMBS UP THUMBS DOWN?
THIS IS JUST QUESTIONS. I WOULD JUST ASK QUESTIONS AND THEN WE WILL GOT A
PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THE MOOD CAN COME BACK AND DO A VOTE ON THE ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE VOTED ON.
ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE MOVING ON A NUMBER TWO, THEN.
NUMBER TWO IS THE SUPPORTIVE COMMUNITY EVENTS WITH PRODUCTION OF FEES. LAST YEAR IN FY 23 AND 24 THERE WAS ALMOST 15,000 THAT WE DID A REDUCTION OF FEES, AND IN THIS YEAR SO FAR, THERE'S ALMOST 17,000. THESE
FEES COME INDIVIDUALLY TO THE CITY COUNCILMEMBER AS WE GET REQUESTS,
SO THAT WAS WHY WE LINE THROUGH IT, BECAUSE THIS IS A ROUTINE STAFF ACTION THAT COMES FORWARD.
YEAH, SO IT SAYS WHAT WE HAD, DID YOU, I DON'T THINK I HEARD YOU SAY WHAT IS IN THE BUDGET PROPOSED FOR 2526.
AS FAR AS REVENUE FROM THERE? WHAT WE HAVE WAIVED SO FAR? NO, SO OKAY, YOU GOT AN AVERAGE, 23-24, 24-25, I ASSUME WE HAVE A LINE ITEM IN 25-26 THAT IS ANTICIPATING.
NO, WE DON'T HAVE A LINE ITEM.
SO WE HAVE A ZERO ESTIMATE AND THEN WE JUST KIND OF WINGED ALONG THE WAY?
WELL, WE DON'T KNOW WHO IS GOING TO REQUEST FOR WAIVERS. WE CAN
ASSUME, BUT UNTIL SOMEONE ASKS FOR A REQUEST FOR WAIVER FEE, THAT IS WHEN WE KNOW WHEN SOMEONE WANTS THE REQUEST.
OKAY, SO WE ARE NOT SETTING ASIDE ANY BUDGET FOR THIS. OKAY, THANKS.
WITH NO OTHER QUESTIONS, REMOVING ON A NUMBER THREE?
I WANTED TO SPEAK TO THAT SECOND. OFTEN SOME OF THESE DO NOT HAVE
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, BUT MAYBE IT'S REASONABLE TO EXPECT SOME SORT OF COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, MAYBE WE CAN ADD THIS TO THE BUDGET.
THE COST ASSOCIATED WOULD BE TYPICALLY IF WE HAD STAFF TIME ASSOCIATED. SO THERE'S TWO THAT WE CAN PUT IN THERE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE
TO ADD THAT AMOUNT BUDGET, I KNOW TWO EVENTS THAT HAVE ASKED FOR STAFF TIME. MOST OF THEM ARE THE FEES THAT THEY ASKED FOR THE WAIVERS FOR. WE DO REQUIRE AND WE DON'T WAIVE THE DEPOSITS, SO IN CASE THEY DAMAGE THE PARK, OR THE EVENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE DO HAVE THAT.
BUT WE COULD DO A SET-ASIDE FOR STAFF TIME BASED UPON THE AVERAGE OF THE LAST TWO YEARS.
YEAH, AND THE WE CAN THINK ABOUT HOW IT IMPACTS THEIR NORMAL BUDGET, BECAUSE IT MAY NOT IMPACTED THAT MUCH. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE'S SAYING.
OKAY, THANK YOU. THE NEXT ONE IS NUMBER THREE, AND THIS IS THE POMO PUBLIC ART, AND UPDATING THE CITY WEBSITE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT. THERE IS A REQUEST FOR $3000 ART MURAL TO HONOR THE POMO, AND THAT COULD BE THE ART IN LIEU . BUT WE DO NOT KNOW THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT PUT IT
INTO THE --
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON.
I WOULD SUGGEST WHEN I WAS HEARING THIS AND VOTED FOR IT
ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT WAS INCLUDING AT OUR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THE WEBSITE, AND THE ART FOR THE NEW HOTEL. I WONDERED IF THAT WOULD BE AN APPROACH OF WHERE THE 3000 CAME FROM. BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT IN OUR MURAL.
WE DID NOT, IT CAME UP IN CONVERSATION ABOUT SINCE WE WOULD BE
HONORING THE POMO, AS FAR AS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS, YES, WE ARE LOOKING INTO DOING THAT. SAME THING WITH THE WEBSITE, I'M GOING THROUGH THE TRIBES TO GET THEIR INPUT, AS WELL. SO WE ARE STILL WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM THEM. BUT THIS IS JUST A CONSIDERATION IF WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING TO HONOR ON TOP OF THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT IN THE WEBSITE.
SO WE WILL COME BACK TO SAY YES OR NO.
THANKS. MOVING ON TO NUMBER FOUR.
SAID THIS IS THE CLEANUP OF GRAFFITI. THIS IS IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THEY HAVE ALLOCATED BASED UPON PAST EXPERIENCES ABOUT HOW MUCH MATERIALS THEY SPEND AS WELL AS ABOUT HOW MANY HOURS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY HAVE ABOUT $550 IN MATERIALS, BUT 200 HOURS IN STAFF TIME
SEEING NO QUESTIONS --
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON HAS A QUESTION. THE NEXT ONE IS WE DID NOT HAVE A BUDGET FOR THIS. THE NEXT ONE IS A FESTIVE ACTIVITIES, HOLIDAYS, EVENTS,
AND THIS IS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND THE PUBLIC
WORKS DIRECTOR TO WORK WITH THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES, THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, TO DISCUSS PLANS FOR ANY TYPE OF UPCOMING HOLIDAY EVENTS. AT
A MINIMUM, WE CAN LOOK AT PUTTING SOME FUNDING IN FOR NEW BANNERS FOR DOWNTOWN, NEW DECORATIONS, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT ALSO A BIGGER SCOPE
ABOUT WORKING TOGETHER, COLLABORATIVE, AND TO SEE WHAT KIND OF EVENTS WE CAN BRING IN FOR THE HOLIDAY, AS WELL.
I WAS THINKING WE COULD DO AN INITIAL PLACEHOLDER IN THE BUDGET, BETWEEN FIVE AND $10,000 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
OKAY, WE WILL COME BACK TO THAT, THIS IS JUST IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM. OKAY. THE NEXT ONE IS THE GRANT WRITER. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY BUDGET IN, FUNDING IN THE BUDGET ALLOCATED. THE LAST TIME WE DID THIS WITH $16,000 AND THAT WAS TWO YEARS AGO. SO WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING PUTTING $16,000 IN THE BUDGET. I AM RECOMMENDING WORKING WITH OUR
COMMITTEES THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE THAT MAY HAVE EXPERTISE ON THE BUDGET. WORKING WITH OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT MAY HAVE EXPERTISE,
AS WELL, WITH THE CITY TO SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME GROUND THAT WAY, AS
WELL AS LATER ON IN THE BUDGET YOU WILL SEE THE ONE ABOUT ORIGINAL
GRANTS DOING THE SAME THING, WORKING WITH OUR COUNCIL LIAISONS AND
APPOINTMENT REPRESENTATIVES AS WELL AS OUR CITY STAFF COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. ANY QUESTIONS? NO? THE NEXT ONE IS TO EXPLORE WAYS TO ADDRESS THE HOMELESSNESS. THIS IS WITHIN THE BUDGET. THERE'S A $40,000
THAT WE HAVE ALLOCATED FOR WEST COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES CONTRACT. AGAIN, NOT TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE BUDGET, THIS IS JUST
WHAT IS IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR TO BE DISCUSSED IN THE JUNE HEARINGS. NO QUESTIONS? NEXT ONE IS TO PURSUE NO ADDITIONAL COST OR LOW COST SOLUTIONS FOR HOMELESSNESS. AGAIN, THIS IS STAFF TIME.
WORKING WITH A COUNCIL LIAISON ON WAYS TO ADDRESS THAT, CREATING SOME TYPE OF ACTION PLAN. NEXT ONE IS TO REVISIT THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE BACKUP OF THE CITY EMERGENCY SYSTEMS. THERE IS FUNDING ALLOCATED THIS YEAR OF $150,000 TOTAL. THIS IS TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE OUR EOC RUNNING IN CASE OF AN EARTHQUAKE, A FLOOD, ALL THAT. THIS WILL HAVE A GENERATOR TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A LICK OF ABILITY, ESPECIALLY WHERE THE EOC IS
LOCATED AND ALL OF OUR COMPUTERS LEFT OFFS, ALL THAT WILL BE DOWN THERE. THERE IS WITHIN THE CIP. THAT I STRESS THE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN. THIS IS THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLANS BEING UPDATED. WILL CONTAIN ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, EVACUATION ROUTES, THINGS LIKE THAT. THERE IS $40,000 ALLOCATED FOR THAT, AS WELL AS THE EOC ASSESSMENT AS TO WHAT EQUIPMENT IS REQUIRED TO BE IN THE EOC. AND THERE IS ALSO REQUIRED TO UPDATE OUR HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN. THERE'S 10,000 IN THE BUDGET FOR THE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE UPDATE.
GREAT.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM AND COUNTY
FREE OFFERINGS, SO CURRENTLY THE COUNTY DOES PROVIDE OFFERINGS FREE, SO THAT HAS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH IT. BUT THE CITY DID RECEIVE A
REQUEST, WHICH WE WILL NEED MORE INFORMATION, BECAUSE WE RECEIVED
REQUESTS FROM ONE BODY, BUT THERE'S A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TEAM THAT WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THIS, AS WELL. BUT WE NEED MORE INFORMATION, ANYWAY. COUNCILMEMBER MAURER HAS A QUESTION.
SO, DID THE POLICE OR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, OR THE COUNTY WEIGH IN ON THESE ANTENNAS THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED?
THIS IS NOT A NEW AGENDA ITEM THAT CAME BACK, THAT WILL COME IF WE ARE
PUTTING FUNDING ASIDE AT THE END OF THIS AGENDA ITEM IN THE COUNCIL WANTS TO PUT THAT, THAT WOULD COME BACK AS AN AGENDA ITEM. SO YES, THIS
IS JUST TO INCLUDE WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO INCLUDE FUNDING FOR THAT, AND THEN WHAT DETAILS WOULD COME BACK AS TO HOW THAT WOULD BE USED.
OKAY, BUT THE QUESTION IS DID THE POLICE OR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE IT IS REQUESTED THAT THIS BE ON THE POLICE BUILDING. SO DID WE HEAR FROM THEM?
I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM THEM. THEY WERE ALL PART OF THE ACTION PLAN, BUT THERE IS NO CONCERN WHERE THIS IS ADDRESSED. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT I HAVE THE CAPTAIN HERE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IT. OR ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS. THIS IS RELATED TO THE RADIOS.
I HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN PART OF THE PROCESS, BUT I AM FAMILIAR WITH MR.
GERALD AND HIS ORGANIZATION, AND TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THE ANTENNA IS,
WITH THE TRANSITION FROM MOVING THE BASE OF OPERATIONS FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT THIS MAKES SENSE. THEY ARE GOING TO NEED THE ANTENNAS. AND IT WILL HELP KEEP OUR VIABILITY DURING AN EMERGENCY SITUATION.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION BECAUSE WE RECEIVE AN EMAIL DAY, I'M ASSUMING WE MEAN THE SAME THING. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
I THINK I WAS JUST --
I DID NOT KNOW WHO IS RIGHT.
I AM INCORRECT ON THAT ONE.
OKAY, THAT'S ALL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON?
OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS LINE THROUGH, NO BUDGET, THE COALITION OF THE HOUSING. KEEPING COUNTY OR REVIEWING WHETHER NONPROFIT OR CHANGE OF THE LEAD AGENCY. THIS IS WITH THE COUNCIL LIAISON ON THE HOMELESS
COALITION AND IT WOULD BE AN ACTION PLAN WITH THE HOMELESS COALITION
TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT, THIS IS MORE OF A COUNCIL LIAISON STAFF ITEM WITH NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH IT. NEXT IS KEEPING DRUGS OUT OF TOWN, DRUG ENFORCEMENT AND NEEDLE EXCHANGE. THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
HAS INCREASED THEIR FOOT PATROLS DOWNTOWN, WITH SAFEWAY, TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES. SO WE ARE NOT REQUIRING ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDING AS THIS IS NOW PART OF THEIR ROUTINE STAFF.
GREAT.
I HAD A QUESTION. I HAD SOMEONE FROM THE PUBLIC CONTACT ME AT ASK ME ABOUT THIS. DOES THAT MEAN, THEY ARE JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF HAVING THAT THERE. BUT THIS IS BASICALLY JUST
WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, JUST THE PLACE THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO THE NEEDLE EXCHANGE SITE? OR I AM TRYING TO ASK UNDERSTAND HOW THEIR FOOT
TRAFFIC ACTUALLY --
SO WE WERE DOING MORE ABOUT THE DRUG ENFORCEMENT AND KEEPING DRUGS OUT OF TOWN. THE NEEDLE EXCHANGE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY ARE
CONTACTED THE PUBLIC WORKS, THERE IS NO LOCATION WITHIN THE CITY THAT WOULD MAKE IT WORK RIGHT NOW. SO IT IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE A NEEDLE EXCHANGE, AS FAR AS ON CITY PROPERTY. THAT IS THE MOST I KNOW ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY REACHED OUT TO PRIVATE
PROPERTIES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING IT ON CITY PROPERTY. IT JUST WON'T WORK ON ANY OF OUR CITY PROPERTIES.
OKAY, THANK YOU. I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO HEAR THAT BECAUSE SOMEONE CONTACTED ME.
THANK YOU.
OKAY. THE NEXT ONE IS SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION, THIS IS UNDERWAY. AS YOU CAN SEE IT IS LINED OUT, AS IT IS IN THE BUDGET. NEXT IS THE POTHOLES AND STREET RESURFACING. WE DID THAT $500,000 IN THE CIP FOR THAT. SO THAT IS
WITHIN THE CIP, WHICH IS WHY YOU SEE IT LINED OUT, BECAUSE IT IS COMING UP IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR DISCUSSION IN JUNE. SAME THING WITH THE WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ZERO MASTER PLAN.
YEAH, CAN I JUST GO BACK? IS THERE REASON BEHIND WHY 500,000 WAS SELECTED TO BE PUT IN THE BUDGET? IS IT A PERCENTAGE, OR --
THE STREETS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S A LIST OF STREAMS THAT ARE
PRIORITY, AND THIS'LL BE COMING BACK FOR THE COUNCIL TO ADDRESS WHICH ONES ARE THE PRIORITY. BUT THEY HAVE A LIST OF THE WORST STREETS. I DON'T
KNOW ABOUT THE PERCENTAGE, BUT WE DO HAVE A PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR HERE TO ADDRESS THAT.
WITH THIS RECOMMEND ABOUT PUBLIC WORKS, THE 500,000? IT SEEMS LIKE A ROUND NUMBER.
IT WAS RECOMMENDED FROM, AS WE ARE GOING TO THE CIP, IT WAS RECOMMENDED FROM STAFF.
YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. 500,000 WILL ADDRESS SOME OF THE NEEDS OUT THERE.
NOWHERE NEAR THE TOTAL NEED. BUT WE ARE PROGRESSING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
I WAS JUST WONDERING, DOES THIS ALIGN WITH THE POLICIES THAT WE CREATED
WHEN WE WERE DOING THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE ARE STARTING TO TALK ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE AND ALL THESE THINGS? I KNOW WE ARE COVERING BUDGET, BUT IS THIS ALSO ALIGNING WITH THE POLICIES THAT WE ADOPTED?
IT IS DEFINITELY ALIGNING WITH THE POLICIES WE ADOPTED, ESPECIALLY WITH THE MEASURE YOU FUNDS.
GREAT.
SO, AGAIN, THE WASTEWATER PIPES INFRASTRUCTURE MASTER PLAN, WE DID HAVE ONE STARTED ALREADY IN THE FISCAL YEAR 24-25. WE HAVE ALSO SAID $157,000 ASIDE IN THE CIP FOR THE SEWERS. SO THAT IS WITHIN THE BUDGET, WHICH IS WHY YOU WILL NOW SEE IT LINED OUT. AND THAT WILL BE COMING BACK IN THE CIP PUBLIC HEARING. THE NEXT ITEM IS THE STORM DRAIN PLAN FOR REMOVAL OF SILT FROM THE ALDER CREEK PIPELINE. THIS IS A MASSIVE UNDERTAKING. AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHERE THEY TYPICALLY FLOODS DOWN BY THE POST OFFICE ANNEX, SO THIS IS ADDRESSING THAT. IT WOULD REQUIRE ABOUT AN ESTIMATE OF A $200,000 DESIGN, AND IT IS ABOUT A $2 MILLION JUST TO CLEAN THE ONE PIPE.
THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE I THINK WE SHOULD REACH OUT TO STATE GRANTS FOR SOMETHING THIS IMPORTANT.
I TOTALLY AGREE. WE ARE REACHING OUT TO SEE WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO ADDRESS THIS TO SEE WHAT IS AVAILABLE.
QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER HINTON ?
SO, IN A QUESTION, WHAT AN INVESTMENT OF THE 200,000 FOR THE DESIGN HELP US SECURE A GRANT? ANY FEEDBACK ON THAT?
I WILL GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS THAT. 200,000 IS REALLY JUST AN ASSESSMENT.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONDITION OF THE PIPELINE IS. IT HAS NOT BEEN ASSESSED IN 25 YEARS. WE NEED TO GET IN THERE. IT'S A CONFINED SPACE, SO
SPECIALIZED PEOPLE HAVE TO GO IN THERE WITH BREATHING APPARATUS AND MY
UNDERSTANDING, IT'S A GOOD MILE STRETCH BETWEEN WHERE IT COMES OUT FROM ASH PARK TO THE OUTFALL BEHIND THE POST OFFICE ANNEX. SO IT'S MORE
OF AN ASSESSMENT TO SEE WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST, AND THEN FROM THERE
WE WILL MAKE IT A DETERMINATION WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN TERMS OF THE PIPELINE, IN TERMS OF THE OUTFALL.
RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER MAURER.
NOW THIS $200,000 NUMBER. YOU CAN BASICALLY PUT AS MUCH MONEY AS YOU WANTED THIS, BUT HOW DID YOU DROP THE NUMBER?
IT IS BUDGETARY. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY QUOTATIONS.
IS THERE SOME WAY TO FIND OUT FOR FREE, YOU KNOW, WILL SOMEBODY TELL
US HOW MUCH THEY MIGHT --
RIGHT NOW WE ARE WORKING WITH A CONTRACTOR, THEY ARE ASSESSING WHAT THE COSTS COULD BE IN TERMS OF LABOR. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
OKAY.
YEAH, IS THIS SECTION OF CALDER CREEK PART OF THE CALDER CREEK PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED A COUPLE YEARS AGO? WHICH, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY IT COULD BE DAYLIGHT IT?
THAT IS NOT PART OF THIS ASSESSMENT. THIS IS REALLY LOOKING AT THE
INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THE PARK WHERE HE GOES INTO THE TUNNEL, AND IN THE OUTFALL WHICH IS BEHIND THE ANNEX.
I UNDERSTAND, BUT IS IT POSSIBLE THAT IT COULD BE DAYLIGHT IT? BECAUSE I
THINK THE PLAN THEY APPROVED A COUPLE YEARS AGO DID ADDRESS THAT SECTION THAT GOES FROM IVES PARK OVER TO THE JOEY DONIA.
RIGHT NOW THE WAY THE PROJECT IS FRAMED AS A MAINTENANCE APPROACH TO IT. WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY LOOKING AT REPLACING THE PIPELINE WITH AN OPEN TRENCH OR OPEN CHANNEL.
JUST TO ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT YOU SAW AS WELL AS I SAW, YES, THERE IS SOME
DAYLIGHTING PLAN IN THE FUTURE FOR THE PLAN THAT GOES AROUND WHERE THE TO RHEA IS. I KNOW YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A MORE IMMEDIATE THING,
AND I QUIT COUNCILMEMBER MAURER IS GETTING AT, SOME KIND OF SYNERGY BETWEEN THE GRANTS AND THIS PROCESS OF REMEDIATING THE AREA. SO THERE MAY BE SOME SYNERGY IN BOTH PROJECTS.
OKAY, OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
MY FOLLOW-UP QUESTION WAS KIND OF GETTING WHERE THEY ARE, BUT IF WE
GOT THE GRANT TO OPEN UP THE DAYLIGHTING, WOULD THAT BE A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE? BECAUSE THIS IS PLUGGED, IS WATER GOING FASTER OR SLOWER? IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE HYDRAULICS. OPEN CHANNEL, OBVIOUSLY YOU WOULD SEE WHAT'S IN THE WAY, AND WE HAD SOME PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE. IF
YOU HAVE A CREEK OBVIOUSLY WOULD SEE ANY DEBRIS IN THERE A WHAT NOT, YOU CAN REMOVE IT IN ADVANCE IF THERE'S ANY FLOODING. BUT IN TERMS OF IF
YOU WANT ATTORNEY FROM A PIPELINE TO A CREEK, THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER KIND OF APPROACH TO ADDRESSING THE SITUATION.
DO YOU RECOMMEND THIS?
I WOULD RECOMMEND A CREEK, BY ALL MEANS. SEE MY KNOW, I'M IN THE 200,000 FOR THE PLAN.
WE DO NEED TO ASSESS THE PIPELINE. IT HAS NOT BEEN LOOKED AT IN ABOUT 25 YEARS. SO IT'S GOOD TO GET DOWN IN THERE AND SEE WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST.
BECAUSE WE EXPERIENCED SEASONAL FLOODING AT THE COASTAL ANNEX. SO IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO GET DOWN IN THERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SING NONE, MARY?
SO I WILL GO TO NUMBER FIVE, WHICH IS THE GRANT APPLICATION, THIS WAS
SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL AND WE ARE ASKING FOR TO BE ON HOLD UNTIL WE HEAR BACK FROM THE GRANT, WHETHER OR NOT WE GET THE GRANT. SO THE NEXT ITEM IS THE ROTARY CENTENNIAL. AGAIN, YOU WILL SEE THAT THIS IS LINED
OUT AS THIS IS DONATIONS FROM THE ROTARY TO UPDATE PARTS OF IVES PARK, THE SNACK SHACK AND AREAS OF HER BY THE LITTLE LEAGUE. THEY WILL BE
BRINGING THEIR PLANS TO THE COUNCIL FOR REVIEW, WE HAVE NOT SEEN THOSE YET. BUT IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS NO FUNDING ASSOCIATED FROM THE CITY.
WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU JUST ANSWERED IT, THEY'RE GOING TO BRING THE
ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION INCLUDING SOME ENHANCEMENTS THAT WERE IN
THE PARK PLAN, AND MAYBE WOULD HAVE, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THEM
SPENDING MONEY THAT WE THEN HAVE TO WORK AROUND IN THE FUTURE, BUT WE LOST OUR ROTARY PERSON TO ASK THAT QUESTION.
AND MY RECOLLECTION WAS THAT WHATEVER THEY COME UP WITH IS GOING TO COME BACK FOR US, FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
THAT'S CORRECT. TO MAKE SURE IT MATCHES THE IVES PARK PLAN THAT THEY
DID HAVE THREE OR FOUR ITEMS THAT ARE IN THERE, ALL THAT WILL BE COMING BACK TO THE COUNCIL ONCE WE REVIEW IT .
GREAT, THANK YOU. PERFECT.
QUESTIONS?
THE NEXT ONE, FOUR, THIS HAS BEEN IN LITIGATION FOR MANY YEARS. WE ARE STILL GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS. I, WE HAVE NO FUNDING SET ASIDE IN THIS YET UNTIL WE GET THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS. SO I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND REVIEWING THIS AT A LATER POINT.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION. WE ARE SETTING FUNDS ASIDE, RIGHT? I THOUGHT
RIVERS, I MEAN, BECAUSE ONLY RAISE THE WATER RATES, THE POINT OF THAT WAS THAT WE ARE SETTING FUNDS ASIDE. IS THAT PART OF THIS? I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR.
I DO NOT THINK WE SET FUNDS ASIDE, I MEAN, WE TALK ABOUT WELL FOUR, THIS IS THE DESIGN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. THE $400,000. BECAUSE IT IS STILL UNDER LITIGATION, WE ARE NOT SURE WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR WHAT YET. BUT I DO AGREE WITH YOU.
SO THE DESIGN BUT NOT THE REPLACEMENT. OKAY. I JUST WANTED UNDERSTAND.
GREAT.
YEAH, THE REPLACEMENT WILL BE MANY MILLIONS.
I KNOW, BUT WE ONLY RAISED THE WATER RATES WE SAID THAT WAS PART OF SO THAT WE CAN REPLACE IT. SO I JUST WANTED TO --
YES, WE ARE STILL IN NEGOTIATIONS AS TO WHO WILL BE, HOW MUCH IT WOULD PAY. SO THAT WILL COME BACK AT A LATER DATE. THE SC TCA FUNDING CYCLE, THE BODEGA AVENUE BIKE LANES, AND THE FUNDING PLAN. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE CALDER PROJECTS WILL COME OUT IN THE FALL, TYPICALLY A 15-20 MATCH. WE WILL REVIEW IT WHEN IT DOES COME OUT TO SEE IF WE CAN PUT
BUDGETS INTO IT, AND AGAIN, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE OR WE ARE GOING TO BE
LOOKING DOOR COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO WORK WITH US ON THE GRANT PLANNING FOR THAT. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? AGAIN, THE CITY HAS BEEN IN THE PROCESS FOR THIS. WE ARE WAITING ON THE FISCAL ANALYSIS, THE COUNTY WILL BE REVIEWING THIS. I BELIEVE IT IS IN JUNE, ONCE THEY MADE THE
DETERMINATION THAT WE WILL BE LOOKING AT IT, WE WILL BE BRINGING IT BACK PROBABLY JULY TIMEFRAME. NEXT IS THE 88 WALKWAY IN IVES PARK. SO WHEN
WE DISCUSSED THE CUSP, WE DISCUSSED THE WALKWAY THERE THAT IS RISING AND FALLING. AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING IN THE CIP THAT WE HAVE 180,000 TO DO FIXES FOR IT, WHILE THAT DOES NOT IMPACT THE IVES PARK PLAN. SO THAT IS OUR REQUEST.
SO, I ASK ABOUT THIS EVERY TIME. HOW MUCH OF THE WALKWAY IS GOING TO BE
FIXED, BECAUSE THE LAST TIME IT WAS JUST A SMALL PORTION, AND A PORTION, AND A PORTION. SO IF WE COULD HEAR HOW MUCH THAT IS GOING TO FIX OF THAT WALKWAY. I ASK IT EVERY YEAR.
YEAH. THE CURRENT PLAN IS TO TAKE IT FROM BASICALLY THE FIRST PHASE, ENDED, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY IN FRONT OF THE POOL ENTRANCE. ALL THE WAY
DOWN TO THE PARKING LOT OF THE COUNTY PARKING LOT THERE FOR THE -- SO, HOW MUCH. I'M SORRY, I'M TRYING TO VISUALIZE IT, BUT BASED ON YOUR KNOWLEDGE HOW MUCH OF THAT, IS THE FULL REPAIR? THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.
YEAH, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME GREAT MODIFICATIONS THAT NEED TO BE DONE. WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN THE FULL DESIGN YET, BUT THERE WILL BE SOME GREAT MODIFICATIONS. AND WE THINK WE CAN DELIVERY WITHIN THE BUDGET AMOUNT.
OKAY, GREAT, THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. SO, THE NEXT ONE, AS I STATED, IT IS A DUPLICATE. IT WAS THE
WATER SEWER MASTER PLAN, HOWEVER, AS PART OF THAT, WHAT WAS NOT DISCUSSED WAS FUNDING FOR THE CITY BUILDING SYSTEMS ASSESSMENT. SO WE
WOULD RECOMMEND EITHER IF WE WANTED TO INCLUDE IN THE CURRENT BUDGET TO DO AN ASSESSMENT, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST WOULD BE.
SO THIS ONE, IN MY REQUEST, WOULD MEAN FURTHER INFORMATION BEFORE WE WANT TO PUT IT IN THE BUDGET.
GREAT, THANK YOU.
OKAY, NEXT ONE IS THE APPROVING OF THE STAFFING, PROGRAM TARGETS THE
MATCH BEST STANDARDS, EFFICIENCY, OPERATIONAL STAFFING EFFECTIVENESS, BUDGET PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT. THIS CAME THROUGH FROM THE STAFFING
ASSESSMENT AS TO IMPROVING OUR PERFORMANCE FOR STAFF AND PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT. WE DON'T PROPOSE ANYTHING IN THE BUDGET
RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, AS I STATED, WE WILL BE LOOKING AT STAFFING THROUGH
ATTRITION, STAFFING THROUGH CONSOLIDATION, AS WE ARE HIRING WE ARE
LOOKING AT THIS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIONS AND HIRING THE RIGHT STAFF FOR THE RIGHT POSITION. SO THERE'S NO BUDGET NEEDED FOR THAT.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE CITY COUNCIL PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES, THIS IS ONGOING. THERE ARE TWO ITEMS THAT WILL BE COMING FOR WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO REGARDING COUNCIL PROTOCOLS. THIS IS NO BUDGET, IT IS STAFF TIME AND THE COMMITTEE. THE NEXT ONE IS THE MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL PRACTICES. THIS IS ONE THAT STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING FOR REMOVAL, IT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS GOALS FOR REVIEW OF FINANCIAL PRACTICES.
WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING IT AT THAT TIME, BECAUSE WE ARE GOING THROUGH OUR I.T. AUDIT AND WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE IT WITHIN THAT. AGAIN, WE RECOMMEND REMOVAL OF THAT ONE. QUESTIONS?
I MEAN, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF FINANCIAL
PRACTICES, BUT BOTH TYPES I AM OKAY WITH NOT INCLUDING IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. IT COULD BE TOO EXPENSIVE FOR THE PROCESSES THAT ARE GOING ON
NOW, BUT IN AN ONGOING SITUATION IT'S ALWAYS GOOD REVIEW YOUR ACCOUNTING PRACTICES.
THAT'S TRUE. AND WE ARE ALSO REVIEWING IT WITH THE FINANCIAL SOFTWARE
VENDOR THAT WE HAD TO SEE WHAT ELSE CAN BE UTILIZED, THAT MAYBE WE ARE NOT AWARE OF. SO WE ARE ALSO WORKING WITH THEM AS WELL TO SEE WHATEVER BETTER FINANCIAL PREMISES WE CAN BE DOING.
DO WE NEED TO DO A THUMBS UP THUMBS DOWN?
THIS WILL BE LATER. QUESTIONS. THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE THE RFP FOR HR MANAGEMENT. AGAIN, NO COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS OTHER THAN STAFF FOR THE RP. WE ARE RECOMMENDING IN THE FALL REVIEWING WHICH CONTRACTS
WOULD GO UP, SO IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO JUST HR, BUT WE WILL BE LOOKING AT OTHER CONTRACTS AS WELL.
YEAH, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS GET REMOVED, BECAUSE WE LOSE TRACK OF IT AND NOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE FALL. I BROUGHT THIS BACK
BECAUSE WE ARE, WE HAVE SOME REALLY OLD CONTRACTS, AND NOW IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE FALL, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALMOST TWO YEARS LATER.
SO THAT SEEMS TOO FAR AWAY. SOME OF OUR CONTRACTS THAT ARE OVER OR RIGHT UNDER THE 50,000, EIGHT YEARS OLD OR SO, SO BY REMOVING IT WE JUST FEEL LIKE WE ARE LOSING TRACK OF THIS AGAIN. THIS WAS AN AGENDA ITEM I
BROUGHT FORTH, SO I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF REMOVING THIS ONE OR THE COMMUNICATIONS RFP.
I GUESS I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO BE GIVING QUESTIONS, BUT WHY ARE WE REMOVING IT WE JUST DISCUSSED IT AND BROUGHT IT AS A GOAL? WE ARE NOT REMOVING IT. IT'S CROSSED OUT BECAUSE IT IS WITHIN THE BUDGET.
WE WILL BE BRINGING THESE BACK, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE ONLY ONE. BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT THIS CONTRACTS HAVE A LENGTH OF TIME. SOME
HAVE THREE YEARS THAT THEY ARE STILL IN CONTRACT WITH, SOME HAVE FIVE YEARS. SO WE ARE REVIEWING WHERE WE ARE AT WITHIN THESE CONTRACTS, BUT WE ARE NOT REMOVING IT. WE ARE GOING TO BE BRINGING BACK THOSE THAT REQUIRE AN RFP.
RIGHT, SOME OF THEM JUST ROLL OVER. AM I WRONG?
LIKE THE HR? I DON'T HAVE AN ENEMY, BUT IT'S A FIVE-YEAR CONTRACT. SO WE MAY BE IN THE MIDDLE. SO THAT ONE MAY NOT COME BACK, BUT WE ARE NOT LOSING SIGHT OF IT. WE WANT TO KEEP IT ON THERE. I.T. WILL BE ONE, ONCE WE GET THIS AUDIT DONE, WE WILL BE BRINGING IT BACK AS WELL.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT IS ONE CATEGORY, THOUGH. THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED. JUST AN RFP POLICY.
THIS WAS A GOAL THAT THE COUNCIL CREATED, WITH THE RFP SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HR. BUT BECAUSE STAFF IS GOING TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, WE WILL BE
BRINGING BACK WITHIN THE NEXT, BY THE FALL, REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS SO THAT THE CONTRACTS THAT WOULD BE ENDING JUNE OF 2026 WOULD START AN RFP PROCESS, LET'S JUST TAKE THIS ONE FOR EXAMPLE. IF THIS CONTRACT WAS ONLY THROUGH JUNE OF 2026, WE WOULD BRING AN RFP PROCESS, PROBABLY SEPTEMBER OCTOBER TIMEFRAME. SO THAT GIVES YOU A MONTH OR TWO TO RECEIVE RFPS. SO WE KNOW THOSE CONTRACTS, THE AMOUNTS WILL LOOK LIKE.
OKAY, I GUESS I WILL SAVE MINE FOR THE COMMENTS WE ARE COMING BACK TO THIS.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO THE NEXT ONE IS TO AVOID THE BUILDER REMEDY. THIS IS UPDATING, THIS IS STUFF THAT COULD BE COMPLETED WITHIN STAFF TIME. SO ZONING CHANGES, HOUSING, WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T GET TO THAT POINT. BUT IT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED WITHIN THE STAFF TIME. AND THE SAME THING AS THE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION, THE PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT, SAME THING. WE HAVE THE FUNDING, AND THE REST CAN BE DONE WITHIN THE STAFF TIME.
I JUST WANT TO GIVE A QUICK SHOUT, THANKS TO ALEX FOR LOOKING INTO THIS FOR US AND REPORTING.
THE NEXT ONE IS TO EVALUATE THE REPLACEMENT OF THE PERMITTING SYSTEM, AND I'M GOING TO INCLUDE THE NEXT ONE, THE CIP SOFTWARE. WE ARE NOT
LOOKING AT IT FOR THIS UPCOMING YEAR, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT GOING INTO NEXT FISCAL YEAR'S BUDGET. AGAIN, THIS IS
HOW SOME OF THE PROGRAMS INTERACT WITH THE CURRENT FINANCIAL SOFTWARE, OUR CURRENT PROGRAM. SO WILL BE BRINGING THESE BACK, AS WELL. THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THEM RIGHT NOW, BUT WILL BE GOING OUT FOR QUOTES AS TO WHAT OTHER PROGRAMS WOULD LOOK LIKE. NEXT ONE IS RESTORING PUBLIC TRUST. AGAIN, THERE IS NO BUDGET TO THIS SO THIS
WILL BE AND HOW WE COMMUNICATE WITH THE PUBLIC, HOW WE GET MORE INFORMATION, MORE TRANSPARENCY. CREATING WAYS TO ENSURE THAT THINGS ARE UNDERSTANDABLE, READABLE, INFORMATIONAL TO THE PUBLIC. THIS WILL BE PART OF OUR ROUTINE OPERATIONS. THE NEXT ONE IS THE I.T. AUDIT, THIS WAS APPROVED AT AN EARLIER CITY COUNCIL MEETING. WE ARE SENDING OUT THE
RFP, WE ARE JUST WAITING TO SEE WHAT THAT IS GOING TO COME BACK, AND WE
WILL BRING THAT BACK AS AN AGENDA ITEM TO SEE IF WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD BASED UPON THE COST FOR THAT. THE NEXT ONE IS ANOTHER ITEM THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE REMOVE. THIS IS THE EVALUATION OF THE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, WHICH IS CALLED THE WORM PROGRAM.
WRITE ONCE, READ MANY TIMES. IT IS A SYSTEM THAT HAS TO BE CONTINUALLY
UPDATED EACH YEAR TO ACCEPT THE NEW TYPE OF FORMATS, PROGRAMS THAT ARE OUT THERE. INITIAL COSTS ARE $80-$100,000. BASICALLY A LOT OF THE LARGER CITIES DO THIS FOR EASE AND RETRIEVAL OF DOCUMENTS. THINGS LIKE THAT. WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY COMPLAINTS, KNOCK ON WOOD, REGARDING OUR RESPONSES. IT MAY TAKE US A LITTLE WHILE LONGER ON A MORE INTENSIVE ONE,
BUT WE USUALLY RESPOND QUICKLY AND STAFF DOES NOT SEE A NEED FOR THIS AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU.
NEXT ONE IS IMPROVING THE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS. THIS IS THE CONTRACT
THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN THE BUDGET FOR THE OUTREACH
COMMUNICATIONS. AGAIN, THE FULL BUDGET WILL BE DISCUSSED, BUT THIS IS FOR OUR CURRENT PUBLIC RELATIONS. THERE'S 50,000 IN THE BUDGET PROPOSED, AND FOR THE CONVERSATION COMING UP AHEAD AT THE JUNE HEARINGS. NEXT WHEN A SHARED SERVICES. THIS IS ONE WHERE WE HAVE CONTACTED OTHER
CITIES TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY TYPE OF SHARED EMPLOYEES THAT WE COULD DO,
WHEN I REACHED OUT OF THE OTHER CITIES THERE'S NONE AT THIS TIME, BUT THIS IS AN ONGOING ITEM WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT. THE NEXT ONE IS A
CROSSTRAINING OF ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, AND TAKING ACTIONS IN THE HOME STUDY. AS I SAID EARLIER, WE ARE DOING THIS NOW. WE ARE BRINGING THE FIRE
CONSOLIDATION BUILDING DEPARTMENT DOWN TO CITY HALL, WE WILL HAVE IT FINISHED AT HIS STAFF TO HELP TO CLERICAL WORK. SOME CROSSTRAINING BETWEEN ALL DEPARTMENTS. THERE WAS $10,000 IN THERE FOR SCANNING OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT PLANS. WE DID NOT PUT THAT IN THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET. THAT IT COULD BE A COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF THE END. NEXT IS THE BALANCED BUDGET. AGAIN, THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. THIS IS
THE DUTIES OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND THE BUDGETS
ARE BROUGHT FORWARD YEARLY AND DONE WITHIN STAFF BUDGET WITH NO EXTRA COST. SAME THING WITH THE QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORTING. THESE ARE QUARTERLY PERKS. STAFF TIME TO REPAIR THEM, BRING THESE BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATION. NEXT ONE IS THE MEASURE YOU PRIORITY RESOLUTION. WE WILL REVIEW THIS DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS, TO ENSURE
THE MEASURE YOU FUNDS ARE BEING SPENT THE WAY THE RESOLUTION HAS IT LISTED. THE NEXT ONE IS THE PUBLISHED REPORTS FOR THE BUDGET, ILLUSTRATING THE BUDGET AT A GLANCE. THIS HAS NOT BEEN PUT INTO THE PROPOSED BUDGET, IT'S A FIVE TO $7000, AND THIS IS TO TRY TO GET MORE TRANSPARENCY FOR OUR CITY BUDGETS.
IS KIND OF MY FEELING THAT THIS CAN BE DONE IN HOUSE. IT'S ALMOST AN INTERN EXERCISE TO CREATE VISUALS FROM THINGS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE SO FORMAL.
I THINK WE ARE STILL IN THE QUESTION PERIOD. WE ARE GOING TO COME BACK TO COMMENTS. WE ARE DOING QUESTIONS OUTSIDE OF COMMENTS.
YEAH, I WOULD LIKE A DEFINITION OF BUDGET AT A GLANCE. SEVEN, 12 PAGES, IT DOES NOT SOUND LIKE THAT IS AT A GLANCE. WHOEVER BROUGHT THIS
FORWARD, COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT WAS YOUR THINKING IN TERMS OF WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE A BUDGET AT A GLANCE?
I THINK THAT THE IDEA WAS TO TAKE THE WHOLE BUDGET AND TURN IT INTO A
LOT OF PICTURES, RATHER THAN NUMBERS AND CITIZENS HAVING TO GO THROUGH PAGES TO GET TO CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS. SO IT'S A LOT OF PICTURES, GRAPHS, THAT IS WHY IT WAS LIKE 12 PAGES WITH THIS COST, AND MORE SO FOR THAT COST. SO PHOTOS, GRAPHS, PIE CHARTS, A LOT OF THOSE.
I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. SO IF WE DID THAT WE WOULD STILL HAVE THE OTHER AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE TO SEE?
ABSOLUTELY.
THIS IS A VALUE ADD.
ABSOLUTELY.
SO, THE NEXT ONE IS TO DIVERSIFY THE CITY REVENUE BASE. THERE IS NO BUDGET ASSOCIATED WITH THIS YET. THIS IS BASED UPON THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. STAFF HAS REQUESTED THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO SEE WHAT THE COST WOULD BE FOR THAT.
I'M PRETTY SURE WE HAD A STUDY LIKE THIS FROM TWO YEARS AGO. AND I'M
WONDERING IF THAT STUDY WOULD STILL BE RELEVANT, IF WE FOLLOWED ALL OF
THOSE SUGGESTIONS FROM THAT STUDY, OR IF WE COULD JUST GO AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT STUDY RATHER THAN HAVING TO REDO THAT STUDY. IN TERMS OF POSSIBLE REVENUE OPTIONS.
SO, THE QUESTION IS, I BELIEVE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS WHEN WE WERE
DISCUSSING ABOUT A YEAR OR TWO AGO DIFFERENT OPTIONS AS FAR AS WHAT TO BRING IN REVENUE. WE COULD GO AHEAD AND REVIEW THAT, BASED UPON, WE LOOK AT THOSE OPTIONS AND SEE SOMETHING FOR CONSIDERATION. I KNOW THAT
WE DID DO THAT ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO, AND THERE WAS VERY FEW THAT WE THOUGHT WERE STILL INTACT AT THE TIME. THIS IS MORE, I BELIEVE, WORKING
WITH THE CHAMBER, THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATIONS, THE BUSINESSES, BRINGING EVERYBODY TOGETHER TO TRY TO CREATE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
SO THIS IS A LITTLE BIT MORE EXTENSIVE. BUT WE CAN REVIEW WHAT WE CURRENTLY DO TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES.
THANK YOU.
I GUESS, JUST HELPING UNDERSTAND. WE HIRED A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PERSON. WE INCREASED THE SALARY, SO I GUESS I'M JUST WONDERING WOULDN'T THIS JUST BE PART OF THAT ROLE? AM I LACKING IN UNDERSTANDING HERE?
I'M GOING TO BRING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF TO EXPLAIN
THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHE HAS RECOMMENDED COMING FROM THE COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT. BUT IT IS THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, YES, WE
CHANGE THE POSITION FROM PLANNING DIRECTOR TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO HAVE ECONOMIC EMPHASIS.
YEAH, AND I'M GOING TO HAVE THE SAME QUESTION AGAIN IN THE NEXT PAGE.
THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. IT'S
A TOPIC THAT'S NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART, AND TO THE COMMUNITY, OBVIOUSLY, FOR HIS WELL-BEING AND LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY. DOES A LOT
OF WORK ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, OBVIOUSLY,
AND ONE OF THE PLANS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO OR TALK ABOUT IS TO HAVE
A STRATEGY THAT WOULD BE THROUGH SO MANY THINGS THAT CAN ALL BE UNDER THAT UMBRELLA OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. BUT THERE'S ONLY SO MANY STAFF HOURS AVAILABLE. SO WE NEED TO FOCUS THAT TIME. THE WAY TO
DO THAT IS TO IDENTIFY SPECIFIC INITIATIVES THAT HAVE THE GREATEST AND IF IT FOR THE STAFF TIME INVESTMENT. ONE WAY TO DO THAT IS TO ANALYZE WHAT THE BENEFITS ARE OF DIFFERENT PROGRAMS. AND WHAT YOU WOULD TERM AS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANALYTICS. FOR EXAMPLE, I MIGHT HAVE A CONSULTANTS LOOK AT DATA SOURCES TO DETERMINE WHAT LEAKAGE WE HAVE.
LEAKAGE IS A TERM THAT MEANS WHAT REVENUE GOES TO OTHER CITIES OR OTHER COUNTIES.
I'M SORRY, THERE IS SOME DESCRIPTION IN THE BACK, WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP IT DOWN, SO WE CAN FOCUS ON THE PRESENTATIONS. THANK YOU.
ABSOLUTELY.
AND HAVING THOSE NUMBERS WOULD LET US KNOW WHAT BUSINESSES WE WANT TO TARGET FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD JUST BE
DONE IN A VACUUM, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING IN
CONJUNCTION WITH NOT JUST THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, WHICH ONLY
REPRESENTS A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY INCLUDING THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, BUT ALL OF THE BUSINESSES. IN THE COMMUNITY. AND THE RESIDENCE, FOR THAT MATTER, WHY THE NEED TO GO
DRIVE ELSEWHERE AND ALSO IMPACT OTHER MATTERS, SUCH AS CLIMATE
CHANGE AND THAT SORT OF THING, BECAUSE THEY ARE HAVING TO DRIVE ELSEWHERE.
IF WE COULD PAUSE. VICE MAYOR?
I JUST WANTED TO ASK. COULD THIS NOT ALSO BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD? I MEAN, I HAVE MET WITH THE DIRECTOR
THERE AND HE HAS, HE ACTUALLY PROVIDED US WITH ACCESS TO SOME
SOFTWARE THAT THE COUNTY UTILIZES AND SAID THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO ACTUALLY WORK WITH US AND HELP US TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE LEAKAGE.
I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT, I RUN THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ENTITY, SO I
AM JUST, ARE THERE OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN DO THIS WHERE IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY IMPACT AND REQUIRE INCREASED FUNDING?
ABSOLUTELY. JUST LIKE ANY INITIATIVE, THE BUILDING INSTRUCTION PROJECT
YOU DO VALUE ENGINEERING, AND YOU CAN SCALE DOWN THE SCOPE OF THE PROPOSAL TO MAKE IT WORK WITHIN YOUR BUDGET CONSTRAINTS. CERTAINLY
WE CAN DO AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND START IDENTIFYING
SPECIFIC INITIATIVES THAT WORK WITHOUT HAVING TO DO A LARGE CONSULTING CONTRACT. AS YOU SAY, WE HAVE HAD SOME STUDIES DONE IN THE PAST. WE
HAVE OUR LOCAL BUSINESS COMMUNITY, AT A MINIMUM, I WOULD BE
INTERESTED IN DOING SOME KIND OF JOINT MEETING BETWEEN COMMISSION AND
COUNCIL TO INVITE BUSINESSES TO EXPRESS THEIR CONCERNS OR THEIR DESIRES,
WHAT THEY'RE HOPING THE CITY CAN DO, AND WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT OTHER MATTERS.
I'M GOING TO JUMP IN, BECAUSE I THINK EARLIER YOU SAID WE WERE PENDING A PRESENTATION, A FULL ON PRESENTATION FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. MY QUESTION TO YOU AND TO ANY IS WHEN IS THAT GOING TO TAKE PLACE? I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER. I'M NOT SURE WHEN THAT IS COMING BACK.
IF YOU GET INTO THAT DIRECT QUESTION, WHEN ARE WE HAVING THE FULL PRESENTATION? BECAUSE IT'S GREAT TO GET A SNIPPET. BUT SINCE WE HAVE BEEN
HEARING THAT THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE, WHEN IS THAT PRESENTATION SCHEDULED FOR?
I THINK IT SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS WITH THE AGENDA REVIEW COMMITTEE. EARLIER MY FORMER CITY MANAGER WANTED THE PRIMARY FOCUS
TO BE ON THE BARLOW HOTEL, AND ALL MY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS HAVE BEEN FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON THAT. I'VE BEEN, SINCE THERE HAS BEEN A
CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP I HAVE BEEN DOING MORE OUTREACH DIRECTLY TO LOCAL BUSINESSES, SO I HAVE NOTED AND IF I TO DATE, IS THE SHORT ANSWER.
THAT SAID, I CAN SEE IT HAPPENING IN A THREE-MONTH PERIOD.
OKAY, SO WHEN YOU SAY AGENDA REVIEW, IT WOULD NOT COME TO AGENDA
REVIEW, IT WOULD COME TO YOUR SUPERVISOR, WHO WOULD THEN BRING IT TO US AS THEIR ECONOMIC AGENDA ITEM REQUEST?
CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. AND WE CAN GO INTO DISCUSSION AT THE END, BUT I
ALSO HAVE SOME OTHER THOUGHTS AS TO HOW IT CAN BE COMBINED WITH ANOTHER GOAL THAT IS IN HERE.
GREAT. OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? MARY?
THANK YOU. THE NEXT ITEM THAT WAS LINE THROUGH WAS THE UPDATE OF THE FINANCIAL POLICIES TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE MEETING SARAH. WE WILL BE
WORKING ON OUR FINANCIAL POLICIES TO UPDATE FINANCIAL STAFF WITH OUR STAFF BUDGET. SO THERE IS NO FINANCIAL REQUEST AT THIS TIME. NEXT IS INCREASING THE REVENUE BASE, SIMILAR TO THE CONVERSATION WE JUST HAD.
THIS WAS A DISCUSSION FROM STAFF ABOUT CREATING THE DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SEEING NO QUESTIONS I WILL GO NEXT TO THE IMPACT FEES. THIS IS, AGAIN, OUR LAST FEES DONE IN . SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT FIVE OR SIX YEARS. IT'S ABOUT $50-$70,000 COST TO HAVE TO CONSULT AND REVIEW ALL THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. THIS IS NOT WITHIN THE BUDGET.
I'M JUST WONDERING IF THIS IS APPROPRIATE, OR EVEN POSSIBLE TO JUST SEE WHAT THE LAST INCREASES KIND OF WORK, AND MAYBE DO A 5% INCREASE. JUST
BLANKET, JUST TO COVER IT FOR A LITTLE WHILE SO THAT WE DON'T ABSORB ANOTHER FEE FOR CONSULTING. BUT SIMPLY INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE ARE GETTING IN.
SO, WE DO AN ANNUAL INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENT EVERY YEAR ALREADY,
WHAT THIS WOULD BE IS A NEW FEE TO JUSTIFY THE FEES, WHICH THE CITY HAS TO DO FROM TIME TO TIME IN ORDER TO KEEP CHARGING.
CAN WE GET STEVE'S OPINION ON THIS, PLEASE?
IT IS A VERY COSTLY STUDY TO DO THIS. I'M ONE THAT DOES NOT JUMP AT SPENDING $50-$75,000 AT THE DROP OF A HAT. I LIKE TO DO A LOT OF OUR THINGS IN HOUSE. WE DO NEED TO UPDATE THEM. THE LAST TIME THEY WERE UPDATED WAS THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR OF 2021. THEY WERE IMPLEMENTED, I THINK, JULY 17th OF 21. BUT WE HAVE SOME FEES THAT ARE A LITTLE OUT OF WHACK IN MY OPINION. OUR LARGEST FEE IS PARKED DEVELOPMENT FEE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE IN THE CITY AT THIS POINT. SEWER AND WATER, WELL, SEWER FEE IS $10,000 IN WATER FEE IS $5000 FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. AND I
DON'T THINK THAT, MARK AND I HAVE TALKED, AND I DON'T THINK THAT FITS WITH WHAT WE HAVE, EITHER. I THINK AT SOME POINT WE NEED TO DO THIS WITHIN THE NEXT 18 MONTHS AT MAX.
COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
YEAH, IT FEELS LIKE IMPACT FEES ARE TO BE RELATIVE TO THE ACTUAL COST OF THE CITY BEARS.
THAT'S ZACK WHEELER WITH THE NEW CITY WOULD DO, JUSTIFY THOSE FEES.
RIGHT, SO $5000 FEELS LIKE JUST A COST, AND NOT PER FOOT.
THOSE ARE PER-UNIT COSTS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION. VIRTUALLY ALL OF OUR IMPACT FEES, EXCEPT FOR THE STORM WATER FEE, ARE BASED ON PER-UNIT COST.
RIGHT, AND WOULD YOU EXPECT ANY DIFFERENT KINDS OF IMPACT FEES TO POP
UP, LIKE MAYBE SOMEBODY HAS SOME DIFFERENT IDEAS OR MAYBE SWAP NAMES?
WE HAVE LOOKED AT ALL THE OTHER CITIES IN THE COUNTY, WE HAVE A LIST OF THE FEES THEY CHARGE. SOME DO IT DIFFERENTLY. ONE CITY JUST HAS A MASSIVE IMPACT FEE, AND THEN THEY DECIDE HOW THAT IS SPENT LATER ON. THERE ARE SOME OTHER OPTIONS WE CAN LOOK AT.
AND DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHT ABOUT THE VALUE TO HAVING ONE OF THESE STUDIES, LIKE IF WE SPEND 70 GRAND, WILL WE GET 70 GRAND IN THE NEXT FOUR YEARS CONDITIONALLY?
IF WE DO AN IMPACT STUDY, YOU ARE PROBABLY GOING TO GET BACK THAT AMOUNT THE VERY FIRST YEAR. THE DIFFERENCE IS, IMPACT FEES, AS YOU KNOW, CAN ONLY BE USED FOR CERTAIN THINGS. WHEREAS THE $50-$70,000 COMES OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.
THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR?
I'M JUST WONDERING, EXCUSE ME, I'M JUST WONDERING, YOU ARE SAYING THEY ARE OUT OF WHACK. MY QUESTION IS DID THAT HAPPEN JUST DUE TO TIME AND HAPPENSTANCE? WE JUST HAD THIS STUDY DONE IN 2021, AND IF IT'S NOT
HAPPENSTANCE JUST THE PROGRESSION OF TIME AND CHANGES, THEN CAN WE USE A DIFFERENT COMPANY?
YEAH, I WILL SAY THAT THE CHANGES, IN 2021, SEWER AND WATER EXACTLY FLIPPED. PARK WAS INCREASED BY 50%, AND I KNOW THAT WAS BASED ON THE PARKLAND THAT IS NOW IN PLACE AND BEEN APPROVED BY YOU. I'M JUST NOT
SURE THAT ALL OF THE PARAMETERS AT THE BEGINNING WERE GIVEN FAIRLY, OR EVENLY. I DON'T SEE THAT SEWER SHOULD BE TWICE AS MUCH IS WATER, ESPECIALLY WHEN WATER WAS TWICE AS MUCH AS SEWER THE YEAR BEFORE.
IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD PARTICIPATE IN? LIKE WHO WOULD GUIDE THIS?
IT WOULD BE MARK AND MYSELF, AND, OF COURSE, MARY NOW LEADING THE PROCESS. WHATEVER HAPPENS LATER WITH THAT, WHETHER WOULD BE THE CITY MANAGER, THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, MYSELF, AND MARK ALL INVOLVED.
GREAT. OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE.
THANK YOU. THE NEXT ITEM WOULD BE THE GRANT FROM THE REGIONAL BODIES
DISCUSSED SIMILAR, WE WILL BE RELYING ON OUR COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
FROM STAFF AS WELL AS OUR COUNCIL LIAISON AND COUNCIL APPOINTEES TO THIS BODIES . REVIEWING OF THE ZONING CODES FOR STREETLIGHTING, THIS IS ONGOING WITHIN THE CITY'S BUDGET ALREADY. THIS IS WITHIN STAFF TIME TO
UPDATE OUR ZONING ORDINANCE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE STREAMLINING THE
PROCESS AND NOT CREATING UNDUE HARDSHIPS ON OUR BUSINESSES AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS. NEXT IS THE ECONOMIC HARDENING PROGRAM REGARDING GETTING BUSINESSES TOGETHER. WE CAN COME BACK TO THIS, THIS
WOULD BE A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO DELVE WITH THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT PLAN BEING BROUGHT FORTH AS A PRESENTATION, BRINGING ALL THE BUSINESSES TOGETHER. AND COUNCILMEMBER MAURER HAS A QUESTION.
YES, COULD YOU EXPLAIN THIS ITEM A LITTLE BIT MORE, WHAT IS IT, WHO PARTICIPATES?
THIS WAS A PRIORITY THAT CAME FROM COUNCILMEMBER CARTER, AND I'M GOING TO ASK HIM TO GIVE SOME INFORMATION ON THIS.
SO, ECONOMIC GARDENING, OR WHATEVER THE TAGLINE IS IS A 25-YEAR-OLD
PROGRAM THAT MANY CITIES HAVE INCORPORATED TO GROW THE BUSINESSES
THAT EXIST ALREADY, SECONDARY GROWTH INSTEAD OF RECRUITING NEW
BUSINESSES, YOU ACTUALLY GIVE A LOT OF LOVE TO THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY THERE. SO YOU DON'T LOSE THEM. IT CREATES, MY IDEA WAS TO GET
THEM ALTOGETHER IN A WORKSHOP ENVIRONMENT, AND HAVE A COUPLE OF LEARNING SESSIONS SO THAT WE CAN GIVE FEEDBACK. YOU UNDERSTAND.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERSON WHO
WOULD BE IN CHARGE OF THIS, WHETHER SHE RECOMMENDS THIS, WHETHER SHE KNOWS ABOUT IT, AND WHAT HER OPINION IS. BECAUSE SHE WOULD RUN IT.
I AM FAMILIAR WITH SIMILAR PROJECTS. SOLANO COUNTY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR IN CONCEPT FOR THE COUNTYWIDE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. I AM ALSO FAMILIAR
WITH IS VISTA BUSINESS, THE TYPICAL STRATEGY FOR ENCOURAGING BUSINESSES
WITHIN A COMMUNITY TO OBTAIN SERVICES FROM EACH OTHER TO TRY TO KEEP
MONEY IN THE FAMILY, AS IT WERE, AND TO TRY TO KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING IN THE COMMUNITY. SO I THINK THIS IS A WORTHY EFFORT, AND IT COULD DOVETAIL
NICELY WITH THE OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES THAT I'M
THINKING OF AND HOPE TO BRING FORWARD IN A PRESENTATION AND SEE HOW THE COMMUNITY FEELS ABOUT DIFFERENT EFFORTS.
OTHER QUESTIONS?
THIS $3000, I KNOW THIS IS AN ESTIMATE, BUT IS THAT HARD COST PLUS THAT TIME?
THAT WAS MY ESTIMATION FOR THE ORIGINAL COST OF THE BUILDING AND A HOST ONE WORKSHOP. AND WITH SOME OF AMY'S TIME. AND OF COURSE SOME BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO MAKE IT WORK.
I JUST DON'T RECALL VOTING ON THIS, SO I'M WONDERING HOW LIST.
IT WAS A PRIORITY. IT WAS CALLED GROWING TOGETHER, AND IT WAS RETITLED TO ECONOMIC GARDENING. BUT IT WAS A PRIORITY THAT WAS VOTED ON.
THANK YOU. THE NEXT ONE GOES BACK TO SIMILAR WHERE THIS IS A
PRESENTATION FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ON THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY. SO THIS WOULD BE AN AGENDA ITEM THAT WOULD BE COMING BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AND THE LAST ITEM IS THE FINALIZATION OF
THE BARLOW HOTEL, AS I STATED, THE COUNCIL DID APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THEM. WE ARE FINALIZING AND RECORDING THE DOCUMENTS,
AND ONCE ALL THAT IS DONE, HOPEFULLY BY THE END OF THE YEAR THERE WILL BE ABLE TO SUBMIT THE BUILDING PLANS FOR BARLOW.
I AM JUST KIND OF CURIOUS, BECAUSE WE SAW MANY UPDATES ON THE BARLOW
HOTEL PROJECT, THAT ARE FORMER PLANNING PERSON WAS ASSIGNED TO THIS PROJECT. IS THERE AN AMOUNT THAT WE COULD FIND THAT WAS PAID OUT TO THE CONSULTANT WHO WORKED ON THE BARLOW PROJECT?
THAT IS ACTUALLY IN THE BUDGET, NO, IT WOULD BE IN THE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT, SO IT WOULD NOT HAVE THE BUDGET. KIND OF LIKE A SET-ASIDE POT THAT BARLOW WOULD DEPOSIT MONEY IN THERE THAT WOULD CHARGE AGAINST IT.
AND IF WE RUN LOW ON THE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT, THEN, YOU KNOW, IT IS UP TO WHOEVER IT IS THAT HAD THE AGREEMENT TO GET MORE MONEY.
SO WE HEARD JANE IS A CONSULTANT. IS SHE STILL ON STAFF AND DOING HOURS FOCUSED?
NO, THIS HAS CONFLATED --
JUST TO GO FURTHER, YOU ARE SAYING STAFF CHARGED AGAINST THAT. IS IT
POSSIBLE FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONSULT CHARGED AGAINST IT VERSUS OUR ON STAFF? BECAUSE WE ARE HEARING THAT ALL CONCENTRATION
WAS ON THAT, SO I'M JUST, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH WE PAID TO A CONSULTANT VERSUS HOW MUCH WAS CHARGED FROM OUR STAFF.
YES, THERE IS AN ACCOUNTING OF HOW MUCH THE CONSULTANT FOR THIS
BARLOW PROJECT THAT THE CITY HIRED TO DO, IN ADDITION TO LEGAL COSTS, IN ADDITION TO STAFF TIME.
THAT'S WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR.
OKAY.
OTHER QUESTIONS? FOR MARY, BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT? NO, THAT IS THE LAST OF THE GOALS. WHAT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY IS SOME
OF THE REASONS WHY WE ARE ALSO ASKING THAT SOME OF THESE ITEMS BE
DEFERRED IS AS THEY COUNCIL, AND I BELIEVE THE COMMUNITY IS WELL AWARE
THAT OURSELVES TEXTED , BUT WE ARE WAITING FOR AN ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION ON THAT, BECAUSE WE ARE IN COMPETITION WITH THE COUNTY. SO WE HAVE NOT HEARD BACK YET. WHAT THE STATUS IS OF THAT. NOT SURE IF WE WILL
HEAR WITHIN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS, THREE MONTHS, BUT WE ARE BEING
CAUTIOUS AT THIS POINT, WHICH IS WHY SOME OF THESE ITEMS WE RECOMMEND FOR HOLDING OFF.
AND I HAVE A REQUEST ON THE FAR END.
YES, LET'S TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE. WE HAVE A LOT OF STUFF TO GET THROUGH, A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
IF EVERYONE COULD HAVE A SEAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. IF YOU ARE STAYING IN THE CHAMBERS, PLEASE FIND A SEAT. ARE WE OKAY?
YES, WE ARE, AND WE HAVE AN ANSWER TO THE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT.
OKAY.
YOU WANT TO KNOW THE SPECIFIC CONSULTANT? OR DOES CONSULTANT IN GENERAL?
CONSULTANT VERSUS STAFF.
10 FOR THE CONSULTANT. STAFF IS 24.
THANK YOU.
SO I THINK WE ARE GOING OUT OF PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT. THE GOALS AND PRIORITY ACTION PLAN. IF YOU
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, AGAIN, IT IS A TWO MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT. I WILL COME TO CHAMBERS FIRST THEN GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS
ANYONE IN CHAMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE ACTION STUDIES THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THE ACTION PLAN FOR GOALS AND PRIORITIES, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
GREAT. BRING IT BACK UP THE DAIS. NOW IT IS TIME FOR COMMENTS AND DELIBERATIONS. MARY, YOUR RECOMMENDATION, I THINK YOU SAID YOU HAD A CHART THAT WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH, IS THAT THE PROCESS? YES, SO MY CHART IS, THE 19 ITEMS THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED, I DO NOT HEAR OF
ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT WE HEADLINED THROUGH THAT ARE IN THE BUDGET, AND UNLESS I AM MISSING THAT.
I THINK WE ARE BACK TO 19.
ALL RIGHT, SO I WILL GO AHEAD, I'M SORRY.
WHAT IF THERE IS SOMETHING WE WANT IS LINED THROUGH THAT WE WANT TO DISCUSS? I MEAN, THIS IS OUR DISCUSSION PERIOD. IT MAKES IT HARD TO DO THUMBS-UP OR THUMBS DOWN, I BELIEVE.
SO, THE ITEM TONIGHT, THE ITEMS THAT ARE LINED THROUGH OUR WITHIN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. THAT WAS BASED UPON THE STAFF DIRECTION, SO STAFF HAS PUT THESE ITEMS IN THE BUDGET. THE GOALS AND PRIORITIES TONIGHT IS FOR
CONSIDERATION WHETHER YOU WANT THOSE TO BE PUT INTO THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR CONSIDERATION OR FOR MIDYEAR. IT IS NOT TO DISCUSS THE
AMOUNT OF AN ITEM THAT IS ALREADY PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET, THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED FULLY AT THE TWO JUNE THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET MEETINGS. THE
ITEM TONIGHT IS TO DISCUSS THE ACTION PLAN AS PRESENTED BY THE STAFF AS
TO WHAT, IF YOU WANT TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THOSE IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET, OR TO HOLD OFF ON THE MIDYEAR. SO IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC ONE MAYBE WE CAN WALK YOU THROUGH TO SEE.
YEAH, THESE ARE GOALS THAT WERE GOALS IN OUR DIRECTION, NOT JUST ABOUT WHAT WAS PUT IN THE BUDGET. SO EVEN IF IT IS IN THE BUDGET, I WILL JUST USE THE EXAMPLE, I BROUGHT UP RFP. I STILL WANT IT ON THE GOALS LIST. THE KOS THERE IS NO BUDGET IMPACT, SO YOU ARE TRYING TO REMOVE IT. BUT I STILL THINK IT'S A PORT, AM I WRONG?
WE ARE NOT REMOVING IT. ALL WE ARE SAYING IS THAT THERE IS EITHER NO
BUDGET IMPACT, THERE IS NOTHING REMOVED FROM THE GOALS OTHER THAN THE TWO IN GREEN THAT I REQUESTED.
ALL THESE LINES, I THOUGHT THEY WERE BEING REMOVED. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. LINE THROUGH MEANS DELETE FOR ME.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THE LINE THROUGH SHOWS THAT IT IS IN THE BUDGET OR THE BUDGET IMPACT. WE ARE NOT REMOVING GOALS THE COUNCIL HAS PASSED AT THE LAST BUDGET MEETINGS.
THANK YOU, WE ARE GOING TO THE 19, AND WILL WE GO THROUGH THEM YOU HAVE A CHECKLIST WITH THUMBS-UP AND THUMBS DOWN. IS THAT A PROCESS? I AM, LET ME GO AHEAD AND SHARE THE SCREEN.
CAN ASK ANOTHER QUESTION FOR CLARIFICATION? THERE WAS A COUPLE OF
TIMES THAT A COUPLE OF US STARTED TO MAKE COMMENT AND WE WERE TOLD OH, WAIT FOR DELIBERATION. SO IF WE ARE JUST DOING A THUMBS-UP OR THUMBS DOWN, WHEN WE MAKE THE COMET?
WE WILL DO COMMENTS AND THEN THUMBS-UP OR THUMBS DOWN.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, I APPRECIATE IT.
RIGHT NOW WE ARE GOING TO CONSIDER THE NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS THE LABYRINTH. THIS IS A DISCUSSION, AND I KNOW IT IS SMALL AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE RIGHT HERE. YOU CAN SEE IT GOOD ON ZOOM. THIS IS REGARDING THE LABYRINTH FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLACING $6000 IN THE BUDGET. SO THE COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER WHETHER TO DIRECT THE CITY BUDGET
COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THIS, OR PUT IT IN THE BUDGET FOR REVIEW, OR PUT IT
INTO AT A LATER TIME WHERE THERE IS MORE INFORMATION REGARDING FUNDRAISING, LOCATION, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS.
GREAT, SO COMMENTS?
YEAH, SO THE LABYRINTH, IDEALLY YOU WANT TO BUILD THAT, OR HAVE THAT BUILT IN A DRY SEASON. SO YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT MIDYEAR WHEN IT IS WET.
YOU ARE GOING TO NEED A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TOGETHER THE VOLUNTEERS, AND
YEAH, THERE'S INFORMATION, THERE IS ALREADY A PROPOSAL, THE WOMAN WHO
DESIGNED THE ORIGINAL LABYRINTH HAS SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL FOR A REVISED DESIGN RIGHT BEHIND THE BALL FIELD. AND IT INCLUDES SOME NATIVE PLANTS,
NATIVE SEEDS, AND SOME SUPPORT, A LOT OF SUPPORT FROM VOLUNTEERS TO PUT A DIFFERENT DESIGN, SO IT WILL BE IN A NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. AND I DID
REACH OUT TO THE LAGUNA FOUNDATION AND HELEN, WHO SUPPORTED THE IDEA, AND IT IS WITHIN CITY LIMITS. A LOT OF IT IS READY TO GO.
VICE MAYOR?
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WHEN I VOTED THUMBS-UP FOR THIS IT WAS WITH
THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE COVERS TO THEIR NATIONS AND IT WOULD NOT BE AN IMPACT ON THE BUDGET. THEN WHEN I HEAR ABOUT
ALL THE STAFF HOURS, FOR ME, AT THIS POINT, I PERSONALLY AM NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS. BECAUSE ANYTHING THAT WE SUPPORT HERE NEEDS TO BE FOR THE GOOD OF EVERYONE ON THE BENEFIT OF EVERYONE, WHERE WE NEED 200 K TO DO
A STUDY WOULD BECAUSE WE HAVE SILT IN OUR PIPES, AND IN MY OPINION, IN
THE PAST, THIS IS HOW WE GOT INTO TROUBLE BECAUSE WE WERE CONSTANTLY,
PREVIOUS COUNCILS WERE APPROVING SMALL PROJECTS HERE AND THERE AND IT
ALL ADDS UP, AND WE DON'T ACTUALLY TAKE CARE OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE
BECAUSE WE'VE DONE ALL THESE LITTLE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO CALL
THEM, PERSONAL PROJECTS OR PET PROJECTS THAT BENEFIT OF YOU BUT NOT THE OVERALL. SO FOR ME, I KNOW IT SOUNDS LITTLE. BUT WE DO A LOT OF THESE LITTLE, IT ALL ADDS UP TO THE MONEY. SO, FOR ME, I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS, JUST BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE COST WAS COVERED AND NOW IT IS NOT. OR THERE IS NO CLARITY ON WHETHER IT IS OR NOT.
OKAY. OTHER COMMENTS? LET'S GET COMMENTS BEFORE WE GET REPLIES.
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON ?
THIS ONE PULLS ON MY HEARTSTRINGS. I REMEMBER WHEN MY CHILDREN WERE
IN SCHOOL AND THE PERSON THAT THIS IS NAMED AFTER UNFORTUNATELY PASSED. SO I FEEL LIKE I CAN SUPPORT APPLYING THE THOUSAND DOLLAR ART IN
BLUE, AND POSSIBLY COMING UP WITH HAVING PUBLIC WORKS USE THE HOURS, AND MAYBE COME UP WITH ANOTHER $2000 AND THE CITY BUDGET. AND ASK VOLUNTEERS TO COME UP WITH THE OTHER 3000 LIKE IN A MATCH. I KNOW WE ARE
TIED ON THINGS, BUT THIS ONE, TO ME, I KNOW IT WAS INADVERTENTLY REMOVED. I DON'T KNOW WHO APPROVED THAT, ALMOST LIKE A SPARROW'S NEST THAT GOT ACTUALLY TAKEN DOWN. I COULD SUPPORT IT IF WE CAN SUPPORT IT WITH STAFF, THE THOUSAND DOLLAR ART IN LIEU AND ANOTHER 2000, AND LET VOLUNTEERS, WITH THE DIFFERENCE.
YEAH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. THIS IS NOT SIMPLY A PET PROJECT.
THIS IS A TEAM MEMORIAL. IT HAS BEEN THERE FOR PROBABLY 20 YEARS. IT WAS BUILT TO MEMORIALIZE TEENS WHO COMMITTED SUICIDE. THERE ARE BENCHES WITH THEIR NAMES OUT THERE. IT WAS CREATED AS A PUBLIC THING, AND AT THIS
TIME IT HAS BEEN TAKEN APART AND IT IS NO LONGER THERE, AND THERE IS A
SIGN THAT ANNOUNCES THAT THIS IS A TEAM MEMORIAL, BUT THERE IS NOTHING, THE LABYRINTH, THERE IS NOTHING THERE. I THINK IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS GOVERNORS OF THE CITY TO REMEDY THIS. I THINK IT'S A PROBLEM AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED. SO THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO FIX SOMETHING THAT WAS A PUBLIC GOOD AND RESTORE THE LABYRINTH. THANK YOU.
OKAY, COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER.
YES, YOU KNOW, JUST TO MEDIATE BETWEEN THE SITUATION, I THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY FIND $1000 IN ART IN LIEU. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT WE COULD PUT
ABOUT TWO GRAND OF THE CITY'S TIME AND EFFORT IN, AND ALSO, WE COULD DO, I'M VERY GLAD TO HELP SAVE THE MONEY FROM WHATEVER IS LEFT.
I'M GOING TO JUMP IN. IT'S NOT JUST FOR THIS ONE, IT'S GOING TO BE MY OVERARCHING THEME. WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SALES TAX, EVEN IF WE GOT THE SALES TAX, THE 1.5, THAT WOULD BREAK IS EVEN. THAT WOULD NOT DO THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, THAT WOULD NOT DO THE ROADS. SO WHEN I MAKE MY COMMENTS, HOPEFULLY PEOPLE WILL UNDERSTAND IN THAT CONTEXT. IF WE
COULD GET THIS DOWN, PERHAPS, TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER CARTER IS SUGGESTING. JUST 1000 OR 2000. I THINK THAT IS GREAT. MY PREFERENCE IS WE WAIT ON ALL OF THIS TO THE MIDYEAR AND WE WORK ON THE SALES TAX. SO THAT IS WHAT I AM MEETING AT THIS TIME.
OTHER THOUGHTS BEFORE WE DO THUMBS-UP THUMBS DOWN?
AND I JUST CLARIFY? THIS IS NOT ABOUT APPROVING THE PROJECT. THIS IS ABOUT
WHETHER WE WANT TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT. YOU COULD WAIT UNTIL YOU COULD REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND HAVE IT COME BACK, LATER ON IN THE PROCESS. I
UNDERSTAND THAT WE WANT TO GET IT WITHIN THE DRY SEASON AND ALL THAT,
BUT IF THERE ARE POTENTIAL DONATIONS TO HELP ADDRESS SOME OF THE CITY
BUDGETS, MY RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT WOULD BE TO REVIEW THIS AT A
LATER TIME, GETTING MORE INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITY CENTER, GETTING THE PLAN TO THE DESIGNER, AND BRINGING THIS BACK.
WE'VE HEARD THIS OVER MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS ABOUT THIS, AND I
ASKED TAKE CHARGE OF THIS TO FIND THOSE ANSWERS FOR US SO WE DON'T HAVE TO SIT HERE. AND IT IS A PROJECT SPECIFIC TO A COUNCILMEMBER. NOT THAT IT IS NOT IMPORTANT, BUT THAT IS HOW I LOOK AT IT.
GREAT.
SO, SINCE THIS IS THE FIRST ONE AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PROCESS, I WANT TO BE CLEAR. THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN, TO ASK THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER PUTTING IT INTO THE BUDGET? AND THEN WE STILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BITE AT THE APPLE WHEN THE WHOLE BUDGET COMES TO US? THAT IS CORRECT. YOU COULD ALSO SAY THAT YOU ARE NOT READY TO MAKE THAT DECISION TO PUT IT INTO THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW.
THAT WOULD BE A THUMBS DOWN?
RIGHT, BUT YOU ARE DENYING IT GOING INTO THE BUDGET, BUT RECOMMENDING
IT COMING BACK A LATER TIME WITH MORE INFORMATION, WE MIGHT HAVE INFORMATION ON FUNDING OR DONATIONS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I HEARD YOU LOUD AND CLEAR, SO IT'S A THUMBS UP IF WE ARE DIRECTING BUDGET TO LOOK AT IT, AND A THUMBS DOWN IF WE WANT TO WAIT. ORSINO.
THANK YOU.
ARE WE ALL CLEAR ON THE PROCESS?
CAN WE MAKE AN ALTERNATE PLAN, LIKE COUNCILMEMBER HINTON SUGGESTED, TO PUT 3000 IN, LIKE SPLITTED AND RAISE THE OTHER THREE? I WOULD BE IN FAVOR DOING THAT.
SO I ASSUME THAT WOULD BE THE TWO OF YOU MAKING THE PLAN, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE ARE SENDING IT BACK TO YOU. JUST TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS.
YES.
OKAY, SO I WAS JUST GIVEN FEEDBACK.
COUNCILMEMBER CARTER.
I'M GOING TO LET MARY CLARIFY.
YES, THIS IS NOT THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT HOW MUCH BUDGET, THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY, BASED UPON WHAT, YOU ARE MEETING BUDGET? OR NOT BUDGET?
RIGHT, WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO INCLUDE THIS. BECAUSE THIS, AGAIN, IS NOT APPROVING IT. THIS IS JUST DIRECTING THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW
PUTTING IT INTO THE BUDGET SO THAT WHEN IT COMES BACK YOU CAN SEE THE
BUDGET AS A WHOLE, AND YOU HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY AS WELL TO SAY YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE PROJECT, SO THIS, AGAIN, IS NOT ABOUT THE PROJECT. IT IS
ABOUT WHAT IS BEEN RECOMMENDED, WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO DIRECT
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO DO IT NOW, OR IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE IT PUT
IN THE BUDGET AND COME BACK AT A LATER TIME POTENTIALLY WITH MORE INFORMATION.
GREAT. ARE WE ALL CLEAR ON THE PROCESS? WHAT AM I RIGHT, MY LEFT. LET'S DO THUMBS-UP THUMBS DOWN.
SAID THIS WOULD BE THUMBS-UP OR THUMBS DOWN FOR INCLUDING THE
FUNDING INTO, DIRECTING THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE FUNDING FOR
THIS PROJECT AT THE NEXT BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING WITH A FULL COUNCIL DISCUSSION AT ONE OF THE JUNE HEARINGS. OKAY, SO COUNCILMEMBER CARTER, YES? COUNCILMEMBER MAURER, YES , COUNCILMEMBER HINTON, YES. OKAY. SO,
THE NEXT ONE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO LOOKOUT IS THE POMO AND PUBLIC ART, UPDATING THE CITY WEBSITE ACKNOWLEDGMENT. SO THE WEBSITE AND THE
LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT DOES NOT NEED FUNDING , THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
WILL BE DOWN THE STAFF AS SOON AS THE COUNCIL DISCUSSES THE DECISION ON THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT. THIS IS FOR WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO PUT
FUNDING INTO THE CURRENT BUDGET, OR THE UPCOMING BUDGET, SORRY, FOR A PUBLIC ART THAT HONORS POMO'S .
WE ARE STILL ALL CLEAR ON THE PROCESS?
YEAH, CAN WE MAKE COMMENTS?
SURE.
I STARTED TO GO INTO THIS. I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS WAS NOT WHAT WE DISCUSSED, NOW IT HAS COME UP AS A SUGGESTION. FOR $3000. AND I THINK MY PERSONAL OPINION ON THIS IS TO HONOR CONSIDERING OUR BUDGET IN OTHER WAYS.
OKAY, I JUST WANT TO COMMENT, WHEN I VOTED ON THIS I DEFINITELY WANT TO HONOR THEM. BUT THIS 3000 WAS NOT PART OF THAT. SO I WOULD PREFER NOT TO HAVE THAT COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
OKAY, NO OTHER COMMENTS.
THAT IS CORRECT. COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER HAS A COMMENT.
SO, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THERE IS SOME ART IN LIEU MONEY COMING IN THAT COULD COVER SOMETHING LIKE THIS. THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE.
BUT TO ALSO, HAVE THE WORK DONE. TO PUT IT ON THE WEB. AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES.
I SHOULD'VE ASKED THIS BEFORE. WAS AN ESTIMATE EVEN OBTAIN? THESE
PROJECTS BALLOON UP AND NEXT THING WE KNOW THIS IS JUST A FIGURE THAT WAS PUT IN THERE FOR A MURAL, BASICALLY.
COMMENT, PLEASE? WE BROUGHT THIS TO THE MEETING IT WAS EXACTLY WHAT WE VOTED ON. I DID NOT INCLUDE A PRICE TAG, BUT IT DID GOOD PUBLIC ART.
SO, THUMBS UP TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THIS. THREE. I
HAVE COUNCILMEMBER CARTER, COUNCILMEMBER MAURER, AND MAYOR ZOLLMAN IN SUPPORT. THE NEXT ONE, THIS DOES NOT HAVE A BUDGET AMOUNT ASSOCIATED WITH IT. WE COULD DISCUSS A SET-ASIDE AMOUNT IF WE'D LIKE, OR WE CAN BRING IT BACK. BUT THIS IS FOR THE FESTIVE HEALTH ACTIVITIES, HOLIDAY EVENTS. AS I DISCUSSED EARLIER, AT A MINIMUM WE COULD LOOK AT
FUNDING SET ASIDE FOR BRAND-NEW BANNERS FOR DOWNTOWN, SOME NEW
DECORATIONS FOR DOWNTOWN TO MAKE IT MORE FESTIVE FOR THE HOLIDAYS
WHILE WE CONTINUE TO COLLABORATE WITH THE CHAMBER OF DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES COMMUNITY AS TO WHAT WE CAN BRING INTO THE CITY.
COMMENTS?
I SUPPORT THIS. BUT BASICALLY FOR HARD PURCHASE THINGS, LIKE THE CITY MANAGER JUST BROUGHT UP, WITH NEW DECORATIONS, BANNERS. I AM NOT SO
MUCH IN SUPPORT OF EVENTS, BECAUSE I THINK THOSE ARE REALLY DISCRETIONARY. AND HARD TO GAUGE ATTENDANCE, ET CETERA, SO I WOULD SUPPORT THIS WITH BASICALLY THINGS THAT WE COULD USE YOUR AFTER YEAR.
OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE DO THUMBS-UP THUMBS DOWN?
YEAH, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE AND I LOVE SEBASTOPOL EVENT
THE CITY GOT OTHER GROUPS AND PEOPLE INVOLVED, BUT I THINK IN ORDER TO DO THAT WE NEED TO SET ASIDE SOME NUMBER. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT NUMBER THAT WOULD BE. [ CAPTIONERS TRANSITIONING ] DO THAT IN
CONJUNCTION WITH NONPROFITS AND SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS AND BRING IT
THERE AS WELL BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT FALLS SOLELY ON THE STAFF IN
THE CITY BECAUSE WE HAVE PLENTY TO DO THAT AS FAR AS AN AMOUNT, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT WOULD BE. A SUGGESTION WOULD BE DIRECTING THIS TO
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO WORK WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH AN AMOUNT TO
INCLUDE IT AND AGAIN IT COMES BACK FOR A FULL CONVERSATION AFTER THIS
AT THE FULL COUNCIL MEETING IN JUNE SO THAT COULD BE A RECOMMENDATION
AS TO BRING THIS ITEM DIRECTED TO THE BUDGET COMMUNITY OR COMMITTEE AND THE STAFF INCORPORATING COST.
THAT DID ANSWER MY QUESTION AND THE BUDGET WILL WORK ON THE AMOUNT THAT WE FEEL IS APPROPRIATE IF IT FITS IN THE BUDGET. OKAY.
SO THAT ONE WAS UNANIMOUS. OKAY. THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE THE
COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM AND THE TRAININGS ARE FREE BUT
THIS IS JUST TO DISCUSS THE CONSIDERATION OF PUTTING ASIDE FUNDING FOR
RADIOS AND ANTENNAS BASED UPON THE MOVEMENT OF THE ANTENNAS FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO MY UNDERSTANDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? YES. I WILL JUMP IN ON THIS ONE. YES, I UNDERSTAND THAT ONE GROUP SUBMITTED THESE ITEMS THATRECEIVED FROM ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL. THE
BOTTOM LINE FOR ME IS TO BASICALLY BE ABLE TO REFER THIS TO THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE TO HAVE THEM MASSAGE THE NUMBERS AND SEE IF THIS IS
WORKABLE AND AS FAR AS THE NEED FOR THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE AS I
MENTIONED WITH A PRIOR COUNCILMAN MEMBER MEETING, THE AMOUNT OF
PEOPLE WHO WENT INTO THAT PROGRAM, HALF OF THAT NUMBER CAME FROM
SEBASTOPOL AND BEING INVOLVED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN OTHER PARTS
OF THIS PROGRAM THERE IS DEFINITELY AN ACTIVE INTEREST FROM OUR COMMUNITY TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER. I AM SUPPORTING THIS. OTHER COMMENTS? QUESTION. IF YOU ARE MOVING THE ANTENNAS FROM THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WHY DO YOU NEED NEW ANTENNAS CRACK
THAT CAN BE WORKED OUT.
I WOULD LIKE THAT ANSWER.
OKAY.
CHIEF, DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER OR SKIP?
MY NAME IS KEVIN [ INAUDIBLE ] AND I HAVE TO LEARN TO DRESS FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. IT IS COMMON WHEN YOU ARE INSTALLING A NEW ANTENNA
OR PROFESSIONAL ANTENNA FOR A BASE STATION OR WHATEVER TO GET A NEW ONE. THERE IS ONE OLD AND 10 AT THE PRIOR STATION, BUT IT IS JUST NOT
COMMON PRACTICE TO INSTALL A PROFESSIONAL LEVEL ANTENNA AND MOVE IT FROM ONE LOCATION TO ANOTHER. AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE A.
SO WHEN YOU REMOVE THEM FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, EVEN THOUGH YOU WON'T USE THEM, WILL THEY BE OUT OF OPERATION?
THAT IS REALLY NOT MY CHOICE AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THE ANTENNA THERE IS RATHER
AND I WOULDN'T CALL IT AMATEURISH BUT IT IS ABOUT THIS HIGH AND ATTACHED TO A PVC PIPE. IT ISN'T A HIGH BUDGET ITEM.
TO AVOID DUPLICATION?
SO WITH THE ANTENNA YOU ARE THINKING ABOUT WOULD IT BE LONGER THAN THIS DESK AND HIGHER POWERED?
YES. IT WOULD BE ON THIS THAT ALREADY EXISTS AND ALREADY A LOT OF
ANTENNAS ON THAT AND I DO REMEMBER THE COMMUNICATION SERVICE AND WE HAVE SHERIFF'S RADIOS AND A LOT OF ANTENNAS ON THAT ALREADY. THESE
WOULD BE NEW ANTENNAS THAT WOULD BE PROFESSIONALLY INSTALLED AND
SOME PLACE ON TOP OF THAT OR SOMEPLACE ON THAT MAST WITH SHIELDED
ANTENNA CABLE COMING DOWN INTO WHATEVER THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WOULD LIKE THEM INSIDE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
I DON'T WANT TO GET OFF TOPIC. WE ARE NOT APPROVING THE ITEM ITSELF. THIS
IS JUST WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO PUT THIS ASIDE AND THE ITEM WOULD COME BACK FOR THE COUNCIL APPROVAL. THIS IS JUST WHETHER OR NOT TO
LOOK AT WHETHER YOU NOT YOU WANT TO SET SOME FUNDING ASIDE AND IT DOESN'T APPROVE THE ITEM WHATSOEVER.
THANK YOU FOR THE REVIEW AND THANK YOU FOR STEPPING UP. SO IF THERE ARE NO COMMENTS.
SO THIS WOULD BE THUMBS UP OR DOWN TO DIRECT FUNDING SET ASIDE, WHICH IS THE 2700 AND THERE FOR THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER AND AGAIN IT COMES BACK FOR FULL DISCUSSION. THAT IS UNANIMOUS. SORRY. SO THE NEXT ITEM IS THE STORM DRAIN THE 200,000 FOR THE ASSESSMENT AND THEN $2 MILLION FOR THE DREDGING WORK WHICH IS AN ESTIMATE THAT THE 200,000
WOULD BE THE ASSESSMENT FOR THAT STORM DRAIN CAUSING THE FLOODING DOWN THE AVENUE.
COMMENTS?
I HAVE A COMMENT. THAT IS MORE THAN WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR BUDGET AND WE DON'T HAVE ROOM IN THE BUDGET FOR THAT. JUST A COMMENT.
IF WE DO THUMBS DOWN TONIGHT, THIS CAN COME BACK IN MIDYEAR, RIGHT OR DOES IT AUTOMATICALLY COME BACK OR DO WE REDIRECT IT?
NO. I WOULD RATHER HAVE YOU VOTE TO EITHER INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET OR
DIRECT THAT MORE INFORMATION COME BACK AND BRING IT BACK DURING MIDYEAR. AGAIN, WE WILL HAVE MORE INFORMATION REGARDING THE SALES TAX
AND THE OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WHICH WE RECOMMEND SOME OF THESE ITEMS.
SO IS THAT A SIDEWAYS THUMB? I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IF YOU ARE
WANTING TO GO IN THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW, THEN YOU DO A THUMBS UP BUT IF
YOU'RE ASKING US TO REVIEW IT AND BRING IT BACK MIDYEAR WITH MORE
INFORMATION AND AS THE DIRECTOR HAS STATED FROM THE CONTRACTOR
CONSULTANT RIGHT NOW SO WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION AND THAT WOULD BE A THUMBS DOWN. AND DIRECTING US TO COME BACK MIDYEAR.
I HAVE A COMMENT THAT FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS WE HAVE WATCHED THE
POST OFFICE BLOOD AND THE POST OFFICE WAS IMPACTED SO MUCH DURING A HOLIDAY TIME. AND I KNOW BECAUSE I OWN A BUSINESS THAT SHIPS STUFF AND
ALL OF OUR MAIL HAD TO BE DIVERTED TO PETALUMA BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE FLOODING THE BUILDING SHUT THE POST OFFICE DOWN. AS WE TALK ABOUT
THESE ITEMS, WHICH IS WHY I SAID EARLIER I PERSONALLY THINK WE HAVE
RAISED TAXES AND RAISING ALL THESE THINGS, I WANT TO REITERATE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS SO IMPORTANT. I JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT. I KNOW NOT EVERYONE WILL AGREE WITH ME. AS WE CONTINUE FORWARD WITH THIS, WE DO
NEED TO RECOGNIZE AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO ASK THE THINGS THAT THE PEOPLE ARE PAYING TAXES FOR. THANK YOU.
YES TO YOUR COMMENT, I WILL VOTE WITH A THUMBS DOWN ON THIS, BUT I WANT THIS TO HAPPEN. I WANT IT TO HAPPEN OR COME BACK WITH BETTER NUMBERS LIKE IN THE MID PART OF THE YEAR. BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE $200,000 TO PUT INTO THE BUDGET NOW. I THINK WE JUST NEED TO GET A BETTER HANDLE OF WHAT THIS PROJECT IS LIKE.
IF NO OTHER COMMENTS?
SO THUMBS UP RIGHT NOW WOULD BE IF YOU WANT TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW PUTTING $200,000 INTO THE BUDGET. OKAY. THAT WAS TWO AND SUPPORT. THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE THUMBS UP TO DIRECT MORE
INFORMATION AND TO BRING THIS BACK AT MIDYEAR BUDGET FOR CONSIDERATION.
CAN WE DOUBLE DIP THEM?
YES. I MEAN -- CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN?
THIS IS TO GET MORE INFORMATION BASED ON THE COMMENT TONIGHT THAT
THEY ARE GETTING QUOTES FROM THE CONSULTANT AND BETTER QUOTES AND
HAVING MORE INFORMATION AND BRING IN THAT BACK TO THE MIDYEAR BUDGET NOW.
THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN?
THE NEXT ONE IS THE GRANTOR. THERE IS NO FUNDING ON THIS. I WOULD JUST
RECOMMEND BRINGING THIS BACK AT MIDYEAR SO WE CAN GET A STATUS UPDATE AS TO THE AWARD OF THE GRANT. THERE IS NO BUDGET INVOLVED WITH THIS ONE RIGHT NOW. SO WE ARE ON NUMBER THE GRANT APPLICATION FOR PHASE 1 OF THE NATURALIZATION OF CALDER CREEK. SO THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATION ON THIS IS TO LOOK AT IT MIDYEAR AND WE WON'T KNOW
UNTIL THE AWARD IS GRANTED AND WE MAY HAVE MORE INFORMATION AT THAT POINT WOULD HOLD OFF UNTIL THEN. THE NEXT ONE IS THE ASSESSMENT OF CITY BUILDINGS. WE DO NOT HAVE AN AMOUNT KNOWN FOR WHAT THIS WOULD COST.
WE WOULD DEFINITELY NEED TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION. WE JUST DID A MASTER PLAN THAT WAS $100,000 FOR THAT AND 150 FOR THAT OR 150 FOR THIS.
NUMBER 11 AND THE CITY BUILDINGS AND GOAL NUMBER 2 INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND NUMBER 11, WHICH IS THE WATER MASTER PLAN AND THOSE ARE ALREADY FUNDED AND WHAT IS NOT FUNDED IS A CITY BUILDING ASSESSMENT. THAT
WOULD BE LOOKING AT OUR CITY BUILDINGS TO SEE REPLACEMENTS OR GETTING A PLAN TO SEE WHAT THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED. THERE IS NO FUNDING IN HERE SO STAFF WOULD NEED TO COME UP WITH FUNDING TO COME UP WITH THAT.
COMES A MEMBER CARTER?
I WILL MAKE A BRIEF STATEMENT THAT I WOULD PREFER TO PACE OURSELVES
AND MAYBE NOT INCLUDE THAT THIS YEAR SINCE WE ARE DOING QUITE A BIT THIS YEAR.
CAN I ASK? I HAVE A QUESTION. IF WE WERE GOING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS NOW CUT WE HAVE ANYTHING THAT WE ARE IN DANGER OF? I AM JUST ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION AND THIS IS WHAT YOU DO.
YOU ARE LOOKING AT ME, AND IT MAY NOT EVEN BE ME THAT DOES THE STUDY.
I UNDERSTAND THAT.
WE ARE SORELY LACKING IN BUILDINGS IN THIS AREA. WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SENIOR CENTER. THEY WANT TO MOVE. WE HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE
RECREATION CENTER RIGHT HERE IN THE FLOOD ZONE THAT IF IT FLOODS NEXT
YEAR, THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE WE WON'T BE ABLE TO REBUILD THAT BUILDING OR AT LEAST NOT AT FEMA'S EXPENSE. I AM ASSUMING THIS WOULD BE A FULL
COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF WHAT WE NEED, WHERE WE NEEDED, AND HOW IT SHOULD BE LAID OUT FOR EVERYBODY. THE LIBRARY NEEDS MORE SPACE AND ALL OF YOU KNOW ALL OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS ARE COMPLAINING TO US.
THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER?
I WAS CONFUSED. I THOUGHT THE ASSESSMENT WAS TO SEE THE CONDITION OF
THE BUILDINGS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE RATHER THAN WHAT ARE WE NEEDING OVERALL FOR THE DIFFERENT GROUPS?
THAT WOULD BE PART OF IT ALSO TO ASSESS THE BUILDINGS WE HAVE NOW CURRENTLY. ALL OF OUR BUILDINGS, EVERY ONE OF THEM WE OWN EXCEPT FOR THE ONES ON HERE ARE MORE THAN 50 OR 60 YEARS OLD. ALL OF THOSE BUILDINGS HAVE A USEFUL LIFE. THEY KEEP PATCHING TOGETHER CITY HALL, WHICH I BELIEVE IS 120 YEARS OLD OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. SO, YES, IT WOULD INCLUDE ALL OF THAT.
THANK YOU. OTHER COMMENTS?
YES. I KIND OF FEEL LIKE I AM ON BOARD COUNCILMEMBER CARTER BECAUSE WE
DID FUND A STAFFING STUDY AND THEN WE WEREN'T ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT. AND SO I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF FUNDING A STUDY WHEN WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT OR TO MOVE FORWARD ON IT. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING IT TONIGHT AND NOT BECAUSE I DON'T INC. IT IS IMPORTANT. I THINK LONG-RANGE BUT I DON'T THINK WE ARE IN A POSITION NOW.
I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT. WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING MORE STUDIES. IF WE CAN'T DO THE WORK WE CAN'T DO THE STUDIES.
THANK YOU.
I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I AGREE AND I WANTED TO HEAR FROM YOUR PROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVE. SO EXOR MY HEARING THE COUNCIL IS ASKING THIS ITEM TO BE REMOVED? OKAY.
WELL, THAT IS WHAT I AM TRYING TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I AM HEARING WE ARE
NOT DOING IT AND IF WE ARE NOT PUTTING IT IN THE BUDGET, ARE YOU
RECOMMENDING IT COME BACK IN MIDYEAR POTENTIAL WHAT A COST WOULD LOOK LIKE? WE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT OUR WE ARE NOT APPROVING IT, BUT DOES
THIS COUNCIL WANT TO REVIEW THIS ITEM AT MIDYEAR TO SEE WHAT A COST FOR A CITY BUILDING ASSESSMENT WOULD LOOK LIKE?
YES.
CAN'T OUR GOALS INCLUDE SOMETHING MAY BE TO LOOK AT FOR NEXT YEAR AND NOT LOSE TRACK OF IT. IF WE REMOVE IT FOREVER, WE MIGHT FORGET ABOUT IT. BUT I AM JUST SAYING I WOULD LIKE IT TO STILL BE A GOAL BUT MAYBE A TWO-YEAR TO THREE YEAR RANGE.
SO THESE ARE ONE OF YOUR GOALS. AND, YES, THEY WERE ADOPTED THROUGH JUNE OF 2026. SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO REVIEW IT AT THE DEER
AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING AT YEAR AND YOU CAN SAY NO THAT IS TOO COSTLY AND WE WILL DO IT THAT YOUR AND THAT IS FINE. I WOULD STILL RECOMMEND THESE COMING BACK SO WE DON'T LOSE SIGHT OF THESE. THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION.
OKAY. NO OTHER COMMENTS? THUMBS-UP OR THUMBS DOWN?
YES AGAIN WE ARE NOT APPROVING PROJECTS BUT JUST LOOKING AT IT SO COUNCILMEMBER MAURER SAID NO . AND YOU SAID THUMBS DOWN TO BRING IT DOWN NEXT YEAR?
TO BRING IT BACK -- THE FIRST THUMBS-UP IS DO YOU WANT TO INCLUDE IT OR DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW INCLUDING IT. I DON'T SEE ANY.
DOES THIS COUNCIL WANT TO REVIEW THIS AT MIDYEAR TO SEE WHAT THE POTENTIAL COST WOULD BE FOR ASSESSMENT OF A CITY BUILDING? THANK YOU.
OKAY. THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE THE MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL PROCESSES AND WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS. THIS IS THE ITEM THAT CITY STAFF IS
REMAKING OR RECOMMENDING AND WE ARE WORKING WITH THE FINANCIAL PRACTICES. WE COULD REVIEW IT MIDYEAR THE COUNCIL IF THEY WANTED TO DO THAT. IT WASN'T PROPOSED FOR A BUDGET IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AND IS NOT PROPOSED FOR A BUDGET IN THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR. THIS IS ITEM 3 UNDER GOAL NUMBER 4, WHICH IS HIGH-PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION.
I WILL JUST DO THUMBS-UP.
I THINK WE NEEDED A NUMBER. WHAT DO YOU THINK IT WILL COST? I BELIEVE THE FORMER CITY MANAGER PUT IN HERE, 10 TO 20, AND CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG. 25,000 IS WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION WAS LAST YEAR BUT NOT APPROVED IN THE BUDGET.
OKAY. I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THIS COUNCIL VOTED, AND I THINK IT WAS -- I DIDN'T VOTE FOR IT I THINK IT WAS EITHER 3-2 OR FOUR MINUS ONE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN I.T. AUDIT. IS THAT CORRECT?
RIGHT. THAT WASN'T PART OF THE GOALS. [ INAUDIBLE ] AND THIS IS AN ITEM
THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD FROM THE SEPTEMBER GOALS BROUGHT
FORWARD FROM THE FORMER CITY MANAGER AND WE HAD TO PUT IT -- HE REQUESTED TO BE IN THE BUDGET AND IT WASN'T APPROVED AT THIS TIME.
I THOUGHT THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON.
NO I THE FORMER CITY MANAGER.
THIS IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN. OKAY.
THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO EITHER REVIEW IT -- I AM SORRY. TO
EITHER REMOVE IT OR TO REVIEW IT AT MIDYEAR IF THIS IS A TOPIC THAT THEY WANT TO KEEP ON LIST OF GOALS.
SO WE THUMBS-UP IF WE WANT TO REMOVE IT?
THUMBS-UP WOULD BE IF WE WANT TO REMOVE IT FROM THE GOALS FOR THIS YEAR SO THERE ARE FIVE FOR REMOVAL.
SO THE NEXT ONE IS TO EVALUATE AND I WILL PUT BOTH OF THESE TOGETHER
BECAUSE THEY ARE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME WHICH IS THE EVALUATION
REPLACEMENT OF THE SMART PERMITTING SYSTEM AS WELL AS REPLACEMENT OF THE CIP SOFTWARE AND QUESTION?
I FEEL LIKE THIS IS IN THAT SAME VEIN OF DO WE BRING IT BACK MIDYEAR.
THAT WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION. THE REASON BEING IS BECAUSE AS WE EVALUATE NEW SOFTWARE AND I.T. AUDITOR WOULD BE BACK BY THEN, THIS
WOULD BE ALL INCORPORATED IN MY OPINION UNDER THE WHOLE UMBRELLA OF I.T.
THUMBS-UP FOR BRINGING IT BACK AT MIDYEAR? AND THAT WOULD BE FOR BOTH OF THEM.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE I.T. AUDIT. THIS IS THE ONE WE WILL BE ISSUING AND WAITING TO SEE WHAT THE COSTS ARE THAT COME BACK. AND THEN WE CAN DETERMINE AT THAT POINT HOW TO MOVE FORWARD. THERE IS NO BUDGET FOR THIS. THIS IS JUST ISSUING THE RFPS AND SEEING WHAT QUOTES COME BACK. [ INAUDIBLE ].
I HAVE HAD SOME COMMUNICATION TO ME FROM SOMEBODY THAT IS INTERESTED AS AN I.T. VENDOR FOR THE CITY. WHEN THESE RFPS COME OUT, CAN
COUNCIL GET COPIES SO WE CAN PUSH THEM OUT TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE INTEREST, FOR WHAT IS THE STANDARD PROTOCOL?
THEY ARE POSTED ONLINE UNDER THE CITY WEBSITE AND WE CAN ISSUE A
NOTICE ON SOCIAL MEDIA UNDER FACEBOOK AND ALL THAT AND MEMBERS CAN HAVE A COPY OF THIS. THIS ISN'T FOR THE I.T. VENDOR AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR AND. SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS THIS COMES BACK MIDYEAR BECAUSE WE WON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE COSTS ARE UNTIL THAT TIME. THE RFPS WILL BE ISSUED BUT AS FAR AS DISCUSSION AND THE BUDGET" AND ALL OF THAT COMES BACK FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.
THUMBS-UP OR THUMBS DOWN?
I AM SORRY.
I MEAN I DO HEAR YOU, BUT THAT MEANS WE ARE NOT EVEN GOING -- MIDYEAR WILL BE DISCUSSED AFTER CHRISTMAS AND THAT IS JANUARY. WE SHOULD HAVE THESE BACK IN SOME TIME AND COULDN'T BE DO PLACEHOLDERS ON THIS?
WE COULD PUT THEM ON A FORWARD AGENDA BUT I JUST WON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE COSTS ARE. SECT WE HAVE DONE PLACEHOLDERS FOR THINGS WE WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD.
IF YOU WANTED TO PUT AN AMOUNT INTO THE BUDGET HOW YOU COULD DIRECT THESE TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW AN AMOUNT.
I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF A PLACEHOLDER UNDERSTANDING CHANGE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL JANUARY OR FEBRUARY TO ACCEPT SOMETHING.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
NO. SECT SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE AN I.T. COMPANY, WOULDN'T WE ALREADY HAVE A NUMBER IN THE BUDGET? EFFECTS OF THIS IS THE I.T. AUDIT.
OKAY. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY. I HAVE VERY LITTLE IDEA WHAT THIS COULD COST JUST GENERALLY, WE COULD PUT A PLACEHOLDER THERE.
SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO REVIEW WHAT A
PLACEHOLDER WOULD BE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT?
I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO PUT A PLACEHOLDER IN
THAT WOULD BE UP FOR DISCUSSION WHEN THE BUDGET COMES BACK TO ALL OF US. WE HAVE DONE IT IN THE PAST AND I THINK IT IS A GOOD PRACTICE IF WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD A LITTLE FASTER THAN NEXT FEBRUARY.
THUMBS-UP AND A PLACEHOLDER?
A GOOD. THAT IS UNANIMOUS. SO THE NEXT ITEM IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION
FOR REMOVAL AND AGAIN THIS WAS A FORMER GOAL FROM SEPTEMBER FROM THE FORMER MANAGEMENT. THIS IS FOR THE $80-$100,000 FOR A SOFTWARE FOR RECORDS RETENTION. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING REMOVAL BUT THAT IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION. I WOULD LIKE A THUMBS-UP ON THAT RECOMMENDATION.
OTHERWISE WE WILL BE BACK IN MIDYEAR.
THUMBS-UP REMOVAL? REMOVAL? OKAY.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE TRAINING OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF. THERE IS NO COST WITH THAT. WITH THE COST OF PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET, WE DIDN'T PUT IT IN THE BUDGET WAS $10,000 FOR SCANNING OF FILES AND THIS IS JUST FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FILES ONLY. WE WOULD STILL HAVE THIS CONVERSATION
BUT IN MY OPINION WE STILL CAN'T GET RID OF THE FILES BECAUSE OF THE
RECORDS RETENTION AND WE COULD SCAN THEM AND IT WOULD BE EASY
RETRIEVAL, WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE A SYSTEM IF WE WERE TO DESTROY THOSE DOCUMENTS. SO I DON'T RECOMMEND IT AT THIS TIME. BUT WHAT I WOULD
LIKE TO DO IS MAYBE CONSIDER RETURNING THIS IN THE MID YEAR TO SEE WHAT
THEY WOULD BE TO SCAN THEM FOR EASY RETRIEVAL BUT WE STILL HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RECORDS RETENTION.
THE 10,000 FOR SCANNING, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT SCANNING HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS VERSUS SCANNING MOVING FORWARD?
RIGHT. THESE ARE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE OLD BUILDING FILES AND SUMMER ON
MICROFICHE RIGHT NOW BUT HERE YOU HAVE A STACKABLE THING IN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. AND IT WOULD BE EASIER TO RETRIEVE THOSE DOCUMENTS BUT WE STILL HAVE THE HARD COPIES STORED OFF-SITE.
AND MOVING FORWARD, AND MAYBE I AM WRONG, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT? THE QUESTION I HAVE IS THERE ANY WAY FOR US TO SCAN IT MOVING
FORWARD SO AS WE ARE MOVING FORWARD THINGS ARE BEING RESTORED DIGITALLY?
WE DO SCAN ALREADY AND WE SCAN OUR DOCUMENTS FOR EASY RETRIEVAL BUT
WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THE RECORD RETENTION WE DO DESTROY THEM WITH A HARD COPY.
JUST FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF WE ARE DOING --
WE ARE SCANNING FOR EASY RETRIEVAL BUT THOSE AREN'T THE OFFICIAL RECORDS BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THAT. SECOND WAS CURIOUS HOW LONG HAVE TO KEEP THEM.
IT DEPENDS ON THE DOCUMENT.
ALL RIGHT, THUMBS-UP FOR REVIEWING IT MIDYEAR? OKAY. MOVING ALONG.
I WOULD WONDER IF WE COULD DIALBACK THE FAN AND THE AC.
OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM WILL BE GOAL 5 AND 4 PUBLISH REPORTS ON BUDGET AT A GLANCE AND THIS IS TAKING THE BUDGET AND PUTTING DOWN TO A 12 TO 24 PAGE
DOCUMENT FOR EASE FOR PEOPLE TO SEE THE BUDGET AT A GLANCE RATHER THAN LOOKING AT 300 PAGES OF A BUDGET.
OKAY. COMMENTS?
I THINK ANYTHING THAT MAKES IT EASIER FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND OUR BUDGET IS IMPORTANT. BUT I AM LOOKING AT ONE FROM WINDSOR AND YOU STILL HAVE TO READ IT BUT THIS ONE IS 40 PAGES OR 60 PAGES AND THAT TO ME DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A BUDGET AT A GLANCE.
YES. I WOULD THINK WE COULD DO THIS WITHIN THE STAFF AND I WOULD NOT
HAVE BROUGHT THIS ON IF I THOUGHT THERE WAS AN EXPENSE ASSOCIATED WITH
IT AND IT IS EASY AND SOMEBODY BROUGHT IT UP AND TICKETS SELL AND I LEARNED THAT IN COLLEGE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME SIMPLE GRAPH AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS. BUT I THINK WE MAY DO THAT ALREADY ON SLIDES.
I WAS GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING AND WE DO THIS EVERY DAY WITH NO JOBS
AND AM NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND IS THAT A PRINTING COSTS OR WHAT IS IT COST THIS MUCH?
I DIDN'T GET THE QUOTE FOR THAT. BUT I DO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION.
IT'S JUST THE 300 PAGES CONDENSED.
I DO UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE I DO IT WITH MY BUDGET ALL THE TIME BUT WHAT IS THE COST $5000-$7000 TO CREATE SOMETHING IN EXCEL THAT I KNOW HOW TO DO AND MY STAFF KNOWS HOW TO DO. I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
THIS IS ACTUALLY SENT OUT TO A COMPANY LIKE THE GRAPHIC COMPANY THAT
WOULD DO IT AND THAT IS WHAT THIS IS AND THE PAGES AND THE COST BUT AS
FAR AS THE BUDGET AT A GLANCE THERE IS SOMETHING NEW IN THE UPCOMING
BUDGET WHERE THERE IS AN ALL IN THE BUDGET AT ONE PAGE THAT YOU CAN
JUST GO RIGHT INTO THAT AND STAFF IS MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BUDGET ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
IF THERE ARE NO MORE COMMENTS?
I DO WANT TO SAY SOMETHING BECAUSE I THINK WE SHOULD BE DOING THIS. I AM BAFFLED THAT WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE THAT KNOW HOW TO USE EXCEL. BUT I
DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE BUDGETING THIS AND THIS SHOULD BE WITH ANY STAFF AND THAT IS WHERE I AM WITH THIS.
LET'S DO THIS IN STAFF AND WE CAN FIGURE SOMETHING OUT.
THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO CHANGE THIS TO MATCH ONE OF
THE LINE THROUGH AS WE DID BEFORE THAT SAYS TO BE DONE WITHIN STAFF BUDGET.
ANY THUMBS-UP?
THUMBS-UP TO HAVE THE FUNDING OR NO FUNDING FOR THIS AND IT SHOULD BE DONE WITH STAFF BUDGET.
ALL RIGHT. MOVING ALONG SECT THE NEXT ITEM IS TO DIVERSIFY THE CITY
REVENUE BASE AND THIS WAS THE DISCUSSION OF IN THE SAME ONE BELOW
REGARDING THE COST FOR GETTING A SCOPE OF WORK FOR DEVELOPMENT AND NEW DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMIC STRATEGY. AND I DO NOT HAVE A COST AND I
DON'T KNOW IF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR WOULD HAVE A PROPOSED COST.
SO I HAVE REVIEWED THE JOB DESCRIPTION FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR THAT WE APPROVED AND WHEN WE EXPANDED THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ROLE. THIS SHOULD BE WITHIN THE SCOPE AND I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF GOING OUT FOR RFPS FOR THIS TYPE OF WORK. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I WON'T FIND AND THERE ARE A FEW OF THESE ON HERE. WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE JOB
DESCRIPTION, IT APPEARS IT WOULD BE STAFF'S RESPONSIBILITY AND I
UNDERSTAND IT MIGHT NOT BE PERFECT BUT I AM WAITING FOR THAT PRESENTATION.
OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE DO THUMBS-UP OR THUMBS DOWN?
YES. I MEAN I DO WANT THIS TO HAPPEN IN STAFF AND IN HOUSE.
IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID ABOVE THAT TO SEE IF THIS CAN BE DONE WITHIN THE STAFF BUDGET AND NOT RECOMMEND A BUDGET FOR IT AT THIS TIME.
I WAS GOING TO ECHO THE SAME THING.
ALL RIGHT, THUMBS-UP FOR PUTTING IT ALL IN HOUSE? ALL RIGHT.
I WILL ASSUME THE SAME WOULD BE FOR THE NEXT ONE WHICH IS DECREASING THE REVENUE. AND THOSE WERE ALL UNANIMOUS.
THE NEXT SUMMER THE UPDATE OF THE IMPACT FEES AND THE DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEES THAT WE DISCUSSED WHICH SHOULD BE DONE WITH TYPICALLY A FIVE-YEAR OR SIX-YEAR TIMEFRAME. ESTIMATE WE HAVE HAD WAS $50,000-$70,000 AND THIS HASN'T BEEN PLACED INTO THE BUDGET. THIS WOULD BE DIRECT IT AS
TO WHETHER OR NOT TO CONSIDER IT OR TO REVIEW IT MIDYEAR SINCE WE WOULD START THE PROCESS IN JANUARY IN THAT TIMEFRAME.
YES. I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ITEM AND IT SHOULD BE DONE. HOWEVER, WE CAN WAIT UNTIL MIDYEAR TO DO IT. BUT WE DID HEAR FROM OUR BUILDING
PERSON STEVE BROWN WHO SAID YOU WOULD RECOUP THE COST THAT YOU SPENT ON THE STUDY WITHIN THE FIRST YEAR. SO THAT IS ENCOURAGING. IT HASN'T BEEN DONE FOR FIVE YEARS. SO IT IS TIME TO DO IT. SO I WOULD GO EITHER WAY. DO IT NOW. PUT IT IN THE BUDGET NOW, OR BRING IT BACK AT MIDYEAR.
HOW LONG WOULD A STUDY TAKE? IS IT BECAUSE WE ARE PUSHING IT TO MIDYEAR?
IF WE ARE PUSHING IT TO MIDYEAR, WHICH I WOULD FULLY SUPPORT ALSO, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET AS MUCH AS WE POSSIBLY COULD DONE IN-HOUSE. SO
MAYBE WE COULD SHORTEN UP THE TIME IF WE WENT OUT IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY TO DO THIS.
THE REASON I AM ASKING IS YOU SAID WE COULD KEEP OUR COSTS SO I
WONDERED IN THAT GAP OR TIME HOW MUCH WE WOULD BE LOSING AND I KNOW
YOU CAN'T FULLY GIVE US A NUMBER BUT I AM THINKING SOMETHING I AM WONDERING.
REMEMBER THE IMPACT FEE ONLY APPLIES TO NEW CONSTRUCTION. WE HAVE A VERY LIMITED NUMBER OF NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. THE LONGER WE WAIT,
THE MORE THOSE HOUSES THAT ARE BEING BUILT NOW GET BUILT AND HAVE A LOWER PACKED.
COUNCILMEMBER?
SO MY FEEDBACK ON THIS IS I HEARD YOU SAY FIVE OR SIX YEARS AND HAVING IT DONE FOR HOW MANY YEARS.
ACTUALLY I BELIEVE THE TIME OF 421 WHICH WAS BEFORE MY TIME BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS DONE BEFORE THAT IN 19 SO AND YOU ARE SAYING SO WOULD BE
MADE UP IN THE HIGHER DEVELOPMENT FEES CHARGING PEOPLE SACRAMENTO
WE ARE PAYING FOR THAT OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND AND THE FEES ARE GOING INTO SPECIFIC ACCOUNTS.
AND YOU THOUGHT WOULD THIS BE ANOTHER BUILDING PROJECT AND WOULD
THERE BE ENOUGH HAPPENING THAT WE WOULD GET THIS BACK
AT THIS POINT I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS THEY WILL BEAT OUT THE OREILLY
BUILDINGS OF ALL THE COMMERCIAL AND MY FEELINGS AT SOME POINT THE
SAME COMPANY IS DOING THIS OWNS IT AND I BELIEVE THEY ARE COMING WITH
RESIDENTIAL AND WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT AT THE OLD CHURCH OUT THERE AND I'VE SEEN PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING 150 UNITS ON THAT SITE, SO THERE MAY BE OTHER PROJECTS COMING.
VICE MAYOR?
I JUST WONDERED WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE ON THIS?
I THINK IF THERE IS CONSENSUS THAT THIS COULD BE DONE THIS YEAR, I THINK IT
WILL TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN WHAT WE THINK IT COULD TAKE AND I
RECOMMEND STARTING IT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER AS LONG AS THERE IS CONSENSUS TO DIRECT THIS TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE BUDGET. AND I BELIEVE -- I AM SORRY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO LEAVE YOU OUT.
I WAS JUST GOING TO ANSWER COUNCILMEMBER CARTER'S QUESTION THAT OF
ALL THOSE EXISTING PROJECTS THAT AREN'T SUBJECT TO THE NEW FEES SO THEY
WILL BE GRANDFATHERED IN AND THEY WILL BE ANY HOUSING PROJECT THAT
SUBMITS AN APPLICATION BEFORE WE ADOPT THESE NEW FEES IS GRANDFATHERED IN.
OKAY. THUMBS-UP FOR STARTING AT THIS YEAR? EFFECTS OF THE THUMBS-UP
WOULD BE TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO PUT IT INTO THE BUDGET FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR?
OKAY. THAT IS UNANIMOUS.
OKAY. THE NEXT ONE IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THE FIRST ONE IS THE
GROWING BUSINESS TOGETHER WHICH IT WAS ORIGINALLY TITLED AND
IMPROVED BUT FOR THE ECONOMIC GARDENING PROGRAM WITH THE POTENTIAL COST OF 3020 HOURS OF STAFF TIME.
COMMENTS?
SO THIS SQUARELY FITS WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR WOULD DO BUT THAT 3000 IS FOR A SPECIFIC EVENT
I SUPPORT DOING THIS BUT THE ONLY THOUGHT I HAVE IF WE GET A
PRESENTATION FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS PERSON SOONER THAN LATER, SHOULD WE DO THAT? I AM JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT ALL COMES TOGETHER SO WE DON'T PIECEMEAL.
SO STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND PUTTING IT IN AS A PLACEHOLDER BUT RECEIVING THE PRESENTATION FIRST BEFORE WE ACT ON IT. SO THIS IS NOT APPROVING ANY
OF THESE PROJECTS BUT THIS IS WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS CONSENSUS TO PUT IT INTO THE BUDGET BUT BEFORE WE ACT ON IT, I WOULD RECOMMEND AS WELL.
I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF REVIEWING IT MIDYEAR. I CAN IMAGINE WE WOULD GET IT DONE BEFORE THEN. BUT I COULD BE SWAYED TO BE A PLACEHOLDER AS WELL IF THAT IS A GOOD RESPONSE.
THUMBS-UP FOR PLACEHOLDER?
FOR THE THUMBS-UP WOULD BE TO DIRECT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO HAVE IT
WITHIN THE UPCOMING BUDGET IS A PLACEHOLDER FOR THE REQUESTED AMOUNT FOR 3000.
SO THAT IS UNANIMOUS?
THE NEXT ONE IS WHAT WE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ARE WE GOING TO ASSUME WE WOULD GO AHEAD WITH WHAT WE STATED ORIGINALLY AND DOING IT WITHIN THE CITY STAFF BUDGET? YES. THUMBS-UP.
THOSE WERE THE ONLY 19 ITEMS THAT NEEDED TO BE DISCUSSED FOR COUNCIL ACTION.
I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE OTHER THING. A SHOUT OUT TO THE ACTING CITY MANAGER FOR PULLING THIS ABSTRACT GROUP OF GOALS TOGETHER. WELL DONE.
THANK YOU.
I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF WHO PUT THE TIME AND ENERGY INTO THIS. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. YOU DID A GREAT JOB AND A LOT OF INFORMATION.
ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE ARE ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX MAC.
WE ARE. THIS IS A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR LEASE FOR FIRE TRUCK AND THIS
HAS A FISCAL IMPACT AND STAFF HAS REQUESTED A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT OF $231,335 $.50 FROM THE LETTER H BOND TO SETTLE THE CITIES OBLIGATION. HERE WE ARE. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT FIRE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND GOOD EVENING. THE ITEM IS REQUESTING THE
COUNCIL APPROVED THE UTILIZATION OF MEASURE H FUND AND AMEND THE
BUDGET TO COVER THE EXPENDITURE FOR PAYING OFF THE TYPE I FIRE ENGINE DO TO AN AGREED-UPON REORGANIZATION PROCESS OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO
THE CITY ENTERED INTO THE FINANCING AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY LEASING PARTNERS ON AUGUST THREE OF 2023 WITH A ANNUAL PAYMENT OF THIS.
THE FIRST PAYMENT MADE EARLIER THIS YEAR AND AUGUST OF 2024 AND IT IS IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2425. THE SECOND PAYMENT WAS PLANNED FOR 2526. HOWEVER,
DUE TO THIS FIRE REORGANIZATION AND THE NEGOTIATION, BOTH PARTY
REMAINDER SHARE THE REMAINING OF THE TWO PAYMENTS AND THE CITY
PORTION IS RECOMMENDED USE THE MEASURE H FUND TO PAY FOR OUR SHARE OF THE PORTION WHICH WOULD BE $231,000. STAFF RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THIS ADVANCED PAYMENT AND APPROVE THE BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.
ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT?
WILL THIS AFFECT THE GENERAL FUND IN ANY WAY?
NOT AT ALL.
SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE FIRE TRUCK POLICE FOR THE
REORGANIZATION APPROVED AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I WILL LOOK IN CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PAYMENT OF THE FIRE
TRUCK FOR THE LEASE PAYOFF FOR THE REORGANIZATION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I WILL MAKE A MOTION.
I SAID COMMENTS AND OR MOTION?
I WANTED TO POINT OUT TO THE PUBLIC THAT JOE AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON
THIS WE WERE NOT MOVING FORWARD TOWARD REORGANIZATION AND WE
WOULD'VE HAD TWO PAYMENTS DUE AND THEY ARE PICKING UP ONE OF THE
PAYMENTS AFTER OUR CONSOLIDATION AND I THINK THERE PLANNING TO PAY THIS OFF EARLY. WE ARE PULLING THIS OUT OF THE FUNDING THAT WAS LOCATED FOR THIS USE. SO I JUST ONE OF THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT THAT WAS THE DEAL ON THIS.
THERE WAS A MOTION?
JUST TO PROVE.
DO YOU WANT TO DO IT? EXPECT THE MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE
RESOLUTION FOR THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE PAYMENT FOR THE FIRE TRUCK AND APPROVING THE FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASING OF THE NEW TYPE 1 FIRE ENGINE IS AGREED-UPON UPON THE PROCESS.
SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND?
SECOND.
SO MOVED AND APPROVING THE RESOLUTION FOR THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
THE PAYMENT OF THE LEASE FOR THE FIRE TRUCK AND ALLOCATING MEASURE H FUNDING. [ ROLL CALL VOTE TAKEN ]
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, BUDGET AMENDMENT PAYMENT OF LEASE ON FIRE STATION. IT DOES HAVE A FISCAL IMPACT AND I WILL READ THIS. THE BUDGET ADJUSTMENT OF 210,000 TO COVER THIS EARLY DEBT SERVICE
OBLIGATION PAYMENT AND THE BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WILL BE ALLOCATED AS FOLLOWS WITH GENERAL FUND FOR THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $56,700 AND HERE THIS FUND AND THE INTEREST AMOUNT OF 27 $300. THE WATER FUND FOR THE INTEREST AMOUNT OF $26,200 AND WASTE WATER FUND FOR THE INTEREST AMOUNT OF 58 THOUSAND $800. AND IS THERE QUESTIONS?
I WAS GOING TO HAVE THE STAFF GIVE THIS BEFORE WE GOING TO QUESTIONS.
GOOD EVENING. THIS IS IN THE SAME VEIN OF THE FIRE TRUCK THAT IS REQUESTING THE COUNCIL TO USE THE MEASURE H FUND TO PAY IN ADVANCE.
BECAUSE OF THE REORGANIZATION, THE CITY TOOK OUT THAT A WHILE AGO OF USING THE FIRE BUILDING AS COLLATERAL. SO WE STILL HAVE BIANNUAL
PAYMENT THAT WAS SCHEDULED FOR NEXT YEAR AND BECAUSE OF THIS REORGANIZATION. HE WOULD LIKE TO ASK COUNCIL TO ADVANCE THIS PAYMENT
AND WHAT THEY JUST READ WAS ASKING THE COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE BUDGET BECAUSE IT WASN'T THERE BEFORE. SO WITH THAT, MR. MAYOR, ALL THE FUNDING THAT WAS IMPACTED FOR THIS $210,000 BETWEEN THE GENERAL FUND AND THE WATER AND SEWER. SO THE EACH SHARE A DIFFERENT PIECE OF IT.
EXCELLENT. OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT?
THE GENERAL FUND IS GOING TO BE PITCHING IN $56,700 AND THAT'S FOR 24 AND 25?
YES, FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. EXPECT WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF WHERE WE ARE LANDING IN TERMS OF THE GENERAL FUND?
LET ME LOOK.
$350,000. IN DEFICIT.
TO THAT, THIS INCLUDED THAT.
OKAY.
ANY QUESTIONS?
THIS IS A STEP WE NEED TO TAKE IN ORDER TO COMPLETE OUR CONSOLIDATION? WE DO. IT WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF THE DEBT OBLIGATIONS TO TRANSFER
OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY BUT THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE TO FIND A DIFFERENT PROPERTY TO MOVE THIS OVER. SO THERE ARE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT THAT WOULD ADD $15,000 OF BOND AND ALL OF THAT AND WE HAVE LOOKED INTO THAT.
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT?
THANK YOU CONNOR MAYER. THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE BUDGET
AMENDMENT FOR REMOVING THE COLLATERAL PAYOFF WITH THE FIRE STATION
AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I WILL ENTERTAIN IN CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO SELL IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
I WOULD ASK FOR MORE COMMENTS AND/OR A MOTION.
I WILL MAKE A MOTION. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS.
SECOND.
SO MOVED AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION FOR THE BUDGET
AMENDMENT FOR THE PAYMENT OF A LEASE ON THE FIRE STATION AND FIRE BUILDING COLLATERAL PAYOFF WITH THE TRUST BANK. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ] MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8 THE APPROVAL OF PROPOSED THIRD OF
JULY FIREWORKS AND MUSIC FESTIVAL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT AND REQUEST FOR
FEE WAIVER TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR ROAD CLOSURES AND THE FISCAL
AMOUNT OR FISCAL IMPACT ARE SEVERAL, WHICH BECAUSE IT IS A FISCAL I WILL READ THEM. FISCAL IMPACT APPLICATION FEE $150, DAILY USE FEE OF $500 AMPLIFIED SOUND USE FEE, $50 CAB ALMSHOUSE USER FEE, $30, PUBLIC WORKS STAFF TIME, $2500, POLICE STAFF TIME $2700. A FEE OF $1000 WOULD BE
ALLOCATED AGAINST THE NEW GARBAGE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ALLOWANCE OF $10,000 FOR WASTE CARTS, PORT RENTALS AND HANDWASHING STATIONS. THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY'S PUBLIC WORKS.
YES. GOOD EVENING. THIS IS THE KIWANIS CLUB ANNUAL FIREWORK SHOW. WHAT
IS DIFFERENT THIS YEAR IS THEY HAD TO USE THE FACILITIES HERE IN THE
PARKING LOT BECAUSE THE SCHOOL HAS CONSTRUCTION GOING ON SO THE SCHOOL WON'T BE AVAILABLE THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR. SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR THIS FOR THE 50th YEAR THEY ARE PUTTING THIS ON. WHAT WILL BE
HAPPENING THEY WILL BE CLOSING UP MORRIS STREET AROUND THE CORNER HERE AND EVEN THE FESTIVITIES AS WELL. SO THE TOTAL COST WILL BE $6930 THEY ARE ASKING FOR IT.
ALL RIGHT. QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT?
I REALLY DON'T HAVE A QUESTION. BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THAT VOTING FOR
THIS, I AM KIND OF HOPING THE MONEY WILL BE USED FOR INCREASED ADVERTISEMENT TO GET MORE PEOPLE TO COME.
THAT IS A PUBLIC COMMENT. NO OTHER QUESTIONS? EXPECT THIS IS FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT FOR THE REQUEST OF WAIVER OF FEES AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I WILL COME IN CHAMBERS FIRST.
THAT IS OKAY. WE ARE GETTING TIRED. THAT IS FINE.
HELLO THERE. I AM FROM THE QANTAS CLUB OF SEBASTOPOL THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THIS IS SUCH A GREAT ANNUAL EVENT AS YOU KNOW AND IT BRINGS A LOT OF PEOPLE TO TRAN ONE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TICKET SALES
AND NUMBERS, THERE ARE PEOPLE COMING IN FROM SANTA ROSA AND ELSEWHERE. IT IS ONE OF THE FEW SHOWS AROUND. SO IT IS A REAL AMPLIFIER FOR LOCAL BUSINESSES. I HAVE TO ADMIT THAT I HAVE ONLY BEEN IN QANTAS LESS THAN A HANDFUL OF YEARS. I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT KIWANIS THROUGH THIS SHOW. AS A YOUNGSTER GROWING UP WE WOULD WATCH IT TO FREE AND WE WOULD GO OUT TO EAT AND ORDER FOOD AND GO TO OTHER PLACES. BUT YOU LOOK AT THE BARLOW AND IT'S PACKED IN DOWNTOWN IS PACKED. IT IS SUCH A GREAT DRAW. WE ARE REALLY EXCITED TO DO THAT FOR THE CITY, BUT ALSO, OF COURSE, IT IS FOR THE CHILDREN. THAT IS WHAT QANTAS DOES. WE RAISE MONEY TO GIVE AWAY AS SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRANTS TO TEACHERS AND STUDENTS. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I WILL GO OUT TO SUMAC. IF
THERE IS ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE REQUEST FOR THE WAIVER OF FEES FOR QANTAS FOR THE THIRD OF JULY? SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS.
MY NAME IS PATRICK CANNON MEMBER OF THE QANTAS CLUB AND HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE CLUB SINCE 1985 AND [ INAUDIBLE ] AROUND 1972 BUT THERE
HAVE BEEN SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FIREWORKS POTENTIALLY CAUSING
PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE WITH PTSD BECAUSE OF THE NOISE INVOLVED AND ALSO
WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD DO IT NOISELESS WITH DRONES FOR SOMETHING EQUIVALENT LIKE THAT. MANY OF THE PTSD SUFFERERS HAVE DEVELOPED
STRATEGIES FOR DEALING WITH SPECIFICALLY JULY FOUR AND PROBABLY ALSO
NEW YEAR'S EVE AND TIMES LIKE THAT WHEN THERE ARE A LOT OF FIREWORKS INVOLVED AND NOISE. DRONE SHOWS, WE DID LOOK INTO THOSE, AND THE
PROBLEM WITH THOSE IS, FIRST OF ALL, THEY ARE NOT VERY EXCITING, SECONDLY, THEY COST ABOUT 6 1/2 TIMES WHAT WE CURRENTLY PAY FOR FIREWORKS. AND THAT ROADBLOCKS US. WE CAN'T AFFORD THAT WE CAN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO IT. WE TAKE ALL THE MONEY FROM THE SHOW AND PUT IT BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY IN THE FORM OF DONATIONS TO CHARITIES. SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY RESERVE IN WHICH WE COULD DO THAT. IF WE DID HAVE A RESERVE, IT WOULD GO TO SCHOLARSHIPS AND OTHER FUNDING FOR CHILDREN'S ACTIVITIES.
INTERESTINGLY, THE MAJOR FIREWORKS SHOWS ARE NOT KNOWN TO CAUSE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE WITH PTSD.
ABOUT 15 SECONDS. FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
THAT IS BECAUSE THE OTHER SHOWS ARE 20 MINUTES LONG AND THEY KNOW
EXACTLY WHEN IT WILL BE SO THEY CAN PREPARE FOR IT AS OPPOSED TO THE
MAJOR PROBLEM WHICH IS NEIGHBORHOOD FIREWORKS WHICH ARE UNPREDICTABLE.
THAT IS TWO-MINUTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.
NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO SUMAC. IF THERE IS ANYBODY ON ZOOM WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY.
CC NONE, I WILL GO BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE IT PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, COMMENT IS CLOSED.
I WILL BRING IT BACK UP TO THE DAIS FOR PUBLIC COLLEAGUES AND EMOTION.
SEEING NONE?
I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
SECOND.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU CASO MOVED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER AND I AM SORRY COTTAGE YOU HAVE A DISCUSSION?
YES. I WANTED TO SAY A FEW COMMENTS. THANK YOU, QANTAS CLUB AND I
WANTED TO SAY THAT THIS IS A LONGTIME TRADITION HERE AND A FEW YEARS
AGO WE MADE A DECISION TO NOT SELL FIREWORKS IN THE CITY ANY LONGER BECAUSE OF THE FIREWORKS DISPLAY THAT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE. FOR ME, IT IS
SIMILAR TO APPLE BLOSSOM WITH ALL THE ATTENDEES AND A GREAT CELEBRATION. SO I KNOW WE ARE RUSHED TONIGHT, BUT I THINK WE REALLY
NEED TO RECOGNIZE THESE KIND OF EVENTS AND THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR EFFORT.
I TOO JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT BRINGS PEOPLE TO OUR COMMUNITY. IT BRINGS PEOPLE TO ALL OF OUR RESTAURANTS, OUR DOWNTOWN. THIS IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE WANT TO DO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND BECAUSE WE ARE SO TIGHT ON FUNDING, WHERE
EVER WE CAN COP PUT IT TO WHAT BRINGS PEOPLE DOWNTOWN TO HELP EVERYONE HERE AND IT IS FOR THE GOOD OF ALL. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU AS WELL.
PERFECT. THANK YOU.
I WANTED TO CLARIFY ABOUT ONE OF OUR GOALS WAS TO SUPPORT CITY SPONSORSHIPS AND REDUCE FEES. I WANTED TO CHECK IN WITH YOU THAT THE CITY SPONSORSHIP MEANS YOU PUT THE TRAN ONE BOGO ON YOUR LITERATURE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO CHECK IN TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE DOING THAT.
GREAT. OKAY.
A MOTION ANY SECOND?
CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT? I ALSO WANTED TO STATE THAT WITH THE NEW FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE HAVE UTILIZED THIS.
THEY HAVE SET ASIDE FUNDING IN THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR EVENTS LIKE
THIS AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT HAS BEEN DONE WITH THE BRAND-NEW
FRANCHISE AGREEMENT SO THAT IS ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF THE CONTRACT AS WELL. SO SO MOVED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER AND A SECOND BY
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER TO APPROVE THE FEES FOR THE PROPOSED JULY THREE FIREWORKS AND MUSIC FESTIVAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $6930. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ] .
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
HOORAY. SO WE ARE MOVING ALONG TO AGENDA ITEM 9, WHICH IS A
CONSIDERATION OF A PARTIAL WAIVER OF FEES FOR THE PEACE TOWN SUMMER CONCERT SERIES, $1550 AND THE RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.
THE FISCAL IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS IS A SPECIAL EVENT FEE OF $150, AMPLIFIED SOUND STAGE A FEE OF $1400. DIRECTOR? SECT YES. THIS IS A SUMMER CONCERT SERIES AND THE 12th ANNUAL ONE THEY ARE PUTTING TOGETHER AND ASKING FOR A FEE WAIVER OF $1550.
I AM SORRY. THERE IS MUSIC? THANK YOU. BACK TO YOU. SECT THERE ASKING FOR A FEE WAIVER FORGIVENESS OF $1550.
PERFECT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM MY COLLEAGUES BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT?
IS THIS ALSO CITY SPONSORED? LIKE WILL YOU HAVE THE APPLE LOGO ON THE LITERATURE? WILL TRAN ONE BE FEATURED AS A SPONSOR?
[ INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ] THE CITY HAS SPONSORED THIS IN THE PAST WHEN WE WERE ABLE TO GIVE COMMUNITY GRANTS AND STUFF. WE HAVE ALREADY PAID OUT THE FEES IN TOTAL. AND THE MONEY THAT GOES TO -- I THINK JUST ASKING IF YOU PUT THE APPLE ON THE FLYER.
THAT WAS MY IDEA BY ROLLING BACK THE FEES THAT WE PUT UP THE BANNERS
EVERY YEAR AT THE PARK AND STUFF, SO WE WOULD DEFINITELY DO IS GIVE YOU
GUYS A LITTLE BIT OF SKIN IN THE GAME BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE DOING A GOOD THING.
THANK YOU. ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE.
THANK YOU. THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE REQUEST TO WAIVER FEES FOR PEACE TOWN. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, I WILL GO TO THE CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE, I WILL GO TO SUMAC. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT FOR THIS EVENT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
BRINGING IT UP TO THE DAIS FOR COMMENTS AND OR EMOTION?
I WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE THE FEE REDUCTION OF THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT
FEES FOR THE PEACE TOWN SUMMER CONCERT SERIES AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1550.
THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND?
I WILL MAKE A SECOND AND MAKE A COMMENT THAT THIS IS ANOTHER EVENT
THAT IS BELOVED BY THE CITY AND COMPETES WITH OTHER CITY SPONSORED
EVENTS THAT ARE HELD IN OTHER CITIES AND WE HAVE OUR VERY OWN PEACE
TOWN THAT REALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY IS A LOT OF FUN, FREE AND YOU GET TO SUPPORT AND SEE HER NEIGHBORS. SO THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS FOR SO MANY YEARS.
YES. Q. IS THERE A MOTION?
A MOVE AND A SECOND TO REQUEST THE AMOUNT OF $1550.
[ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
HOORAY, MUSIC. ALL RIGHT. SPECS ARE MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10,
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A REDUCTION OF SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT FEES
FOR THE MANY MOONS FESTIVAL SPONSORED BY THE ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER COALITION OF NORTH BAY. THE TOTAL REDUCTION FEES HE DOLLARS AND TURNING BACK TO THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
YES. GOOD EVENING. MANY MOONS FESTIVAL IS A NEW EVENT WHICH IS A NORTH
BAY COALITION AND PUTTING ON THE EVENT HERE IN TOWN SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR A FEE WAIVER OF $725.
DO YOU KNOW THIS AND WHERE WILL BE HELD BECAUSE IT IS NEW? AND I AM SORRY, I MISSED THAT. I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE IN [ INAUDIBLE ] PARK. MY QUESTION IS I THOUGHT THIS WAS VERY CREATIVE. ONE OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN IT, A RESIDENT, IS THAT HOW WE GOT THIS FEE?
OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
WE ARE JUST ASKING FOR QUESTIONS. IT IS FINE. YOU CAN COMMENT AFTER.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT?
SO THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE REMOVAL OF FEES FOR THE MANY MOONS
FESTIVAL AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
MY NAME IS JANET THE EVENT COORDINATOR FOR THE MANY MOONS FESTIVAL.
IT WILL HAPPEN AT IVES PARK ON OCTOBER FOUR. WHAT THIS IS IS A PAN- ASIAN
EVENT AND I KNOW I AM NOT ASIAN AND I AM AN EVENT COORDINATOR SO THAT IS WHY THEY HIRED ME. BUT THIS IS PUT ON BY THE ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER COALITION OF THE NORTH BAY. IT WILL BE ASIAN FOOD, ASIAN ENTERTAINMENT, ASIAN FASHION SHOW HOW WORKSHOPS, CRAFTS. IT WILL BE A BEAUTIFUL EVENT. WE ARE VERY VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT. THE ONLY CONCERN WE HAVE IS HOW MUCH IT IS COSTING US. IT IS VERY EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE AND THE VISION WE HAVE IS IT WILL BE VERY MAGICAL. YOU HAVE INDICATED THAT THERE ARE A FEW FEE WAIVERS WE'RE LOOKING AT. I WANT TO PUT FORWARD
THAT THOUGH YOU HAVE PROPOSED TO GIVE US THE ADJUSTMENT TO MAKE IT A
RESIDENT VERSUS A NONRESIDENT FEE, THERE IS ALSO A COMMUNITY FEE AND I
AM SORRY THAT I DON'T HAVE THE CORRECT WORD HERE, COMMUNITY GROUP FEE WHICH IS 650. WE ARE A NONPROFIT. I NOTICE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY NONPROFIT FEES. I WONDER -- WE ARE PERFECTLY FINE WITH A RESIDENT FEE IF THAT IS WHAT
FEELS COMFORTABLE, BUT IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER THE COMMUNITY GROUP FEE IS A NONPROFIT FEE, THAT WOULD HELP US EVEN MORE. SO JUST ASKING.
THANK YOU.
I WAS JUST CHECKING ON PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE TIMER HAS DISAPPEARED.
I WILL GO OUT FOR SUMAC IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR A REQUEST OF WAIVER OF FEES FOR THE MANY MOONS FESTIVAL. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
SEEING NONE, I WILL COME BACK IN THE CHAMBERS. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENTS.
YES. WHEN I MADE MY COMMENT ASKED MIKE QUESTION, I THOUGHT THAT IS WHAT YOU FOLKS HAD ASKED FOR. LOOKING AT THE FEES WE HAVE APPROVED IN
THE PAST, TRASH ATLANTIS WHICH WAS A FIRST-TIME EVENT FOR US AND WAS VERY SIMILAR AND WE WENT AHEAD AND CHARGE THEM $825 AND I AM NOT SURE IF THIS IS ANY DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF WHERE IT IS BEING HELD. BUT I WOULD PROPOSE TO MY COLLEAGUES TO MAYBE REDUCE YOUR FEE TO 825 TO BE IN THE SAME RANGE AND IF I HAD SUPPORT ON THAT.
I AM KIND OF CONFUSED ABOUT THAT. SORRY. COUNCILMEMBER HINTON, ARE YOU SAYING -- I AM LOOKING AT THIS TABLE HERE. ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU
WANT TO REDUCE THEIR FEES TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT, --
I WAS SUGGESTING INSTEAD OF CHARGING THEM 1125 TWO MAYBE WE COULD CONSIDER CHARGING THEM 825 WHICH WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE TRASH ATLANTIS.
SO HOW MUCH OF A WAIVER WOULD BE GIVING THEM IF WE DID THAT? CAN I JUMP IN REALLY QUICKLY?
I AM SORRY CAN I JUMP IN. THE 825 IS WHAT WAS WAIVED AND THAT IS AND WHAT THEY PAID. THAT IS THE AMOUNT THE COUNCIL DID APPROVE FOR WAIVING AND
WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE STAFF REPORT TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT THOSE FEES WERE BUT WHAT I BELIEVE I AM HEARING AND CORRECT ME, 650 YOU ARE REFERRING TO IS THE DAILY USE FEE.
[ INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ]
WITH THERE BE A WAY TO SEE WHAT WE HAVE?
THE 650 IS THE FEE THAT IS WITHIN YOUR STAFF REPORT IF YOU WANTED TO CONSIDER SOMETHING. IT IS A COMMUNITY GROUP FEE FOR THE DAILY USE.
OKAY. HOLD ON. THERE IS A PROCESS HERE.
I COULD TRY TO GO BACK TO SEE WHAT THEY PAID IF YOU WOULD WANT TO SEE
THAT AT THE FEES THAT ARE IN FRONT OF YOU IS WHAT THE FEES WOULD BE IF YOU WANTED TO.
SO VICE MAYOR AND THEN [ INAUDIBLE ]. SECOND WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER WE ARE DOING THAT WE SPEND TIME ON THIS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT WHATEVER WE ARE DOING IS BASICALLY IN LINE WITH WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING AND THIS IS WHAT IT IS. I DON'T WANT US TO START PICKING UP
RANDOM FEES ARE EVERY TIME SOMEBODY COMES HERE SO I WANTED TO SAY IS THERE A FOUNDATION FOR THAT OR A PRECEDENT. THAT IS WHY I WAS LOOKING AT TRASH ON THIS.
LET'S LET HER RESPOND.
THERE IS NO SET FEE ESPECIALLY LIKE THE PAYMENT WOULD BE AN APPLICATION FEE OR IT COULD BE SOMETHING YOU COULD WAVE. YOU COULD CONSIDER IT A
SMALLER VENUE OR A LARGER EVENT BUT I WOULD TAKE THE FEES IN FRONT OF YOU AND WAIVE EITHER THE 650 FOR THE DAILY USE FEE AND INCREASING THAT 725 TO 13 FOR THE WAIVER SO THEY WOULD ONLY BE PAYING THE DIFFERENCE AND I WOULD HAVE TO PULL IT.
BEFORE YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, SHE HAS A COMMENT.
AM LOOKING AT THIS TRYING TO FIGURE THIS OUT. IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE BEING CHARGED NON-RESIDENT COSTS. WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR IS A ZERO DAILY USE FEE, CORRECT? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE REQUEST IS $550 OFF THAT FEE.
WE ARE GOING TO DIRECT QUESTIONS TO STAFF AND NOT TO THE APPLICANT APPLYING FOR THE SERVICE.
I AM JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
NOW SHE HAS COMMUNICATED TO THE DIRECTOR WHO APPARENTLY WILL COME
UP HERE BUT I THE DIRECTOR AND IT DOESN'T MATTER BUT PLEASE COMMUNICATE WITH THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR.
SO RIGHT NOW THEY ARE PAYING A NONRESIDENT FEE BECAUSE THERE IS NO ONE IN TOWN THAT IS ACTUALLY APPLYING FOR THE WAIVER.
SO WHAT IS THE TOTAL FEE REDUCTION REQUESTED AT THIS POINT? $725.
OKAY.
CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG THAT IS TO REDUCE IT TO THE RESIDENT EVENT COST SO WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THEM A RESIDENT COST BY REDUCING IT BY 725.
SO YOU WILL SEE THIS IT IS FOR 650 FOR NONRESIDENT AND THE FEE IS BEING REDUCED BY $550.
WE HAVE A COMMENT AND/OR MOTION
PERSONALLY I WOULD PREFER TO GO WITH WHATEVER STAFF RECOMMENDS
BECAUSE THEY KEEP TRACK OF ALL OF THIS, AND THEY TAKE IT AND I DON'T
WANT TO END UP IN THIS POSITION WHERE EVERYBODY IS COMING IN HERE TO
NEGOTIATE WITH US EVERY TIME AND IT BECOMES THIS REALLY WILLY-NILLY
THING AND IF WE ARE NOT KEEPING TRACK OF IT ALL THEN WE ARE GIVING
SOMEBODY ELSE MORE AND FOR ME PERSONALLY I WILL GO WITH WHAT IS RECOMMENDED.
OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER.
SO WHY I ASKED IF WE SHOULD OFFER SOMETHING LESS IS BECAUSE THEY ARE SAYING THEIR ORGANIZATION HAS RESIDENCE. SO I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY
WOULDN'T QUALIFY FOR THE RESIDENT EVENT COST IN THE BEGINNING IN WHICH CASE WE ARE NOT GIVING THEM ANY DISCOUNT AT ALL. SO THAT IS WHY I AM
QUESTIONING THIS AND THINKING THAT WE HAVE SUPPORTED OTHER NONPROFITS
AND WE SHOULD SUPPORT THEM AT A SIMILAR LEVEL AND IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE WE ARE GIVING THEM A DISCOUNT.
IS IT POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE IS ASKING FOR A LITTLE BIT BETTER? AND I DO WANTED TO BE STANDARDIZED.
BEFORE YOU GET INTO ALL OF THIS. MARY, WHAT ARE YOUR RECOMMENDED THOUGHTS AT THIS POINT IN TIME ABOUT HOW TO PROCEED THROUGH THIS? AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING APPLICANT JUST RESPONDING TO QUESTIONS.
BUT THE PURPOSE IS TO HAVE THIS BY THE DIRECTOR AND THE DIRECTOR PRESENTS AND AGAIN WE HAVE A PROCESS. SO WHAT IS YOUR
RECOMMENDATION?
THE DIRECTOR IS PRESENTING THE RESIDENT FEE AND I WILL TELL YOU FOR
TRASH ATLANTIS YOU WAIVED THE PERMIT FEES SO THE COUNCIL COULD
CONSIDER, ON TOP OF THE REDUCTION TO THE RESIDENT FEE, YOU COULD WAVE AN ADDITIONAL $100 FOR THE PERMIT APPLICATION FEE AND WAY THIS FOR THE DAILY USE FEE OR WAY THE AMPLIFIED MUSIC AND THOSE OF THE THREE. MY
RECOMMENDATION IS IF YOU WANT TO INCREASE THAT WAIVER, THOSE WOULD BE ONE OF THE THREE WOULD LOOK AT.
WAS THE POLICY FOR A RESIDENT DETERMINING AND WHAT IS THE CITY'S POLICY
AND VERSUS NOT IF THEY ARE SAYING THEY HAVE THOSE AND I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR POLICY IS.
TYPICALLY RESIDENT WOULD BE IF YOUR ORGANIZATION IS WITHIN THE CITY OF TRAN ONE CITY LIMITS AND THAT IS HOW WE DO A RESIDENT FEE. IF YOUR
ORGANIZATION IS OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS AND IT WOULD BE A NONRESIDENT FEE. THE QUESTION IS I UNDERSTAND THE REMEMBERS LIVING WITHIN BUT WHERE IS OFFICIALLY THE ORGANIZATION THAT AT?
I WILL JUST COMMENT BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE I HAVE AN
ORGANIZATION THAT IS IN SONOMA COUNTY AND I GO FOR THINGS IN MAREN AND
EVEN IF YOU HAVE MOST OF YOUR BOARD LIVING HERE YOU ARE A RESIDENT AND YOUR ADDRESS IS TRAN ONE SO YOU ARE A NONRESIDENT. I UNDERSTAND THAT.
IS THERE A MOTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ACTS
I MOVE TO INCLUDE THE WAIVER OF THE 650 OR WHATEVER IT WAS, LIKE AN ADDITIONAL APPLICATION FEE THAT WE CAN REDUCE? IS THAT CORRECT?
SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO DO BOTH OF THESE, ONE FEE WOULD BE THE FEE REDUCTION OF THE $100 FOR THE APPLICATION OR YOU COULD WAVE THE ENTIRE APPLICATION FEE. IT WOULD BE TO 50 OR YOU CAN REDUCE IT TO 100 AS A RESIDENT APPLICATION. THERE IS A 650 COMMUNITY FEE FOR A RESIDENT. IF YOU REDUCED IT, THERE WOULD BE THE 550 AND THEN THERE IS THE APPLICATION OF THE SOUND SYSTEM. SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A RECOMMENDATION, A
RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO WEIGH THE APPLICATION FEES AND WE ARE HELPING OUR NONPROFITS TO DO THESE EVENTS. THE DAILY USE FEE, REDUCING ITS FROM THE 1200 TO 650, I WOULD LEAVE THAT BUT I RECOMMEND REMOVING
THE FEE FOR THE --
SO WHAT ARE THE WAIVERS?
YOU WOULD TAKE A FIRM 1850, WHICH WOULD BE THE NONRESIDENT FOR EVERYTHING ONLY PAINT 650 FOR THE DAILY USE FEE SO A DIFFERENCE OF $1200.
IS THAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION?
THAT IS A COUNCILMEMBER WITH THE MOVE?
CORRECT.
I SECOND.
CAN YOU CLARIFY? I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
CAN YOU RESTATE YOUR RECOMMENDATION AS COUNCILMEMBER CARTER MOVED? EFFECTS OF THE CURRENT COST WAS 1850. WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE REDUCED TO JUST THE PAYMENT OF THIS 650 FOR THE DAILY USE FEE.
THAT IS A TOTAL WAIVER OF $1200?
THAT WOULD BE $1200 FROM THE 1850 THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PAY.
OKAY.
EVERYONE NOW CLEAR ON THE MOTION PENDING?
SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER CARTER AND A SECOND BY THE MAYOR TO APPROVE THE WAIVING OF THE FEES FOR $1200 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE PAID OF 605th THE.
[ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
MOVING ON TO THE LAST AGENDA ITEM. APPROVAL OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION
OF INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 2026 FOR THE CITY OF TRAN ONE STREETLIGHTING ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ENGINEERS REPORT AND
SETTING THE DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972. THERE IS A FISCAL IMPACT WITH THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT CHARGE OF $35 FOR EACH ESD IS EXPECTED TO GENERATE APPROXIMATELY $140,100 IN REVENUE WITH CORRESPONDING EXPENSES ESTIMATED AT AROUND $139,300. AND THIS IS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST A RECAP THE PROCESS. ON APRIL 15 OF 2025, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION 6657 APPOINTING THE ENGINEER OF WORK AND
DIRECTING AND REPAIRING AND FILING THE ANNUAL REPORT TO DESCRIBE ANY POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR 25 AND 26 AND THE
ANNUAL REPORT HAS BEEN SUPPORTED FOR REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY APPROVAL. SO FOR THE NEXT YEAR, THE PROPOSED ANNUAL ASSESSMENT AS YOU STATED WILL BE $35. AND THAT WAS A THREE DOLLAR INCREASE FROM THE 2024 2025 YEAR. SO TONIGHT'S MEETING IS THE SECOND OF THE THREE ANNUAL CITY
COUNCIL ACTIONS REGARDING THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BY ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION TONIGHT, THE COUNCIL WILL SET A MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT RATE.
AND THAT MAY BE LEVIED FOR 2526. SO ON JUNE 320 25 PUBLIC HEARINGS, THE
COUNCIL MAY AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF THE COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENT OF A RATE OF $35 OR LESS AT THAT TIME. AND A RATE APPROVED TONIGHT, THAT RATE
IS THE APPROVAL OF TONIGHT'S MEETING THESE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED BY THE LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 OF THE STREET HIGHWAY CODE SO THAT IS CONCLUDED A SUMMARY.
THINK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS. SEEING NONE.
THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE DISCUSSION OF THE FY25 2026 LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I WILL COME TO CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE. IF YOU
WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS AGENDA ITEM FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC, DISCLOSE.
AND BRINGING IT UP FOR DISCUSSION? IS THERE A DISCUSSION AND/OR MOTION? I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
THE MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION OF THE ATTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 20 2526 FOR THE
CITY OF TRAN ONE STREETLIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND PRELIMINARILY
APPROVING THE ANNUAL ENGINEERS REPORT AND SETTING THE DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS.
SECOND.
SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MAURER AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CARTER.
[ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
MOVING ON TO ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA.
THANK YOU CONNOR MAYER. THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY IF YOU DIDN'T GET A
CHANCE TO TALK IN THE FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, THIS IS YOUR
OPPORTUNITY TO TALK NOW FOR A TWO-MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING MEN IN CHAMBERS. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT BY ZOOM RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
MOVING ON TO COUNCILMEMBER REQUESTS FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS. EITHER ANY ITEMS TO MY RIGHT AND LOOKING TO MY LEFT. SEEING NONE CAN WE MOVE ON TO CITY COUNCIL CITY STAFF REPORTS. CITY MANAGER? THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT YOU WILL SEE
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS AND THESE ARE THE MONTHLY REPORTS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS. TOMORROW WE DO HAVE THE AGENDA REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING. WE WILL BE WORKING ON TRYING TO FINALIZE ALL THE DOCUMENTS
FOR THE FIRE CONSOLIDATION AS WAS APPROVED TONIGHT AS WELL FOR THE GRANTEES IN THE BUILDINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. MONDAY IS A CITY HOLIDAY CASA WE WILL BE CLOSE FOR MEMORIAL DAY. WE DO HAVE A BUDGET MEETING NEXT WEEK TO GO OVER ALL OF THE GOALS FROM TONIGHT. THAT IS IT.
THANK YOU, ERIE. MOVING ON TO MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO GO FIRST? VICE MAYOR?
ALL RIGHT. SO SINCE OUR LAST MEETING, WE ALL ATTENDED THE MEETING ON THE SEVENTH WHERE THEY APPROVED THE CONSOLIDATION. THAT WAS AN
EXCITING MEETING AND I ATTENDED THAT AND IN ADDITION WE HAD A FIRE AT
HUCK COMMITTEE MEETING FOLLOWING THAT AND JUST TRYING TO TIDY THINGS
UP AND WORKING WITH THE CITY TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THOSE FINAL DETAILS TO CLOSE THIS. AND IN ADDITION -- I AM LOOKING AT MY CALENDAR. I ALSO ATTENDED A SERVICES MEETING WITH THE MAYOR AND CITY STAFF. AND IN
ADDITION LAST FRIDAY, WE HAD THE LEGISLATIVE MEETING WITH CAL CITIES
WHICH IS WHY WE BROUGHT FORTH ONE ITEM TONIGHT ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR WHICH IS ANOTHER ITEM COMING OUT ABOUT THIS AND I AM GLAD EVERYBODY SUPPORTED THAT. AND THAT IS PRETTY MUCH IT. IT HAS BEEN A LITTLE LESS HEAVY, THESE MEETINGS.
GOOD.
I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE MY OTHER COLLEAGUES TO COME OUT ON MAY 22 ON THURSDAY TO THE TRANSPORTATION REIMAGINING DOWNTOWN. IT IS SUPER SIGNIFICANT AND WE HAVE PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO IT. WE WILL HAVE YOUR THOUGHTS WHILE IT IS IN PROCESS. THANK YOU.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION? WOULD SOMETHING LIKE THAT, CAN ACTUALLY GIVE
OUR THOUGHTS ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE IF IT'S COMING BACK TO THE COUNCIL?
YES. THAT IS NOT A DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS YOU CAN GIVE YOUR THOUGHTS DURING THAT PROCESS.
INC. YOU.
THIS LAST FRIDAY I DID A TALK AT THE AND TOOK QUESTIONS. THEY HAD
SEVERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS WITH EMERGENCY EXITS BECAUSE
ON ONE AND THEY ARE FACING BODEGA HIGHWAY AND IT WOULD BE A
CONTINUAL STREAM OF TRAFFIC SO THEY ASKED IF A BLINKING RED LIGHT COULD
BE PUT THERE IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY SO THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
WOULD FOLLOW UP WITH THAT IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPONDED AND ALSO
ONE IN THE BACK THEY HAVE WHICH IS THE EXIT ONTO MITCHELL COURT
BLOCKED AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ADDRESSED THAT ALSO AND THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT THAT OUT. I WENT TO THE VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION LUNCH FOR THE SENIOR CENTER. AT FIRST, I WAS INVITED AND I DIDN'T WANT TO ACCEPT
IT BECAUSE I'M NOT A VOLUNTEER AND IT WAS UNCOMFORTABLE ACCEPTING IT
BUT THE DIRECTOR WROTE TO ME AND SAID PLEASE COME SO I AGREED AND THEN
SHE SAID LATER I LIKE COUNCILMEMBERS TO COME TO THESE EVENTS BECAUSE SHE WANTS US TO MEET THE VOLUNTEERS. IT WAS THE SWEETEST EVENT AND JUST A LOVE FEST. IT WAS GREAT. THEY HAVE SO MANY GREAT VOLUNTEERS AND
THEY ARE SO WELL-ORGANIZED AND THEY SERVED A DELICIOUS MEAL AND ALL
GAVE LITTLE SPEECHES ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT VOLUNTEERS WITH THE
LEGACIES AND MAKING A HALF-MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR FOR THIS SENIOR CENTER AND IT IS AMAZING. THEY ARE EXPANDING AND I THINK THEY ARE EXPANDING IT TO DO SPORTS THINGS. AFTER I WAS THERE, I WALKED DOWNTOWN
BECAUSE IT WAS CURIOUS AND I SAW SEVERAL PLACES, THE GOLDFINCH AND ANOTHER PLACE NEXT TO MANY RIVERS. THEY WERE OUTSIDE HAVING POETRY READINGS. IT WAS REALLY COOL.
AWESOME.
ONE MORE THING. WE DID DO A DRIVE-BY OF THE DOWNTOWN WITH A BUNCH OF NEW ART WITH CRAZY STUFF DOWN THERE. IT IS DEFINITELY WORTH A LOOK AND
I DO APPRECIATE THESE FOR ORGANIZING THAT AND I THINK IT IS PIAZZA DONATING THE LAND THERE SO WE COULD HAVE SOME OUTDOOR PUBLIC ART.
SO I ATTENDED BOTH THE EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING AND THE MAIN BOARD
READING -- MEETING WITH SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS AND GOALS WE WILL BE
APPLYING FOR FUNDING GRANTS AND THEY HAVE CHANGED THE FUNDING RULES ABOUT APPLYING FOR THAT AND IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT THIS YEAR SO 15%, 55
AND FIVE INTO NEW CATEGORIES FOR THE FIRST TIME AND I AM SURE WE WILL BE
WORKING WITH STAFF AND ALSO WE DID HAVE A PRESENTATION INTERESTING TO NOTE ON THE REPLACEMENT OF THE GAS TAX. IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN FOLLOWING
TRANSPORTATION, THERE IS A LOT OF EFFORT OVER THE RECENT YEARS TO THINK
ABOUT HOW TO REPLACE THE DECLINING GAS TAX BECAUSE OF ALL THE ELECTRIC VEHICLES. THEY ARE GOOD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT BUT THEY ARE NOT THERE
PAIR SHARE -- PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE TO BE ON THE ROAD SO THEY HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT HOW TO TAX CORRECTLY ELECTRIC VEHICLES. IT IS REALLY INTERESTING. LASTLY, I DID MENTION IT BEFORE, BUT THE BAY RIM PROGRAM
WITH TRAN ONE IS ONE OF THE ONLY CITIES THAT SIGNED UP IN SONOMA COUNTY FOR THAT PROVIDING OUR CPA STAFF AND ABOUT 83% FUNDING. THAT IS REALLY AT RISK. AND I THINK IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD FOR THE OUR CPA SIDE OF THAT
HOUSE IF THEY DON'T GET MORE PARTICIPANTS ABLE TO MOVE THAT FORWARD FOR FUTURE FUNDING. I DO BRING IT UP BECAUSE IT IS ONGOING AND THE PLAN OF ACTION SUBCOMMITTEE WITH THE ORGANIZATIONS. SO BRINGING THAT UP. ALSO I
WANTED TO BRING UP FROM THIS HEARING THAT PART OF WHY WE GOT
APPROVED AND THE SUCCESSFUL APPROVAL FOR US FOR REORGANIZATION
BECAUSE THE PROTEST THAT WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO TAKE IT TO THE BALLOT IF WE HAD 25% PROTEST AND WE HAD LESS THAN 200 PROTESTS AND THAT EQUATED TO 2.4%. SO VERY FAR FROM THE 25%. I DON'T KNOW IF THE WHOLE COUNCIL SAW THIS. IT ALSO WE DID HAVE 4% FROM HOMEOWNERS. SO WE WERE REALLY FAR
BELOW THE THRESHOLD AND NOW WE HAVE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE FIRE REORGANIZATION ALONG THE YEARS.
ALSO I ATTENDED THE BOARD MEETING AND ELECTED TO THE EXECUTIVE BOARD AND THAT IS IT. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE ADJOURN? JUST A REMINDER THAT MAY 22 IS A SPECIAL BOARD MEETING.
THE MAYORS AND COUNCILMEMBERS SPECIAL BOARD MEETING ON THE 22nd AT 6:00 AND YOU CAN COME AND I HAVE YOUR DIRECTION ABOUT THE THREE
PRIORITIES WE WANT TO ADVANCE AND WE WILL SEE HOW IT GOES AND WE WILL SEND AN EMAIL TO MARY AND MARY WILL LET YOU ALL KNOW.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION? THAT IS NOT THE SAME [ INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ] SORRY. I MISSPOKE THAT IS ACTUALLY THE MAYORS MEETING TO TAKE ALL OF YOUR INPUT TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THESE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY.
THE NEXT MEETING THEREFORE FOR MAYORS AND COUNCILMEMBERS WILL BE JUNE 12.
YES. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE ADJOURNED. ALL RIGHT. [Event Concluded]