Sebastopol City Council
December 2, 2025

Meeting of Tuesday, December 2, 2025

CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF DECEMBER 2, 2025
As Approved by the City Council at their regular meeting of December 16, 2025.

CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Zollman called the meeting to order 6:01 pm ROLL CALL:

Present: Mayor Stephen Zollman
Vice Mayor McLewis Zoom – ADA Accommodation
Councilmember Phil Carter
Councilmember Hinton
Councilmember Sandra Maurer

Absent: None
Staff: Interim City Manager Mary Gourley
City Attorney Associate Schuyler H. Schwartz
Administrative Services Director Kwong
Building Official Steve Brown
Jane Riley, Planning, Consultant, 4 Leaf
Police Chief Sean McDonagh
Public Works Operations Supervisor Billings
Vice Mayor McLewis replied she was attending by zoom via medical accommodation.

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. None LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The City of Sebastopol acknowledges that we live and work within the unceded ancestral homelands of the Southern Pomo and the Coast Miwok people. We pay our respect to the past, present, and future generations of these peoples, including the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria.

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

There were no stated conflicts of interest.

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.

Myriah
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.

Councilmember Maurer requested item number 5 be removed from the consent calendar.

Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:

Kyle
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, 4, 6, 7 and 8.

Item number 5 was removed from the consent calendar.

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 Special Meeting Minutes - Closed Session - of November 17, 2025 Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the minutes is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional financial impact is anticipated with approval of this item.

City Council Action: Approved City Council Special Meeting Minutes - Closed Session - of November 17, 2025 Minute Order Number: 2025-365

2. Approval of City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of November 18, 2025 Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the minutes is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional financial impact is anticipated with approval of this item.

City Council Action: Approved City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of November 18, 2025 Minute Order Number: 2025-366

3. Receipt of Incoming Mayor’s Request for Committee Assignments Submittals from Councilmembers for City Council Committee Assignments and Liaisons. Recommendation and Appointments will be made at the January 6, 2026 City Council Meeting. (Requests to be Submitted to Mayor No Later Than December 20th 2025) (Responsible Department: City Administration/Mayor) Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional financial impact is anticipated with approval of this item.

City Council Action: Approved Receipt of Incoming Mayor’s Request for Committee Assignments Submittals from Councilmembers for City Council Committee Assignments and Liaisons. Recommendation and Appointments will be made at the January 6, 2026 City Council Meeting. (Requests to be Submitted to Mayor No Later Than December 20th 2025)
Minute Order Number: 2025-367

4. Adopt a Budget Amendment Resolution, authorize the Interim City Manager to approve increasing the purchase order to Miksis to $58,309 and Accept improvement and authorize staff to file a Notice of Completion for the Calder Creek Storm Drain Repairs Project. Notice of Completion is a routine item.

Budget Amendment for increase of $10,250 is due to additional work required. Budget amendment was presented to BC at meeting of 11/17/25
Responsible Department: Public Works/City Engineer
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and is covered within existing budgeted salaries. Budget Amendment for increase of $10,250 is due to additional work required. Budget amendment was presented to BC at meeting of11/17/25
City Council Action: Approved Budget Amendment Resolution, authorize the Interim City Manager to approve increasing the purchase order to Miksis to $58,309 and Accept improvement and authorize staff to file a Notice of Completion for the Calder Creek Storm Drain Repairs Project. Notice of Completion is a routine item. Budget Amendment for increase of $10,250 is due to additional work required. Budget amendment was presented to BC at meeting of 11/17/25
Minute Order Number: 2025-368
Resolution Number: 6719-2025

5. Approval of Grant of Easement Deed to PG&E for the Village Park Conversion Program and Authorizing the Mayor to sign the Grant Deed on behalf of the City Council. Grant of Easement is required by PG&E before they perform utility upgrade work at Village Park.

Responsible Department: Public Works/City Engineer
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional fiscal impact but may have future savings since PG&E will be responsible for maintaining onsite utility lines.

6. Revised Employee Travel and Reimbursement Policy
Responsible Department: Administrative Services Director Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional fiscal impact. The proposed updates are not expected to increase overall travel expenditures but will improve clarity, compliance, and administrative efficiency and aligning with current standards for reimbursements.

City Council Action: Approved Revised Employee Travel and Reimbursement Policy

Minute Order Number: 2025-370
Resolution Number: 6721-2025

7. Receipt of Preliminary List of CIP Projects developed in the ongoing Water Master Plan Update. This provides Council an early review of the list of projects prior to the Final Draft Water Master Plan to be presented to Council at a future meeting in January/February 2026.

Responsible Department: Public Works/City Engineer
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional fiscal impact. This is a draft list of CIP projects. The final projects would be approved by Council during CIP budget hearing. This item as presented to BC at meeting of 11/17/25.

City Council Action: Approved Preliminary List of CIP Projects developed in the ongoing Water Master Plan Update. This provides Council an early review of the list of projects prior to the Final Draft Water Master Plan to be presented to Council at a future meeting in January/February 2026.

Minute Order Number:2025-371

8. Extension of Contract with 4LEAF for Planning Department Consulting Services.

Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries; no financial impact to the General Fund as contract costs will be covered with salary savings from vacant positions. Recruitment has been underway for positions; but it is not anticipated that the positions will be filled by end of current contract.

City Council Action: Approved Extension of Contract with 4LEAF for Planning Department Consulting Services.

Minute Order Number: 2025-372
Resolution Number: 6718-2025
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).

PUBLIC HEARING(s):

9. Public hearing for the proposed adoption by reference of portions of the 2025 Building Code with Local Amendments and Administrative Changes. The Building Department recommend that the Council: 1) introduce an ordinance adopting by reference the 2025 edition of the California Building Code as adopted and amended by the State of California, repeal existing sections not applicable to new codes and modify Chapters 15.04-15.08 of the City of Sebastopol City Municipal Code to reflect the new model code; and 2) adopt a resolution setting a public hearing on December 2, 2025 for adoption of the ordinance.

Responsible Department: Building Official
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries; as well as costs for the Code are budgeted within the current building department budget Steve Brown, Building Official, presented the agenda item recommending the Council receive the agenda report, ask questions, open the public hearing, and deliberate on the request to approve to approve waiving of first reading and introduction of ordinance for 2025 Building Code.

Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter/or staff. Council asked various questions of staff/presenter.

Mayor Zollman opened the public hearing. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:

Mayor Zollman closed the public hearing.

City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:

The Council discussed the agenda item.

MOTION:

Councilmember Hinton moved and Councilmember Maurer seconded the motion to approve adoption of ordinance for 2025 Building Code.

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 adoption of ordinance for 2025 Building Code.

Minute Order Number: 2025-373
Ordinance Number:

REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS (DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION):

10. Resolution of Intent re: EIFD. The purpose of this item is to submit to the City Council a report out from the EIFD Ad Hoc Committee to the City Council. The action for consideration tonight is as follows:
a) Receive an updated report from Kosmont on EIFD Feasibility Analysis Findings b) City Council consideration of a Resolution of Intention to form the Sebastopol EIFD; or c) Other direction as Council deems appropriate
Responsible Department: Planning/Consultant: Kosmont
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries; Consultant work for the EIFD feasibility evaluation is being funded by the $50,000 County allocation procured by Supervisor Hopkins, and an additional allocation of $15,000 split evenly between the City and the County. If an EIFD is ultimately established, there would be no decrease in the amount of property tax revenue the General Fund receives; however, a portion of future City property tax increment from within the approved EIFD boundary would be restricted to fund targeted infrastructure investments in the City to catalyze economic development and provide public benefit. Further information regarding fiscal impacts is required to be analyzed as part of the preparation of the ultimate Infrastructure Financing Plan, which would be presented to the City Council, County Board of Supervisors, and EIFD Public financing Authority in future meetings for approval, prior to any binding actions for EIFD formation.

Jane Riley, 4 LEAF, City Planning Consultant, presented the agenda item recommending the Council receive the agenda report, ask questions, open the public comment, and deliberate on the request to consideration of a Resolution of Intention to form the Sebastopol EIFD.

Joe Dominguez, KOSZMONT, City Consultant provided a presentation.

Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter/or staff. Council asked various questions of staff/presenter.

Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:

Kyle
Robert
Oliver
Member of the public
Steve
Mary
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:

The Council discussed the agenda item.

MOTION:

Councilmember Hinton moved and Councilmember Maurer seconded the motion to approve a Resolution of Intention to form the Sebastopol EIFD.

Councilmember Maurer moved to delay the item for six months 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 of Intention to form the Sebastopol EIFD.

Minute Order Number: 2025-374
Resolution Number: 6722 – 2025

5. Approval of Grant of Easement Deed to PG&E for the Village Park Conversion Program and Authorizing the Mayor to sign the Grant Deed on behalf of the City Council. Grant of Easement is required by PG&E before they perform utility upgrade work at Village Park.

Responsible Department: Public Works/City Engineer
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional fiscal impact but may have future savings since PG&E will be responsible for maintaining onsite utility lines.

Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter/or staff. Council asked various questions of staff/presenter.

Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:

Kyle
Robert
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:

The Council discussed the agenda item.

MOTION:

Vice Mayor McLewis moved and Councilmember Hinton seconded the motion to approve the grant easement deed.

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

VOTE:

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

Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Grant of Easement Deed to PG&E for the Village Park Conversion Program and Authorizing the Mayor to sign the Grant Deed on behalf of the City Council. Grant of Easement is required by PG&E before they perform utility upgrade work at Village Park.

Minute Order Number: 2025-369
Resolution Number: 6720-2025
Vice Mayor McLewis departed the meeting at 7:46 pm.

SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT : None
COUNCILMEMBER(S) REQUESTS FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS: None CITY COUNCIL/CITY STAFF REPORTS/COMMUNICATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/FUTURE MEETINGS:

11. 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)

12. 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)

13. Council Communications Received (Information/Meetings/Correspondence Received from the General Public to Councilmembers)

CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION/ELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR/MAYOR PRO TEMPORE • Presentation of Plaque to Outgoing Mayor
• Message from Outgoing Mayor (Mayor Zollman)
• Confirmation of Incoming Mayor and Vice Mayor
MOTION
Mayor Zollman moved and Councilmember Hinton second the motion to confirm Jill McLewis as Mayor and Sandra as Vice Maor.

Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:

Kyle

Kate
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 confirm Jill McLewis as Mayor and Sandra as Vice Maor. • Message from Incoming Mayor (Former Vice Mayor McLewis) • Cake and Coffee for Outgoing Mayor
Reference Order Numbers: 2025-375
CLOSED SESSION: NONE

ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor McLewis adjourned the December 2, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting at 8:11 pm to the next Regular City Council Meeting of Tuesday, December 16, 2025 at 6:00 pm, Sebastopol Youth Annex, 425 Morris Street, Sebastopol, CA.

Respectfully submitted,
Mary C. Gourley
Interim City Manager/City Clerk
Attachment: Zoom Transcript

City Council Meeting - December 2, 2025

MY IMMUNE

SYSTEM IS STILL
FRAGILE.

I'M GOING TO CONTINUE

PARTICIPATING VIA ZOOM, BUT I

SPOKE WITH MY DOCTOR, ADVISED
I

CAN ATTEND BRIEFLY

AT THE END OF
THE MEETING.

I'LL DO SO IN A WAY TO

PRIORITIZE MY
HEALTH.

I CAN'T STAY FOR THE FULL
DURATION.

I'LL BE MASKING AND
FULL

DISTANCING THERE, SO I'LL
COME
TOWARD THE END OF THE MEETING.

I FEEL LIKE IT'S

SIGNIFICANT,

AND I WANTED TO HONOR
AND

RECOGNIZE OUR OUTGOING MAYOR
AND

WELCOME OUR INCOMING VICE
MAYOR,

SANDRA MAUER, AND ALSO
ACCEPT
THE ROLE AS MAYOR FOR 2026.

SO I JUST WANTED TO LET
ME

EVERYONE KNOW AHEAD OF TIME

WHY

I WILL SHOW

UP THERE FOR JUST A
FEW MINUTES.

THEY SAID I COULD AT LEAST DO

THAT SO LONG
AS I'M CAREFUL.

THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR.

IF YOU'LL JOIN ME.

SALUTE TO THE FLAG.
[ PLEDGE RECITED ]

WE'LL DO THE LAND
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.

THE CITY OF

SEBASTOPOL

ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WE LIVE AND

WORK WITHIN THE UNCEDED
AN

SISTER TALL HOMELANDS OF
THE

SOUTHERN POMO AND COAST MIWOK
PEOPLE.

WE PAY OUR RESPECTS TO THE
PAST,

PRESENT, AND FUTURE

GENERATIONS

OF THESE PEOPLE, INCLUDING THE

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON
RANCHERIA.

WE HAVE NONE PROCLAMATIONS AND
PRESENTATIONS.

STATEMENTS OF CONFLICT
OF
INTEREST.

LOOKING TO MY COLLEAGUES TO
MY

LEFT, LOOKING TO MY
RIGHT,
LOOKING TO THE VICE MAYOR.

SEEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO
PUBLIC COMMENT.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS
PUBLIC

COMMENT FOR ITEMS THAT ARE
NOT
ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA.

MARY?
THANK
YOU, MAY OFF.

AS STATED, THIS IS FOR PUBLIC

COMMENTS NOT ON TONIGHT'S

AGENDA, TWO-MINUTE TIME LIMIT,
20 MINUTE IN TOTAL.

I WILL GO TO CHAMBERS
FIRST,

THEN OUT TO ZOOM, THEN BACK TO
CHAMBERS.

IF THERE'S ANYONE IN

CHAMBERS

THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A
PUBLIC

COMMENT, PLEASE COME UP TO
THE
PODIUM.

SEEING NONE, I CAN GO OUT TO
ZOOM.

MARIAH, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF,
PLEASE?
YEAH, HI, EVERY U.S.

JUST

WANTED TO HOP ON TONIGHT
BRIEF

HI TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND THANK
THE

CITY FOR THE BEAUTIFUL
DECORATIONS AND LIGHTS.

WE'VE HAD SO MANY PEOPLE

COMMENT

ON HOW FESTIVE IT LOOKS THIS
YEAR.

AND I THINK IT'S JUST EXCITING.

THANKS FOR DOING THAT.

WE'RE LOOKING

FORWARD TO THE

TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY ON THE
4th ON THURSDAY AT 5:00.

AND HOPEFULLY ANYONE

LISTENING

HERE CAN COME OUT

AND HOPEFULLY
ALL OF COUNCIL CAN COME OUT.

AND CITY STAFF.

YOU'VE ALL INVITED.

THANK YOU.

IS FROM ANYONE
IN CHAMBERS?

SEEING NONE, I WILL GO

BACK OUT

TO ZOOM, IF THERE'S ANYONE
ON

ZOOM WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE
A

PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE
RAISE
YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY.

SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS

CLOSED.

MOVING ON TO CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM.

THE APPROVAL OF THE

MEETING MINUTES
CLOSED SESSION.

NUMBER TWO, APPROVAL OF THE
CITY
COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES.

THIRD THE RECEIPT OF INCOMING

MAYOR'S REQUEST FOR COMMITTEE

ASSIGNMENTS, SUBMITTALS FROM

COUNCILMEMBERS FOR CITY

COUNCIL

COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS AND
LIAISONS.

NUMBER 4, ADOPT A BUDGET

AMENDMENT RESOLUTION,

AUTHORIZE

THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER
TO

APPROVE INCREASING THE

PURCHASE

ORDER TO MISCUS,

CALDER CREEK
STORM DRAIN REPAIR PROJECT.

MISS CALL IMPACT STAFF TIME IS
INCORPORATED.
$10,250

IS DUE TO ADDITIONAL
WORK REQUIRED.

BUDGET AMENDMENT WAS

PRESENTED

TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE AT ITS
MEETING ON NOVEMBER 17th, 2025.

NUMBER 5.

APPROVAL OF GRANT OF EASEMENT

DEED TO PG&E FOR THE

VILLAGE

PARK CONVERSION PROGRAM AND

AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
SIGN

THE GRANT DEED ON BEHALF
OF THE
CITY COUNCIL.

GRANT OF EASEMENT IS REQUIRED BY

PG&E BEFORE THEY PERFORM UTILITY
UPGRADE WORK AT VILLAGE PARK.

MAY HAVE FUTURE SAVINGS
SINCE

PG&E WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR

MAINTAINING ON-SITE UTILITY
LINES.

NUMBER 6, REVISED EMPLOYEE

TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT POLICIES.

STAFF TIME INCORPORATED.

NO ADDITIONAL FISCAL IMPACT.

THE PROPOSED UPDATES ARE
NOT

EXPECTED TO INCREASE

OVERALL

EXPENDITURES BUT WILL IMPROVE

CLARITY,

COMPLIANCE, AND

ADMINISTRATIVE EFFICIENCY IN

ALIGNING WITH THE

CURRENT
STANDARDS FOR REIMBURSEMENT.

NUMBER SEVEN, RECEIPT OF

PRELIMINARY LIST OF CIP

PROJECTS

DEVELOPED IN ONGOING
WATER

MASTER PLAN
UPDATE.

THIS PROVIDES COUNCIL AN EARLY

REVIEW OF THE LIST OF PROJECTS

PRIOR TO

THE FINAL DRAFT WATER

MASTER PLAN TO BE PRESENTED
TO

COUNCIL AT A FUTURE MEETING
DATE

IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY OF THISTHIS
YEAR.

STAFF TIME IS INCORPORATED.

THIS IS A DRAFT LIST OF CIP
PROJECTS.

THE FINAL PROJECTS WILL
BE

APPROVED BY COUNCIL DURING ITS
CIP BUDGET HEARING.

THIS ITEM IS PRESENTED TO
BUDGET

COMMITTEE AT ITS NOVEMBER --
WAS

PRESENTED TO THE
BUDGET
COMMITTEE AT ITS NOVEMBER 17th,
2025 MEETING.

NUMBER 8.

EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH
4LEAF

FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CONSULTING SERVICES.

STAFF TIME IS INCORPORATED.

NO FISCAL IMPACT TO THE

GENERAL

FUND AS CONTRACT COSTS WILL BE SALARY SAVINGS
FROM
THE VACANT POSITIONS.

RECRUITMENT HAS BEEN UNDER WAY

FOR INFORMATIONS BUT IT IS
HAT

ANTICIPATED THE

POSITIONS WILL

BE FILLED BY THE END OF THE
CURRENT CONTRACT.

I'M LOOKING TO MY COLLEAGUES
TO

SEE IF THEY WOULD LIKE

TO PULL
ANY ITEMS?

COUNCILMEMBER
MAUER?
POLLING NUMBER FIVE.

LOOKING TO MY RIGHT TO SEE
IF

THERE'S ANY MORE THAT'S
REQUESTED.

NO.

LOOKING TO VICE MAYOR, NO.

GREAT.

WE'LL

GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT
THEN, MARY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THIS IS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 1,
2,
3, 4, 6, 7, 8 AS ITEM
NUMBER 5

WAS PULLED AND WILL BE

ADDRESSED
LATER IN THE AGENDA.

IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC

COMMENT, I WILL COME
INTO

CHAMBER FIRST AND THEN GO
OUT TO
ZOOM.

ANYONE IN CHAMBERS THAT WOULD

LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT
ON

THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS?
SEEING NONE, OUT TO ZOOM.

KYLE, CAN YOU UNMUTE

YOURSELF,
PLEASE?

SAM, DO YOU HAVE THE TO
HAVE-MINUTE TIMER?
YES, ONE MOMENT.

CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER, KYLE?
YES, I CAN.

GO
AHEAD.

I WANT TO MAYBE GET A
LITTLE

BIT OF CLARITY FROM COUNCIL
OR
STAFF REGARDING THE 4LEAF
CONTRACT.

I CAN UNDERSTAND A

PERSPECTIVE

THAT THERE IS NO FISCAL
IMPACT

BECAUSE YOU ARE MAKING SOME
SORT

OF CONSIDERATION TO SALARY
SAVINGS.

HOWEVER, I THINK LOOKING
AT IT

WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE
FINER

DETAIL IN TERMS OF THE

ANALYSIS,

BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT

IS WE ARE CURRENTLY LACKING A
CITY STAFF EMPLOYEE.

SOMEBODY WHO IS DEDICATED TO OUROUR
WHO IS WORKING FULL-TIME.

SO IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW

THAT IF THE SO-CALLED
SALARY

SAVINGS IS A RESULT OF

TAPPING

INTO THE SAVINGS THAT'S A
RESULT
OF A VACANCY OF A POSITION.

IF WE WERE TO BREAK THIS THING

DOWN TO AN HOURLY BASIS FOR THE

CONTRACT, AS OPPOSED TO
WHAT

THAT EMPLOYEE WOULD BE

MAKING,
IS THERE SAVINGS IN THAT SPACE?

AND THEN SECONDLY, JUST
REALLY

TRYING TO THINK THROUGH
THE

DECISIONS THAT

WE'RE MAKING

REGARDING USING OUTSIDE CONTRACT
SERVICES.

AND CONTINUING TO LOOK AT WAYS

TO BE USING CONTRACT
SERVICES.

IT SEEMS TO BE A REPEATINGREPEATING

PATTERN, THAT I WAS HOPEFUL THAT

OUR COUNCIL WOULD BEGIN TO
TRY
TO SWAY AWAY FROM.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME INDICATION

THAT COUNCIL -- I WOULD REALLY

HOPE THAT WE COULD ADDRESS
THE

ISSUE IN

A WIDER SCALE MOVING
FORWARD.

BEFORE WE GET TO THE
NEXT

ONE, IF I COULD REMIND

PEOPLE,

NOISE TRAVELS A LOT HERE IN THE
CHAMBERS.

IF WE CAN REDUCE THE

TALKING, THAT
WOULD BE GREAT.

ANYONE IN CHAMBERS?

SEEING NONE, BACK
OUT TO ZOOM.

IF

THERE'S ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A
PUBLIC

COMMENT ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR

ITEMS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND
VIRTUALLY.

SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO
FOURTH
PUBLIC
COMMENT.

THANK YOU, MARY.

BACK UP TO THE DAIS TO SEE
IF

THERE'S A MOTION TO IMPROVE ALL

CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS MINUS
NUMBER 5.

SO MOVED.

SECONDED.

SORRY, VICE MAYOR, SECONDED.

MARY?
THAT'S OKAY, NO WORRIES.

I'M

SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER
MAUER?
WHO
MOVED.

THANK
YOU.

SO MOVED BY

COUNCILMEMBER

MAUER AND SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR
McLEWIS CALENDAR ITEMS 1, 2, 3,
4, 6,
7, 8.

NUMBER 5 HAS BEEN REMOVED.

CARTER?

YES.

HINTON.

AYE.

MAUER?

YES.

McLEWIS?

AYE.

ZOLLMAN?
YES.

MOTION PASSES NAP
MISCELLANEOUSLY.

WE DO NOT

HAVE ANY

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS OR
PRESENTATIONS TONIGHT.

PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE

PROPOSED

ADOPTION BY REFERENCE
OF
PORTIONS OF THE 2025

BILLING

CODE WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS
AND
ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES.

THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS
MADE

VARIOUS

RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEY
ARE LISTED ON THE AGENDA.

TURNING IT OVER TO STEVE.

SO WHAT I HAVE IN FRONT
OF

YOU IS A REQUEST TO APPROVE THIS

ORDINANCE THAT BASICALLY
ADOPTS
THE STATE CODES VARY BAIT TIP.

THERE ARE NO LOCAL AMENDMENTS
IN
THERE.

THERE ARE A COUPLE

APPENDICES

THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY

ADOPTED

BY THE STATE IF WE DON'T HAVE
TO.

ONE OF THEM DEALS WITH TINY
HOMES.

THE OTHER ONE DEALS WITH
INSULATION IN OUR CITY.

BUT THE PROPOSAL IS BASICALLY

STATE CODE THAT IF WE
DON'T

ADOPT IT NOW, IT
WOULD

AUTOMATICALLY BE ADOPTED JANUARY
1st.

INSPIRATION ON BUILDINGS AND AN

APPENDIX ON ADOPTING TINY HOMES,

WHICH WE'VE HAD IN THERE
THREE
YEARS.

SO YES, THE ANSWER TO
YOUR

QUESTION IS

HOPEFULLY IT WILL

SPEED THINGS UP AND MAKE IT
EASIER.

AND HOW WOULD THIS AFFECT
ANY

BUILDING
OF ADUs OR THINGS LIKE
THAT?

I THINK WE'VE DONE DONE
CLOSE
TO 50 ALREADY THIS YEAR.

WE MAKE THEM AS EASY AS WE
POSSIBLY CAN TO GET THOSE IN.

IT WON'T NECESSARILY CHANGE
ANYTHING.

THE SAFETY CODES OF THE

BUILDING
CODE WILL STILL BE THE SAME.

BUT WE DO PROCESS THOSE VERY
QUICKLY, WITHIN A WEEK OR SO.

GET THE PERMITS OUT.

WE TRY VERY HARD TO WORK WITH

THE DEVELOPERS AND THE OWNERS TO
GET THOSE IN THERE.

SO IT DOESN'T REALLY CHANGE
ANYTHING WITH THAT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?

I NOTICED THERE WAS A PERMIT
REQUIRED FOR A 10 BY 12
OUTBUILDING?
NOT 10 BY 12, BUT IN
THE

STATE CODE, ANYTHING BIGGER THAN
10 BY 12 DOES REQUIRE A
PERMIT.

YOU COULD PUT A 10 BY
12 WITHOUT A PERMIT IN THE CITY OF
SEBASTOPOL?
CORRECT.

THANK
YOU.

ANYTHING BIGGER WHEN IS WE
GET INTO THE PERMIT.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE
A

PUBLIC COMMENT, I'LL GO
TO
CHAMBERS FIRST THEN OUT TO ZOOM.

ANYONE IN CHAMBERS?

SEEING NONE,
ZOOM?

ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WOULD
LIKE

TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON
THE

INTRODUCTION OF THE

ORDINANCE

FOR BUILDING

CODES, PLEASE RAISE
YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY.

SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC
COMMENT.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION AND/OR
MOTION?

I'D GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT WE

ACCEPT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT'S

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
2025

BUILDING CODE WITH LOCAL
AMENDMENTS.

AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES.

I'LL SECOND THAT.

MOVED BY HINTON, SECONDED BY

MAUER, TO APPROVE THE STAFF

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WAIVING
A

FIRST READING

AND INTRODUCTION

FOR THE ORDINANCE OF THE
2025
BUILDING CODE.

COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

AYE.

MAWER?

YES.

McLEWIS?

AYE.

ZOLLMAN?

YES.

MOTION PASSES
UNANIMOUSLY.

MOVING ON TO OUR FIRST ACTION

FOR THE EVENING WHICH IS
THE

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER
10,

RESOLUTION OF INTENT REGARDING
EIFD.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS ITEM IS
TO

SUBMIT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
A

REPORT OUT FROM THE EIFD AD
HOC
COMMITTEE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

THE ACTION FOR

CONSIDERATION
TONIGHT IS AS FOLLOWS.

RECEIVE AN UPDATED REPORT FROM

KOSMONT ON

EIFD FEASIBILITY
ANALYSIS FINDINGS.

B, CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERS OF A
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION.

C, OTHER DIRECTION AS

COUNCIL
DEEMS APPROPRIATE.

TURNING IT OVER TO OUR PLANNING
DIRECTOR.

THANK YOU.

JANE RILEY, OUR CURRENT

PLANNING

DIRECTOR, CONSULTANT FOR
4LEAF,

HAS HELPED TO CREATE THIS
STAFF
REPORT FOR THE EIFD.

SHE CAN DO A FREE PRESENTATION.

WE ALSO HAVE JOE DUGGET FROM

KOSMONT PRESENTATION WHO IS
HERE

TO GIVE PRESENTATION ON THAT

EIFD AS
WELL.

GOOD EVENING.

THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

I WILL LET JOE DO THE

BULK OF
THE PRESENTATION.

I'M JUST HERE TO FACILITATE
AND

TO ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL TO ASK

QUESTIONS OF JOE
WHEN
CONSIDERING THE EIFD.

READY TO GO, JOE?
JOE, CAN YOU HEAR US OKAY?

I HEAR YOU GREAT, THANK
YOU.

GREAT.

EVENING.

MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF

THE CITY COUNCIL, GOOD TO
BE

WITH YOU
ALL AGAIN.

I'M GOING TO BRING UP THE
PRESENTATION.

IT'S THE SAME DECK THAT
IS
ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT.

AND I'M GOING TO FOCUS
VERY

IMPORTANTLY ON THE HIGHLIGHTS,

ADVANTAGES,

DISADVANTAGES, WHERE
WE ARE IN THE POTENTIAL PROCESS.

AND I'M GOING TO TALK
ABOUT

THINGS LIKE OFF-RAMPS ALONG THE
WAY.

AS A QUICK REFRESHER, PERHAPS TO

ALL IN ATTENDANCE, THIS IS ALL
A

CONVERSATION ABOUT A FUNDING
AND

FINANCING POOL KNOWN AS THE

ENHANCED

INFRASTRUCTURE
FINANCING DISTRICT, EIFD.

THE PROPERTY TAX-BASED FUNDING
TOOL.

IT DOES NOT INCREASE ANYBODY'S
TAXES.

THIS IS MORE ABOUT PUTTING
ASIDE

A PIECE OF FUTURE REVENUE INTO
A

SPECIAL FUND THAT WOULD BE
RESTRICTED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND IT WOULD BE SEPARATE
FROM
THE GENERAL FUND.

TONIGHT IS ONE OF WHAT I WOULD

CALL A SERIES OF
OFF-RAMPS.

SORT OF GO/NO-GO DECISION
POINTS.

IT'S A DISCUSSION GOING ON

THROUGH ABOUT NOVEMBER 2023.

THERE HAVE BEEN TOUCH
POINTS

ALONG THE WAY WITH THE CITY
COUNCIL.

LAST ONE WAS REALLY IN FEBRUARY
OF 2025.

WHERE WE PROVIDED AN
UPDATE.

I'LL DO A REVIEW OF THAT,
THEN

I'LL SPEND A BIT MORE TIME

TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S BEEN DONE
SINCE FEBRUARY.

THIS ALL STARTED WITH COUNTY

DISTRICT SUPERVISOR, CARA

HOPKINS FROM THE COUNTY,

PROCURING SOME FUNDING TO
STUDY

THIS TYPE OF TOOL, BOTH WITHIN

THE CITY OF

SEBASTOPOL AS WELL
AS UNINCORPORATED WEST COUNTY.

UNINCORPORATED COUNTY
JURISDICTION.

THERE WAS NO SCENARIO IT
WAS

FEASIBLE TO HAVE A SINGLE

FINANCING DISTRICT

THAT INCLUDED
BOTH

AREAS WITHIN THE CITY AND
AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.

WHAT KOSMONT AND STAFF HEARD
WAS

FOLKS WANTED TO KEEP THEIR WORK
SEPARATELY.

THEY WOULD BE

ONE WITHIN THE
CITY

LIMITS WHERE THE COUNTY CAN
BE A PARTNER TO THE CITY.

THAT GREW WITHIN CITY LIMITS.

THEN THE COUNTY CAN DO ITS
OWN
THING.

NUMBER TWO HERE, WE'RE
NOT

REALLY AFFECTING THE CITY AT
ALL.

THE COUNTY

COULD FOCUS ON AREAS
OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS.

THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN MOVING

FORWARD SO
FAR.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS
NUMBER ONE.

IF IT MAKES SENSE,

SOMETHING

WITHIN THE CITY, HOW COULD IT
LOOK?

I'LL SHOW A MAP IN A MOMENT
THAT

FOCUSED NOT ON THE

ENTIRETY OF

THE CITY BUT JUST FOCUSED ON
THE

MAIN BRANDED CORRIDOR WITHIN
THE
CITY, IF YOU DID THIS AT ALL.

THE SECOND POINT "B" WAS HOW

MUCH OF THAT FUTURE GROWTH
THE

CITY MIGHT

CONSIDER ALLOCATING
TO A FINANCING DISTRICT.

IT'S ALWAYS A BALANCING ACT.

IF YOU GO ALL IN AND PLEDGE
ALL

OF YOUR FUTURE PROPERTY
TAX

WITHIN THAT BOUNDARY,

SURE, YOU

CAN GENERATE A WHOLE BUNCH
OF

FUNDING CAPACITY, PAY FOR SOME
INFRASTRUCTURE.

BUT IT WOULD BE AT THE RISK
OF
THE GENERAL FUND.

ANY DOLLAR THAT'S IN
THIS

INFRASTRUCTURE

FINANCING

DISTRICT IS A DOLLAR THAT'S
NOT

IN THE GENERAL FUND, AND
SO

THERE'S A BALANCING ACT BETWEEN
THEM.

ALMOST LIKE A RETIREMENT
ACCOUNT.

I'D LOVE TO PUT AWAY 25%

BECAUSE

THAT MEANS I CAN GET SORT OF
SAN

EMPLOYER MATCH FROM THE COUNTY
IN THIS CASE.

BUT IF THIS ANALOGY, THE
COUNTY

IS YOUR EMPLOYER MATCHING
WHAT

YOU MIGHT BE WILLING TO PUT

ASIDE, BUT IT'S STILL
AN
IMPORTANT QUESTION.

CAN YOU AFFORD TO SET ASIDE
25%
AND STILL KEEP YOUR LIGHTS ON?
KEEPING THE CITY RUNNING.

WE LOOKED AT THAT AND 25%
OF THE

FUTURE GROWTH IS KIND OF WHERE

THE ANALYSIS IS SETTLING IN
WE

WERE ABLE TO THE CITY ALLOCATING
25% OF ITS FUTURE PROPERTY
TAX

GROWTH, JUST WITHIN THAT

BOUNDARY, THAT IT COULD
STILL

SUPPORT A POSITIVE NET FISCAL

IMPACT.

SORT

OF A POSITIVE RETURN ON
INVESTMENT FOR THE CITY.

NOTHING IS BEING BOUND TONIGHT.

SYMBOLIC ACTS AND YOU WOULD
BE

CONTINUING TOWARDS THE PATH OF
IMPLEMENTATION.

THE MAP AS A REFRESHER

IS THIS
LINE IN PURPLE.

I TALKED ABOUT THE
MAJOR

TRANSPORTATION CORDONS
WITHIN
THE CITY.

WHEN WE WERE LOOKING
AT
DIFFERENT BOUNDARIES.

IT WAS NOT A FISCALLY

SUSTAINABLE PICTURE TO

PUT THE

WHOLE CITY IN THE FINANCING

DISTRICT.

TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE

FOCUSED

ON WHERE THERE ARE DEVELOPMENT

OPPORTUNITIES, LIKE HOTEL OR
RESIDENTIAL OR OTHERWISE.

SO THE PURPLE BOUNDARY
HERE,
ABOUT 290 ACRE,
24% OF THE CITY

IN TERMS OF ACREAGE.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S BEING

DISCUSSED

AS A POTENTIAL BOUNDARY
ALTERNATIVE.

JUST TO PUT DETAIL, IT'S HARD
TO

TALK ABOUT THIS TOPIC WITHOUT
A
SENSE OF REALITY.

WE DID SOME KIND OF YEAR BY

YEAR-REVENUE RUN TO MAKE

IT VERY

CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC,
IN THE

FIRST YEAR, THESE THINGS
TAKE
TIME TO RAMP UP.

SO IT'S NOT THE LARGEST DOLLAR
AMOUNTS IN THE EARLY YEARS.

WHAT WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT
IS
ABOUT $21,000.

ALMOST $2,000 BEING SET ASIDE
BY

THE CITY

IN THE FIRST YEAR AFTER
FORMATION.

THE COUNTY MATCH IS, AGAIN,
THE

SORT OF NET NEW DOLLARS THAT
YOU

WOULDN'T OTHERWISE
HAVE.

TO PUT IT IN PLAIN SPEAK IN
THAT

FIRST YEAR, WE'RE LOOKING
AT,

OKAY, WE'VE GOT TO PRESERVE
OUR
GENERAL FUND.

THAT $21,000 THAT WOULD NOT
BE

IN THE GENERAL FUND,

BUT RATHER

IN THIS RESTRICTED FUND ONLY
FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE.

THAT'S THE KEY FISCAL

QUESTION

IN THIS
YEAR.

IF YOU ARE WILLING TO DO THAT,
WHAT DO YOU GET FOR IT?

YOU'RE BRINGING IN NET NEW
DOLLARS FOR THE COUNTY.

IN FACT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT
GETS
MOST OF THE PIE HERE.

SO THE PIECE OF THE PIE
THAT

WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT
HERE

IS THE PIECE THAT THE CITY
GETS

AND THE PIECE THAT THE
COUNTY
GETS.

THAT'S WHAT'S IN PLAY HERE.

LOTS OF DIFFERENT REVENUE
SCENARIOS.

NONE OF THIS IS BEING DECIDED
TODAY.

I WILL JUST REINFORCE WHAT
THE

ANALYSIS HAS THUS FAR

CONCLUDED
IS A SCENARIO THAT IS LETTER "C"

ON THIS TABLE WHERE THE CITY

ALLOCATES S 25% OF ITS
FUTURE

SHARE OF PROPERTY TAX
WITHIN
THAT PURPLE BOUNDARY.

WHERE THE COUNTY MATCHES
THAT

DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR, THAT'S
KIND

OF THE TECHNICAL SWEET SPOT

GENERATING ENOUGH MONEY
WHERE

IT'S WORTH ACTUALLY DOING
THE

THING WITHOUT OVERBURDENING
THE
GENERAL FUND BY OVERCOMMITTING.

THAT'S WHERE THE ANALYSIS IS

POINTING

AS THE SORT OF SWEET
SPOT OF ALLOCATION.

WE'RE NOT IN ANY WAY SEEING

CITIES OR

COUNTIES DO THIS IF

IT'S NOT A POSITIVE RETURN ON
INVESTMENT FOR THE GENERAL FUND.

IT'S MEANT TO BE NOT SORT OF
A
LOSS

LEADER BUT AN INVESTMENT OF

DOLLARS THAT GENERATES

PRIVATE

SECTOR INVESTMENT, WHETHER
IT'S

HOUSING OR COMMERCIAL OR
OTHER

TYPES OF INVESTMENT THAT BRING

WITH IT JOBS, WAGES ASSOCIATED

WITH THOSE JOBS, AND THEN VERY

IMPORTANTLY, THE NET
FISCAL

BENEFIT TO THE GENERAL FUND AT
THE CITY LEVEL.

AND THE COUNTY ALSO EXPECTS
THAT

SAME LEVEL OF FISCAL BENEFIT
IF

THEY ARE GOING TO BE

A PARTNER
TO YOU.

WHAT'S BEEN DONE

THROUGH

FEBRUARY WAS NOT JUST A
CITY

ANALYSIS OF WHAT'S IN IT FOR
YOU

BUT THE COUNTY ANALYSIS
OF
WHAT'S IN IT FOR THEM?

THEY HAVE THIS

PARTICIPATION

POLICY IN PLACE THAT REQUIRES

THIS LEVEL OF ANALYSIS
THAT

WE'VE USED THE TIME

OVER THIS

LAST NINE AND TEN MONTHS TO
DO

THAT ANALYSIS FOR BOTH THE
CITY
AND THE COUNTY.

IF IT WAS A POSITIVE FISCAL

BENEFIT, EITHER AGENCY EVEN

ENTERTAINING THE CONVERSATION
FURTHER.

THE LAST BULLET POINT'S
IMPORTANT.

YES, THIS IS A REVENUE TOOL
THAT
YOU CAN BOND AGAINST IT.

YOU CAN PLEDGE IT FOR

REIMBURSEMENT FOR A

DIFFERENT

SOURCE OF
FUNDING SOURCES.

THAT LAST BULLET POINT IS ALSO
IMPORTANT.

IT ALSO

INCREASES YOUR SCORING
FOR GRIM.

TO GIVE YOU MORE POINTS ON

CITIES AND COUNTIES THAT HAVE

SPECIFICALLY THESE TYPES
OF
DISTRICTS IN PLACE.

IT IS A BIG ACT TO

RESTRICT A

PORTION OF FUTURE PROPERTY TAX

DOLLAR THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE
UNRESTRICTED.

WRAPPING UP, A BIT MORE
DETAIL

ON THE FISCAL ANALYSIS.

HAPPY TO COME BACK IN Q&A.

WHEN WE SAY POSITIVE RETURN ON

THE GENERAL FUND, WE MEAN NEW

GROWTH, NEW DEVELOPMENT, CAN BE
CATALYZED.

THAT'S GREAT.

COMES WITH IT SOME NEW REVENUES.

THEN WE'RE SEEING WE'RE GOING
TO

TIE UP A PIECE OF THAT
FUTURE

PROPERTY TAX WITHIN
THE
FINANCING DISTRICT.

THOSE DOLLARS WOULD NOT
BE
AVAILABLE TO THE AT ANY JUBD.

AND TAKING INTO ACCOUNT

THE FACT

THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT ALSO
COMES
WITH NEW EXPENDITURES.

NOT JUST NEW
REVENUE.

WHEN WE SAY NET FIT CALL, WE
SAY

NEW REVENUE NET NEW
EXPENDITURES.

THAT'S DETAILED ANALYSIS
THAT'S

BEEN DONE OVER THE LAST

SEVERAL

MONTHS FOR BOTH THE CITY AND

COUNTY.

WOULD

SEEM TO SUPPORT A POSITIVE
RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

A IST OF PROJECTS.

THINGS THAT
HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED.

LIBRARY EXPANSION.

CITY HALL COMPLEX.

PARKS IMPROVEMENTS.

THESE ARE JUST THAT INCLUSIVE
LIST OF IMPROVEMENTS.

AGAIN, NONE OF THIS IS
BEING

DECIDED TODAY IF IT
MOVES
FORWARD AT ALL.

THIS IS JUST

EXAMPLES OF WHAT'S

COME UP IN THE CONVERSATIONS SO
FAR.

A CENTRAL PATH FORWARD.

AGAIN, THIS IS AN OFF-RAMP.

A GO/NO-GO POINT.

MAYBE THE CONVERSATION

DOESN'T
CONTINUE AFTER TODAY.

IF IT DOES, WE ARE REALLY
AT
LETTER "D" IN THIS.

WHAT'S BEEN DONE IN "A," "B,"

"C" IS A LOOK UNDER THE
HOOD,

THE FEASIBILITY

ANALYSIS,

INITIAL DISCUSSIONS WITH
THE

COUNTY TO SEE IF

THEY'RE

INTERESTED IN BEING YOUR

PARTNER.

FORTUNATELY THOSE HAVE PANNED
OUT POSITIVELY.

YOU HAVE A COUNTY THAT
IS
WILLING TO BE YOUR PARTNER.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT'S THAT
IS

OFTEN NOT THE CASE IN OUR
WORK
ACROSS THE STATE.

HAVING DONE OVER 20 OF THESE

ACROSS THE STATE, OFTENTIMES THE

DEFAULT ANSWER FROM A COUNTY
IS,

NO, I DON'T WANT TO BE YOUR
PARTNER CITY IN THIS DISTRICT.

YOU, FORTUNATELY, DO

HAVE THE

COUNTY WILLING TO

BE YOUR

PARTNER IF YOU WANT TO GO
DOWN
THIS PATH.

SO YOU'RE AT LETTER "D."

AGAIN, THIS IS A

NONBINDING

RESOLUTION OF INTENTION.

YOU'RE NOT BOUND TO IT.

IF YOU WERE TO MOVE

FORWARD, I

WILL PUT IT VERY PAIN

PLAINLY,

THERE ARE
COSTS.

TO MOVE FORWARD BEYOND
TODAY,

DOWN IMPLEMENTATION, THERE ARE

ONE-TIME COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH
THE NEXT STEP.

THE STAFF REPORT ENUMERATES
A
LEVEL BETWEEN $55,000 AND
$75,000 THAT WOULD BE INCURRED.

TO DRAFT THE REQUIRED

DOCUMENTATION,
THE

INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING PLAN,
A

MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION BY
A

LICENSED SURVEYOR, AND
YEAH,

TYPICALLY THE CITY ADVANCING
THOSE COSTS.

THAT WOULD BASICALLY TAKE
YOU

NOT FINISH LINE OF THAT LETTER
"K.
"

THAT WHOLE PROCESS INVOLVES
A

SERIES OF PUBLIC MEETINGS AND

HEARINGS, PUBLIC NOTICES BY

MAIL, BY
NEWSPAPER, BY WEBSITE.

THERE'S NO VOTE, THERE'S
NO

OFFICIAL VOTE OF THE PUBLIC FOR
THESE.

YOU'RE NOT INCREASING

ANYBODY'S

TAXES AT

THE LAST PUBLIC
HEARING.

LETTER "J.
"

THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR

FOLKS WITHIN THE

DISTRICT
BOUNDARIES TO PROTEST.

THEY DON'T LIKE REALLY

ANYTHING
ABOUT IT.

THE CONCEPT, THE FINANCING
PLAN,

THE WAY THE PROCESS
WAS
CONDUCTED.

THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
PROTEST.

EVEN THOUGH FOLKS ARE
NOT
REQUIRED TO VOTE.

IT TENDS TO BE VERY TRANSPARENT.

NOWHERE TO HIDE WHAT
YOU'RE

GOING TO DO WITH THE
MONEY,

FINANCIAL IMPACTS, AND ALL
OF
THAT.

SO THAT'S THE BULK OF IT.

THIS EVENING IS BEFORE THE

COUNCIL AN OPPORTUNITY TO,
IF

NOTHING ELSE, RECEIVE THIS
UPDATE.

TO TAKE NO ACTION.

YOU CAN, INSTEAD OF
THIS

RESOLUTION OF INTENTION, KEEP
THIS PROCESS MOVING FORWARD.

YOU CAN

CHOOSE TO PERHAPS
REVISIT AT A FUTURE DATE.

OR CUT BAIT ENTIRELY.

I WILL REMAIN FOR

QUESTIONS BUT

PASS IT BACK

TO YOU, MAYOR, FROM
HERE.

THANK YOU.

TURNING TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR
QUESTIONS?

LOOKING TO
MY LEFT FIRST?
COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?

SO THIS FEELS LIKE A
$100,000

OPTION TO GET WHAT IS BASICALLY

LIKE A HOME EQUITY LOAN, YOU

KNOW, SO TO SPEAK, ON FUTURE TAX
REVENUES.

WHAT, YOU KNOW -- WE CAN
DECIDE

ON DOING, LIKE, REBUILDING THE

KITCHEN, LIKE PRODUCTIVE THINGS
OR.

WE CAN DO INFRASTRUCTURE THINGS

LIKE REBUILDING THE ROOF OR THE
FOUNDATION.

INFRASTRUCTURE-TYPE THINGS.

ONE THING THAT, YOU KNOW,
ON

YOUR MAP, IT DIDN'T INCLUDE

PARTS OF MAIN STREET AND --
UP
TO THE FIR CREST MARKET AREA.

DIDN'T GO DOWN THAT CORRIDOR.

IT KIND OF WENT UP

BODEGA AND
OUT TOWARDS HEALDSBURG.

WONDERING WHY YOU
DIDN'T

CONTINUE ALONG THE DOWNTOWN

CORRIDOR

THROUGH SOUTH TO THE
FIR CREST MARKET AREA.

THE BOUNDARY AT THE TIME WAS

A BALANCING ACT.

WE STARTED LARGER -- I THINK
WE

DID HAVE ONE SNORE THAT

CONTINUED TO THE

SOUTHERN
BOUNDARY ALONG 115.

TRYING TO ARRIVE AT THAT SPEED

STUFF, STUFF IN THE PIPELINE
ON

ONE HAND, ALSO NOT

OVERBURDENING

THE GENERAL FUND BY

HAVING TOO

LARGE OF AN AREA, AT

LEAST AT

THAT TIME MONTHS AGO, WHAT THE

DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE WAS LOOKING

LIKE, PIPELINE

DEVELOPMENT
TRACKER THE CITY MAINTAINS.

WE WEREN'T AT THAT TIME
SEEING

ANYTHING BIG COMING ON
THAT
SOUTHERN PORTION.

SO IT WAS DECIDED AT THAT POINT
TO LEAVE IT OUT.

THANK YOU.

VICE MAYOR?

SO I UNDERSTAND
YOUR

DEFINITION OF WHY YOU DEFINED

THAT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME,
I'M

JUST WONDERING, HOW DID YOU

DETERMINE THAT DEVELOPMENT
WOULD
HAPPEN IN THIS AREA?

BECAUSE MY CONCERN ALL
ALONG

WITH THIS IS JUST THAT

WE DON'T

HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT, AND
WE'RE TINY.

IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVE A VAST

AMOUNT OF LAND, AND WE CAN'T

EXPAND, SO HOW DID YOU

DETERMINE

THAT THAT WOULD BE THE BEST
AREA

WHERE DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY COULD
TRULY OCCUR?

ONE STARTING POINT WAS
THE

ACTUAL PIPELINE FACTOR,

WHICH I

BELIEVE IS BASED ON
THE

PROPOSALS AND THE
ACTUAL

CONCEPTS THAT ARE GIVEN TO
CITY

STAFF BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR
OF
PLAN DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS.

VERSUS JUST GRASP THE

BROADER

CONVERSATION THAT WAS MEANT TO

BE OBJECTIVE, NOT

CRYSTAL

BALLING IT, BUT STUFF
THAT'S

ACTUALLY ON RECORD OF BEING
SUBMITTED.

THAT'S MAINLY WHAT WAS

USED AT
THE TIME.

HOW FAR BACK DID THAT GO TO,
THEN?
REALISTICALLY?

I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW
REALISTIC THIS IS.

IS THIS A PERIOD OF 20 YEARS
BACK?
OR RECENTLY?

I MEAN, HOW WAS THAT, YOU
KNOW,

THAT INFORMATION -- HOW DO
YOU
COME TO THAT DECISION?
YEAH, THANK YOU.

STAFF CAN OBVIOUSLY

CORRECT ME
IF I MISCHARACTERIZE IT.

SO IT'S PRETTY FRESH, THE
INFORMATION.

THE SUBMITTALS, I BELIEVE,
WERE

WITHIN SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR.

I BELIEVE THAT'S HOW OFTEN
THAT

PIPELINE TRACKER IS UPDATED
THAT

PLANNING MAINTAINS OR AT
LEAST
MAINTAINED AT THAT TIME.

AND THOSE ARE PROPOSALS THAT

WOULD BE WITHIN NOT THE
NEXT

NECESSARILY ONE YEAR,

TWO YEAR,

BUT THEY COULD STILL BE
OUT AS

FAR AS FIVE OR TEN YEARS
INTO
THE FUTURE.

BUT AS FAR AS HOW RECENT
THE

INFORMATION WAS

SUBMITTED, I

BELIEVE IT WAS MORE ON THAT ONE
YEAR.

LET ME ASK YOU,

JANE --
YES, WE TRACK BOTH.

SO THIS IS BOTH ENTITLED

PROJECTS, SUCH AS THE HOTEL

SEBASTOPOL, WHICH IS

PROBABLY
FIVE YEARS OLD.

BUT THAT'S ALREADY AN ENTITLED
PROJECT.

SO BOTH THOSE ENTITLED ONES
AND

THE MOST RECENT APPLICATIONS TO
DEVELOP IN THE CITY.

IT REALLY GOES BACK ABOUT FIVE

YEARS, BUT THE STUFF THAT
WE'RE

LESS SURE ABOUT IS MORE
RECENT
IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS OR SO.

THANK YOU.

FURTHER TO MY
LEFT,
COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?
THANK YOU.

DOES THE COUNTY NEED TO AGREE TO
THIS?

FOR EXAMPLE, THE CITY
SAYS,

OKAY, WE WANT TO GO FORWARD
WITH
THIS.

DOES THE COUNTY THEN

NEED TO

TAKE A VOTE ON
IT?
OR ARE THEY AUTOMATICALLY IN?

COUNCILMEMBER,

THEY WOULD

HAVE TO DO THIS --
THE
EQUIVALENT OF THIS SAME ACTION.

THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO ADOPT

A

RESOLUTION OF INTENTION, SORT
OF

A COMPANION MOTION, TO

INDICATE

THEIR CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO BE
YOUR PARTNER.

SO JUST TO CLARIFY, THEY'VE

ALREADY DONE THAT FOR THE
COUNTY?

THEY'VE STARTED A NEW ONE FOR

THE COUNTY THAT DOES

NOT INCLUDE
SEBASTOPOL?
CORRECT.

OKAY.

YOU ESTIMATED IN THE FIRST YEAR
IT WOULD COST GIVEN $55,000 TO
$70,000 TO DO THE
STARTUP.

MY QUESTION IS WHAT ABOUT THE
ANNUAL, EVERY YEAR?

YOU PROBABLY HAVE TO
HAVE
MEETINGS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

WHAT DO YOU ESTIMATE THE COST
IS

FOR YOUR SERVICES, THEN ALSO
THE
COST

OF STAFF TIME AND MEETINGS

AND SUCH?
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.

OBVIOUSLY, WE KNOW WE WOULD --

TO BE OF SERVICE TO THE
CITY,

WE'D COMPETE AND ALL THAT
STUFF.

THE ADMINISTRATION IN THE
EARLY

YEARS FOR THESE TYPES
OF

DISTRICTS IS ON THE LOWER
SIDE

IN THE LARGER WORLD OF
PUBLIC
FINANCING POOLS.

OUR CONTRACT FOR ANNUAL

ADMINISTRATION IN THE FIRST
FEW
YEARS ARE MAYBE $5,000, MAYBE
$7,500.

WHEN YOU START GENERATING THE

LARGER DOLLARS, LIKE YOU'RE IN

THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS
OF

REVENUES TO SPEND ON

PROJECTS,
MAYBE THE ADMIN GETS UP TO 20,
$25,000.

ANNUALLY.

THAT'S CONSULTING TIME.

THE NOTICING COSTS, THESE
ARE

REQUIRED TO MEET JUST ONCE A

YEAR.

SOME OF THESE DISTRICTS
WILL
CHOOSE TO MEET TWICE A YEAR.

ONLY ONE OF THOSE, ONLY THE
ONCE

A YEAR REQUIRED MEETING, IS

REQUIRED TO BE DULY NOTICED
AND

HAVE SOME MAILING COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

I WOULD ESTIMATE MAYBE
$1,500,

MAILING ANY PROPERTY OWNER OR

OCCUPANT WITHIN THE

DISTRICT

BOUNDARY ONCE A YEAR WITH
AN
ANNUAL REPORT.

I COULD ADD PART OF WHAT I
MENTIONED IN THE HOST, 5,000,
$7,500, THAT'S

FOR PREPARATION

OF A REQUIRED ANNUAL
REPORT

WHICH IS REQUIRED TO SAY HOW
YOU

DO VERSUS WHAT YOU SAID
YOU
WOULD DO.

ACTUAL VERSUS PROJECTED.

PROJECTS ACTUALLY FUNDED AND
ALL
OF THAT.

SO WHAT THAT RANGES,

$75,000

INITIAL YEARS, MAYBE UP TO
$25,000 MAYBE YEARS TEN AND

BEYOND ANNUALLY, WHAT IT

DOESN'T
INCLUDE IS STAFF TIME.

THAT ONE IS HARDER FOR ME TO

ESTIMATE, THE COST OF THAT, WHEN

OUR FIRM IS INVOLVED WE TRY
TO
MINIMIZE THE STAFF TIME.

WE TYPICALLY TRY TO DRAFT
THE

STAFF REPORTS, ANY

RESOLUTIONS,

AND HAVE CITY ATTORNEY OR
STAFF
REVIEW ALL THAT STUFF.

BUT MAYBE WHEN IT COMES TO COST

OF STAFF TIME, I
WOULD

COMPLETELY DEFER TO CITY

MANAGER

OR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR.

THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY
OTHER
COSTS
REQUIRED.

A LOT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING
IS

DONE BY COUNTY

AUDITOR

CONTROLLER WHEN IT COMES
TO

DOING THE CALCULATIONS AND
THETHE
OF

THESE.

OKAY.

I'M GOING TO GO TO MY RIGHT

BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN TO MY
RIGHT YET.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THE RIGHT?
BACK TO THE LEFT?
EVERYBODY HAS THEIR HAND UP.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY,
HAVING

SAT ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE
WITH

MAYOR ZOLLMAN, IT'S NOT A

SURPRISE, AND I'D BE -- TO ME,

ANYWAY, BUT I'D BE CURIOUS YOUR

FEELING, THAT THE COUNTY WENT

AHAD AND PASSED THE

RESOLUTION
FOR THE UNINCORPORATED.

BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT

OF TALK

ABOUT COLLECTING TAXES IN
A

CERTAIN AREA AND THEN

DOING A
PROJECT IN A DIFFERENT AREA.

SO I THINK THAT WAS A

NATURAL

CONCLUSION OF SEBASTOPOL, IF
WE

WENT WITH ONE, WANTED TO

COLLECT

OUR OWN MONEY, AND DO A

PROJECT

IN OUR OWN JURISDICTION,

VERSUS,

YOU KNOW, HAVE -- DO

SOMETHING
IN UNINCORPORATED.

I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY
THAT.

THAT'S KIND OF

HOW IT'S BEEN
DOING.

RIGHT?

KIND OF THIS RESPONSE
TO

COUNCILMEMBER MAUER'S
QUESTION?
CORRECT.

OKAY.

FURTHER QUESTIONS?

SO IF THE COUNTY JOINS THETHE

EIFD -- RIFD, WILL THEY SHARE
THE 55 TO $75,000 ANNUAL

STARTUP
COST?
AND THEN THE ANNUAL COSTS?

OR IS THAT JUST SEBASTOPOL'S
AND
THE

COUNTY WILL HAVE THEIR OWN
ADDITIONAL COST?
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.

FOR THE INITIAL STARTUP COSTS,

TYPICALLY THE CITY WOULD PAY
FOR

IT, ADVANCE THE FUN

FUNDING,

THEN IT GETS REIMBURSED BY
THE

DISTRICT AND THE

DIRECTORS
DOLLARS HAVE THOSE TWO FLAVORS.

HALF CITY MONEY, HALF
COUNTY
MONEY.

YOU WOULD BE DOING THE

ADVANCE
YOURSELF, TYPICALLY.

NOTHING PRECLUDES YOU AS A
CITY

FROM ASKING THE COUNTY,
MIGHT

YOU BE WILLING TO HELP
SHARE

THIS ADVANCE OF DOLLAR,
THAT

IT'S NOT TYPICALLY DONE, BUT

HEY, YOU DON'T GET WHAT YOU
DON'T ASK FOR.

JUST SAYING WHAT TYPICALLY
HAPPENS.

THE ONGOING COSTS THAT I

MENTION

WOULD BE THE COSTS REALLY TOTO
DISTRICT.

THE CITY STAFF TENDS TO
BE IN
THE LEAD OF IT.

WHATEVER, UP SO $25,000 A YEAR.

BUT TYPICALLY, THAT IS PAID
FROM

THE DISTRICT REVENUE,
WHICH

WOULD BE, AGAIN, HALF CITY,
HALF
COUNTY.

HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS THE
QUESTION.

THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR?

YES, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I
MISSED IT IN HERE ANYWHERE.

I UNDERSTAND THE TOTALS WE HAVE
HERE.

WHAT IS THE TIME VALUE OF
THE

MONEY WE WOULD BE, YOU
KNOW,
SETTING ASIDE HERE?

I MEAN, BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT
50 YEARS, RIGHT?

AND AGAIN, CAN YOU REMIND
ME,

WHEN IS IT THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY
UTILIZE THIS?
OVER 50 YEARS, WE'RE
SEEING

THE TIME VALUE OF THAT

MONEY IS
ABOUT $21 MILLION.

WHERE HALF OF THAT

TECHNICALLY

IS CITY DOLLAR AND HALF OF
THAT
IS COUNTY DOLLAR.

THE TIMING, YOU KNOW, WE
ALWAYS
HAVE TO SET THE EXPECTATION.

IT'S PRETTY ANTI-CLIMACTIC.

THE FIRST TWO YEARS, $40,000.

SECOND YEAR, $90,000.

THIRD YEAR, $140,000.

YOU'RE REALLY NOT CHURNING
UNTIL

YEAR FOUR OR YEAR FIVE

WHERE YOU

COULD EVEN THINK ABOUT
DOING

SOMETHING LIKE THAT SOMETHING

LIKE AN ISSUANCE OF A BOND
FROM

THE DISTRICT BASED ON, YOU
KNOW,
THE YEAR FIVE REVENUE.

SO IN THOSE FIRST FIVE YEARS

WITH THOSE TENS AND HUNDREDS OF

THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS,
WHAT'S

TYPICALLY GOING ON IS YOU
COULD

PAY FOR PLANNING AND DESIGN
WORK.

SO IF THERE ARE INFRASTRUCTURE

COSTS -- ENTIRELY MAKING THINGS

UP.

IF THERE WERE LIBRARY

EXPANSIONS

YOU WERE CONSIDERING TO PAY
FOR,

PLANNING AND DESIGN COSTS
THAT

NEEDED TO BE IN, THOSE WERE
BE

AN ELIGIBLE AND

PERHAPS

APPROPRIATE USE OF

THOSE SMALLER

DOLLARS IN ADVANCE OF

ACTUALLY
BUILDING OR EXPANDING A LIBRARY.

THAT'S HOW THAT WORKS.

JOE, TO REFRESH MY MEMORY,
IF

WE MOVED AHEAD AND PUT
THIS
MONEY IN, WE'RE TRAPPED.

WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES
OF

EVEN TRYING TO TAKE ANY OF IT
BACK?
THANK YOU, MAYOR.

YEAH, SO YOU FORM IT.

LET'S SAY, I DON'T KNOW,
THREE

YEARS IN YOU HAVEN'T ISSUED ANY

BONDS BUT YOU DECIDE IT'S NOT

WORKING OUT, LET'S CLOSE UP
SHOP.

YOU ARE ABLE TO DISSOLVE AND

REDISTRIBUTE THE DOLLARS, ANY

DOLLARS ACCRUED BACK TO THE CITY

AND THE COUNTY WITH

ANYTHING
ACCRUED AT THAT TIME.

OR COST TO YOU AT THAT POINT
IS

OBVIOUSLY THE TIME AND

RESOURCE

YOU'VE ACTUALLY SPENT UP TO
THAT
TIME.

WE'D CALL THAT SORT OF THE LESS
INTENSE DISSOLUTION SCENARIO.

THE MORE CRASS SCENARIO
IS SAY

YOU'RE IN YEAR SIX, LET'S SAY
IN

YEAR FIVE YOU ACTUALLY ISSUED
SOME BONDS TO PAY FOR $2.
5 MILLION OF FLOOD CONTROL
IMPROVEMENTS.

THEN YOU REALLY ARE TRAPPED
IN

THE SENSE THAT YOU HAVE TO
HONOR
THE PAYMENTS FOR THAT $2.
5 MILLION BOND.

THOSE WERE 30-YEAR BONDS,
YOU'VE

GOT TO AT LEAST SET ASIDE THE

ANNUAL PAYMENT FOR THAT $2.
5

MILLION OF BOND OR 30 YEARS.

WHAT YOU WOULD THEN BE DOING IS

SAYING, THAT'S IT, I'M
NOT

SPENDING ANYTHING ELSE, I'M
NOT

ENTERING INTO ANY OTHER

OBLIGATIONS, ANY

ADDITIONAL
MONEY BEYOND THAT BOND PAYMENT.

IT'S COMING BACK TO ME AS A

CITY, BACK TO THE COUNTY
SEPARATELY.

BUT YOU WOULD BE TRAPPED
FOR

WHATEVER YOU HAVE COMMITTED FOR
THINGS LIKE A BOND.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY A SORT
OF
UNTOUCHABLE.

IT'S
OBLIGATED.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
CARTER.

ALSO INCREMENTALLY,
I'M

WONDERING WHAT THE COST IS
TO
THE CITY YEAR ON, YEAR ON.

IT LOOKED LIKE SOMETHING
A
LITTLE OVER $20,000 A YEAR?

CORRECT, COUNCILMEMBER,
CORRECT.

FURTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE
WE
GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT?
COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?

IF YOU TAKE --

SO I'M LOOKING
AT PAGE 6 OF YOUR REPORT.

AND IT SAYS YEAR

ONE, WE'D SET
ASIDE $22,000.

IT'S GOING TO COST 55 TO 75.

THAT GETS WIPED OUT IN THE FIRST
THREE YEARS.

YOU CAN'T REALLY -- YOU
CAN'T
ADD INTEREST TO THAT.

BECAUSE WE'D ALREADY SPENT THAT
MONEY.

SO -- I DON'T KNOW, KIND OF

SKEWS THE WHOLE CHART HERE THAT
YOU HAVE.

I WOULD AGREE, COUNCILMEMBER,
THAT'S RIGHT.

YOU WOULDN'T BE FULLY

REPAID

BACK EVEN AT THE YEAR OF END
ONE

IF YOU'RE SPENDING, LET'S SAY,
$60,000.

YOU ONLY HAVE $43,000 TO REPAY

YOU, THROUGH ALL OF YEAR
ONE,

MAYBE HALFWAY THROUGH YEAR
TWO,

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY
TRUE.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS
BEFORE
WE GO TO PUBLIC?
I
DO.

COUNCILMEMBER
MAUER.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN ON
YOUR
REPORT, PAGE 6 AT THE

BOTTOM,
YEAR 1 TO 50 TOTAL.

THEN IT SAYS BELOW THAT, IT
SAYS, PRESENT VALUE.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
THANK YOU.

FIRST ROW, 1 THROUGH 50 TOTAL,

IS WE CALL FOR THE UNADJUSTED,
NOT ACCOUNTING FOR INFLATION.

ECONOMISTS WOULD CALL

THE
NOMINAL DOLLAR AMOUNT.

ADD UP THE DOLLAR WHERE A
DOLLAR
IN YEAR 50 IS SORT OF WORTH
THE
SAME AS A DOLLAR IN YEAR ONE.

A SIMPLISTIC WAY OF LOOKING
AT
IT BUT USEFUL TO SOME.

THE PRESENT VALUE

IMMEDIATELY

BELOW THAT ACCOUNTS FOR THE
TIME
VALUE OF MONEY.

WE'RE SAYING A DOLLAR 50
YEARS

FROM NOW BUYS YOU A LOT
LESS
THAN A DOLLAR TODAY.

THE MOST VALUABLE DOLLAR IS
THE
DOLLAR TODAY.

WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE DISCOUNT

RATE TO SAY, INFLATION, THE
TIME

VALUE OF THE DOLLAR

DECREASES
OVER TIME.

WE WOULD SAY IT'S AN

OVERSTATEMENT TO SAY YOU GET
$56
MILLION, $56.3 MILLION.

THAT'S REALLY ONLY

WORTH ABOUT
$1.4 MILLION TODAY.

JUST TO REITERATE THAT,
JUST

FOR FOR

PARTICULARITY, WHAT

YOU'RE SAYING IS WE SET ASIDE
$28 MILLION, THE COUNTY
SETS
ASIDE $28 MILLION, RESULTING IN
$56 MILLION TO WORK WITH.

BUT THE VALUE IN 50 YEARS IS
NOW

ONLY WORTH
$21 MILLION?
CORRECT.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

DO WE GET INTEREST ON THAT
MONEY?

LIKE A BANK
ACCOUNT?

THE MONEY'S SITTING THERE,
RIGHT?

SO IT'S NOT THAT -- I MEAN --

CORRECT.

SO IT WOULD BE GAINING
INTEREST AS IT COMPOUNDS?

RIGHT, APPLES TO

APPLES,

TYPICALLY DOLLARS -- THE
CITY

MANAGES ITS OWN FLOW, ITS CASH
MANAGEMENT.

OUR PUBLIC AGENCIES WOULD
BE

PUTTING THIS MONEY ASIDE
JUST

LIKE A GENERAL FUND DOLLAR
ASIDE

IN DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTS SO
IT'S

NOT SITTING THERE LIKE A
0%

CHECKING ACCOUNT, IF IT'S NOT
BEING INVESTED.

COUNCILMEMBER MAWER?

ARE THESE NUMBERS ON PAGE
6,
DO THEY INCLUDE INTEREST?
NO.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION
CORRECTLY, NO.

WE'RE NOT SAYING WHAT IF YOUR
CITY'S LIKE $10.7 MILLION
GETS

INVESTED IN A MONEY MARKET

ACCOUNT, GENERATING -- NO,
WE'RE
LEAVING INTEREST OUT OF IT.

ADDITIONAL

QUESTIONS,

COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?

I'D LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT
SOME

OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE
GONE
THROUGH THIS OR SOME EXAMPLES.

IF YOU'VE DISCOVERED ANY

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OR --

WHAT ARE THE PARALLELS WE MAY

NOT BE SEEING DIRECTLY?

LIKE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE

PAYMENTS TOWARDS YOU KIND
OF

TAKE AWAY -- BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A

SMALL AMOUNT, IT'S A LARGE
PERCENTAGE.

THANK YOU.

THESE HAVE BEEN DONE ABOUT
35 ACROSS THE STATE.

WE'VE DONE ABOUT 23 OR SO
OF

THEM IN CITIES LIKE MOUNT

SHASTA, POPULATION 1,000.

TO CITIES LIKE SAN DIEGO,
SACRAMENTO, SAN FRANCISCO.

OBVIOUSLY MUCH
LARGER.

ALL SIZES.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

WE'VE HAD SOME, LIKE THE CITY
OF

PLACENTA IN ORANGE COUNTY
WHERE

THEY TRIED TO OVERPRESCRIBE THE

THING, AND THEY SAID, OKAY,

WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS AT
ALL,

WE WANT TO BE SUPER SURE WHAT

WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE
MONEY.

WE'RE GOING TO
CHOOSE
SPECIFICALLY AN $8 MILLION
FREE

SKATE MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT.

WELL, LIFE HAPPENS.

COVID HAPPENED.

THAT WAS FORMED IN 2019.

AND AN $8 MILLION FREE
SCAPE

IMPROVEMENT PLAN TURNED INTO A
$21 MILLION, ALL

THE PROJECTIONS
ONLY BASED ON $8 MILLION.

THAT LED TO HAVING TO

REVISIT

THE WHOLE PLAN AND
ADJUST

ALLOCATION LEVELS, DURATION,
AND
DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS.

BECAUSE IT WAS SORT OF
OVERCONSTRAINED.

IT WAS TOUGH.

THEY WERE THE FIRST CITY/COUNTY
PARTNERSHIP IN THE WHOLE STATE.

THE LESSON LEARNED IS TRY TO

GIVE OURSELVES A LITTLE BIT MORE

FLEXIBILITY ON THE LIST
OF

PROJECTS AND EXACTLY THE
TYPES
OF THINGS WE WANT TO PAY FOR.

KEEP IT INCLUSIVE.

EXPECTATION SETTING.

WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT BETTER AT IT.

WE HAVEN'T ALWAYS HAD SLIDES

LIKE THE ONES I WALKED THROUGH
THAT SAYS 20,000 OR 40,000
IN
YEAR ONE.

WE'VE SOMETIMES HAD

MEMBERS OF

THE PUBLIC, HEY, I

THOUGHT WE

COULD AUTOMATICALLY PAY FOR
$5

MILLION FREE SCAPE IMPROVEMENT
PLAN.

NO.

WHAT WE'RE -- WHAT WE'RE TRYING

TO PROACTIVELY AVOID IS MAKING
EXPECTATIONS CLEAR.

IT IS PRETTY QUIET IN THE
FIRST
FEW YEARS.

IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY.

I WOULD AGREE IT MAY FEEL
OVERLY

ADMINISTRATIVELY

BURDENSOME

HAVING ONE-TIME COSTS TO GET
THE
THING
GOING.

THAT IS JUST THE WAY THESE GO.

THEN MORE BROADLY TO THE FIRST

PART OF YOUR QUESTION ON
SUCCESSES, YEAH.

WE'VE HAD THE LAVERNE ONE IN LOS
ANGELES.

THEY STARTED WITH SMALLER
THINGS.
$3 MILLION FREE SCAPE.

OLD TOWN LAVERNE.

THEN BIG STUFF LIKE
WEST

SACRAMENTO EARLIER THIS YEAR,
$55 MILLION, EIFD BONDS TO
PAY

FOR A VARIETY OF FLOOD CONTROL,

WATER-SEWER-ROADWAY

IMPROVEMENTS.

SOME OF THOSE THAT HAVE
BEEN
FORMED IN 2017 TO
2019, THOSE

ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE THE
MOST

PROGRESS TO REPORT

IN PLACES

LIKE LAVERNE, SAN DIEGO,
MESA,
WEST
SACRAMENTO.

THANK YOU.

I'M GOING TO TURN TO STAFF.

BECAUSE, MARY, AND OUR

WONDERFUL

CITY MANAGER, YOU'VE
BEEN

WORKING ON THIS PROJECT SINCE
IT
STARTED, BASICALLY.

IN ONE FASHION OR ANOTHER.

WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THIS?

IS IT EVEN POSSIBLE MOVING

FORWARD TO CONSIDER THE BURDEN
THAT IT WOULD TAKE ON STAFF?

I THINK THE BURDEN ON STAFF
WOULD BE -- HI.

WE ARE LIMITED ON STAFF.

WHETHER WE HAVE

PERMANENT

STATUTE ON OR CONSULTANTS
ON

RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD BE
AN

ADDITIONAL BURDEN THAT
CITIES
HAVE TO TAKE.

THE FINANCES AS WELL.

YOU KNOW, THE 50 TO $75,000.

I UNDERSTAND WE WOULD GET IT

REIMBURSED AFTER THE

PROBABLY
THIRD
YEAR.

SO AT A MINIMUM,

YOU'RE LOOKING

AT THE SAVINGS NOT

STARTING
UNTIL THE FOURTH.

JOE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF
I'M STATING SOMETHING INCORRECT.

MY UNDERSTANDING THAT
IS

REIMBURSEMENT WON'T OCCUR
UNTIL
THE THIRD OR FOURTH YEAR.

SO WE WON'T START SEEING
ANY

SAVINGS UNTIL THE FIFTH YEAR,
BASICALLY.

THE COUNCIL COULD DO
A

RESOLUTION NOW, LOOK AT
THE

BUDGET NEXT YEAR TO SEE IF
THIS

IS SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT
TO

INCLUDE INTO THE
BUDGET.

BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND

UNTIL WE

CAN GET FULLY STAFFED,
I

WOULD -- MY

RECOMMENDATION WOULD

BE POSTPONE UNTIL WE CAN
GET
FULLY
STAFFED.

GREAT, THANK YOU.

VICE
MAYOR?
YOU'RE
MUTED.

SORRY.

I WAS JUST WONDERING, JUST
AN

ESTIMATE OF -- LIKE ON
THE

AVERAGE, HOW MUCH MONEY WOULD
WE

BE SETTING ASIDE

PER HOUSEHOLD
THAT'S HERE IN SEBASTOPOL?

PER PROPERTY, YOU KNOW,
THAT
WOULD BE TAXED?

DID ANYONE DO THOSE NUMBERS
SO
THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT?
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU?

TO CLARIFY, JUST TO CLARIFY,
NO ONE'S PAYING MORE TAXES.

WHETHER YOU'RE IN THE DISTRICT

OR OUT OF THE DISTRICT --

I UNDERSTAND THAT, I'M
JUST

ASKING PER HOUSEHOLD, IF
WE'RE

SETTING THIS MONEY

ASIDE, HOW
MUCH

IS THAT ACTUALLY PER

PROPERTY, I SHOULD SAY, NOT
HOUSEHOLD?

I'M GOING TO COME UP
WITH
THAT HERE ON THE FLY.

BUT THERE
ARE --

I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE THAT
OUT MYSELF.

I THOUGHT MAYBE YOU HAD THAT.

DID NOT, I'M SORRY.

AND THEN THE OTHER -- I
GUESS

THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION

IS, ALL

THE CITIES THAT YOU

LISTED AS

FAR AS EXAMPLES, THEY ARE
ALL
VASTLY LARGER THAN SEBASTOPOL.

AND WE OFTEN, IN MANY

DECISIONS

THAT WE MAKE, WE LIKE TO

COMPARE

TO OTHER CITIES THAT ARE

SIMILAR
IN SIZE.

I MEAN, THE SMALLEST CITY I
SAW
THAT YOU MENTIONED WAS A 30,000.

WE HAVE 7,500 PEOPLE HERE.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF
YOU

ACTUALLY HAVE EXAMPLES
OF

SMALLER CITIES SIMILAR TO US,
TO

GIVE US THE POSITIVES AND
THE

NEGATIVES OR

UNINTENDED

CONSEQUENCES FOR SUCH A SMALL
PLACE?

SO THE SMALLER CITIES THAT

HAVE DONE THIS, LIKE MOUNT

SHASTA,

BANGOR, SOME OF THOSE
TEND TO BE THE NEWER ONES.

FORMED IN THE LAST TWO OR
THREE

YEARS WHERE THEY MAY ONLY BE

GENERATING, DUE TO THEIR SMALL

SIZE, MAYBE ONLY TEST OF
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.

MAYBE THE LOW 100s.

NO MASSIVE TO REPORT.

WHERE SOME OF THOSE LIKE TANKER

HAVE BEEN PARTICULARLY

ENTREPRENEURIAL,

SCRAPPY,

WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT,

BUT THEY'VE BEEN DOING WITH
A

SMALLER DOLLAR AMOUNT, ARE USING

THEM IN GRANT PROPOSALS,
USING

THEM AS DEMONSTRATIONS OF LOCAL
MATCH.

NOT MATCH DOLLARS TODAY BUT
A

COMMITMENT OF FUTURE DOLLARS
AS

A MATCH WHICH THE GRANT

PROVIDER

LIKES BECAUSE IT'S SEPARATE
FROM
THE GENERAL FUND.

SO IT'S NOT AS HARD IN TERMS
OF

SUCCESS OF HAVING
A

MILLION-DOLLAR BOND LIKE WEST
SACRAMENTO.

BUT SOMEONE LYCRA DONDO BEACH,

THEY WEREN'T EVEN

FULLY THROUGH

THE FORMATION PROCESS OF OF
THIS
EIFD.

THEY HAD ZERO DOLLARS IN
THE
BANK ACCOUNT.

THEY WERE ORDERED PROP 68,
OPEN

SPACE GRANT, $3.5 MILLION IN THE

AWARD LETTER FROM DEPARTMENT
OF

PARKS AND REC CITED THEIR USE
OF
THAT INNOVATIVE EIFD TOOL.

HAVING A CITY-COUNTY

PARTNERSHIP

WITHIN THAT POOL IS HAVING A LOT
TO DO WITH THEIR AWARD.

THAT'S PROBABLY THE CLOSEST
I

CAN TALK ABOUT AS A SUCCESS FOR

A NEWER ONE WITH NOT

A LOT OF
THE
MONEY.

GREAT.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CARTER.

I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS.

CAN A CITY TAKE OUT A BOND?

SOME OF THESE BONDS ARE
VERY
LONG LENGTH.
50 YEARS IS CRAZY.

A
LOT.

AND YOU KNOW, IS THAT -- 6, 7,
8%.

IF YOU DID A SHORTER

BOND, COULD
IT BE LESS?

CAN CITIES TAKE OUT A
BOND

WITHOUT
THIS FACILITY?
WITHOUT EIFD?
YES.

WE CAN'T USE THE

GENERAL FUND

TO -- THE CITY CAN'T USE
THE

GENERAL FUND FOR A BOND DIRECTLY
WITHOUT A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE.

THERE ARE OTHER BONDS, YOU
KNOW,

IF WE USE RATE REVENUE, FOR
EXAMPLE.

THE ISSUE OF BONDS OR

SIMILAR

DEBT IN ORDER TO FUND
SEWER

IMPROVEMENTS OR THINGS LIKE
THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT FULLY
ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.

YEAH, I WAS BASICALLY
ASKING

IF THERE ARE OTHER WAYS
TO

ACCESS CAPITAL IF WE HAVE
A

LARGE CAPITAL PROJECT THAT
WE

SHOULD DO NOW TO MAKE

AN JECHLT
IN OURSELVES IS.

ARE THERE OTHER

FACILITIES --

THERE ARE

OTHER WAYS TO
ACCESS CAPITAL, YES.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

SO YOU TALKED ABOUT
THE

SMALLER CITIES, AND YOU LISTED
THEM OFF.

BUT CAN YOU TALK ABOUT SONOMA
COUNTY?

HOW MANY
EIFDs ARE MOVING
FORWARD?

YOU MENTIONED ONE TONIGHT
IN

STAFF REPORT FOR

UNINCORPORATED
WEST COUNTY.

I'M FAMILIAR WITH SANTA ROSA.

IS THERE OTHER EIFDs THAT
HAVE

BEEN --

ARE BEING FORMED IN OUR
OWN COUNTY?

CAN YOU LIST
THOSE?
THOSE ARE CERTAINLY SMALL.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.

SO FAR ONLY ONE HAS BEEN FULLY

FORMED.

THAT IS THE CITY OF SANTA
ROSA

PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COUNTY OF
SONOMA.

IN THE EVALUATION PHASE, IS THE

UNINCORPORATED WEST COUNTY
ONE
MENTIONED IN A STAFF REPORT?

THAT ONE IS NOW THEY
JUST

AUTHORIZE THE ACTUAL WORK
TO
TAKE IT TO THE FINISH LINE.

MAYBE NOT DONE UNTIL AUGUST OF
NEXT CALENDAR YEAR.

CURRENTLY UNDER

EVALUATION IS IN
THE SONOMA VALLEY.

THE EAST COUNTY

PORTION,

POTENTIALLY INCLUDING

PORTIONS

OF THE CITY OF SONOMA AND

UNINCORPORATED PORTIONS
OF
SONOMA COUNTY IN DISTRICT 1
JUST
NORTH OF THE CITY OF SONOMA.

THAT ONE IS CURRENTLY IN THE

EVALUATION PHASE, INCLUDING

MEMBERS FROM BOTH CITY
AND
COUNTY WORKING TOGETHER.

AND THEN PROBABLY MOST

RECENTLY

ARE THE CITIES OF KATADI AND

ROHNERT PARK JUST NOW
AND I

DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT,

ON WHAT THE BOUNDARIES
MIGHT
LOOK LIKE.

IT'S LITERALLY JUST GETTING
OFF

THE GROUND IN KETATI AND ROHNERT
PARK.

WE'VE HEARD SUPERVISOR GORE,
THE

POTENTIAL OF LOOKING AT ONE
AT

CLOVERDALE AT SOME

POINT, BUT

THERE'S BEEN NO ACTION ON THAT
ONE YET.

THANK YOU.

OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO
TO
PUBLIC COMMENT?

SEEING NONE, MARY, PUBLIC
COMMENT?
THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE

EIFD, POTENTIAL RESOLUTION OF
INTENTION.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC
COMMENT, IT IS A TWOMINUTE
PUBLIC COMMENT.

I'LL GO TO CHAMBERS FIRST,
THEN
GO
OUT TO ZOOM.

KYLE?

OVER THE LAST NUMBER OF YEARS

I'VE WATCHED THE CITY AND

COUNCIL VERY HEAVILY

CRITICIZE

THE COUNTY AND ALSO JUST
REALLY

NOT HAVE A GOOD WORKING
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COUNTY.

AT LEAST PUBLICLY FACING.

SO CRITICISM ABOUT
THE
MANAGEMENT OF HOMELESS SERVICES.

CRITICISM ABOUT THE

SEBASTOPOL
HOTEL.

THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

IF YOU THOUGHT THAT OUR

WORKING

RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COUNTY
WAS

BAD NOW, WAIT UNTIL ALL
THESE
OTHER EIFDs AROUND THE
COUNTY

ARE GOBBLING UP PROPERTY
TAX

DOLLARS AND THE COUNTY IS

GOING

TO BE THEN LOOKING AT THE

REMAINING PROPERTY TAX
INCOME

THAT ISN'T ALLOCATED TO
EIFDs,

AS WE SAW TONIGHT, AND

THEN DO

YOU THINK SEBASTOPOL'S GOING TO

BE ABLE TO KIND OF GET SWAY IN

TERMS OF THE COUNTY

PROVIDING

SOME OF THOSE PROPERTY
TAX

DOLLARS TO

INFRASTRUCTURE
PROBLEMS IN SEBASTOPOL?
I DON'T THINK SO.

UNLESS THERE'S A RADICAL
CHANGE

IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
OUR

CITY AND THE COUNTY,

WHICH I

DON'T SEE HAPPENING ANY TIME
SOON.

THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY
TO

ESTABLISH A RELATIONSHIP THAT

GIVES US CHUNKS OF THAT PROPERTY

TAX DOLLARS THAT THE COUNTY
IS

COLLECTING AND PUTTING IT TO A

PROJECT THAT WE HAVE SWAY ON
ANDAND

DON'T TO GET THEIR

APPROVAL

IN THE SENSE THAT WE DON'T

HAVE

TO COME TO THEM AFTER THE
FACT

AND BE ASKING FOR THEM
TO
CONTRIBUTE TO SOMETHING.

AND THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE

BUILDING THIS THING UP AS A
LARGER-SCALE PROJECT.

DON'T MISS OUT ON OPPORTUNITY
TO

DO THIS JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE

CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT IT'S GOING

TO LOOK LIKE FIVE YEARS DOWN
THE
LINE.

I UNDERSTAND THE IDEA

THAT MAYBE
THIS IS A BURDEN ON STAFF.

BUT THAT IS A SELFFULFILLING

PROP PROPHECY IN THE

SENSE THAT

YOU HAVE RADICALLY REDUCED
THE

ABILITY FOR STAFF TO
BE

FUNCTIONAL IN THIS -- IN
OUR

CITY BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF

DEVELOPMENT OF EMPLOYEES, YOU
KNOW.

GROWTH OF EMPLOYEES.

AND SO THE IDEA THAT
YOU'RE

GOING TO MAKE A DECISION BASED

ON THAT OPINION I DON'T

THINK IS
A WORTHWHILE APPROACH TO TAKE.

YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY,
DON'T
MISS
IT.

THANK YOU, KYLE.

NEXT OUT TO ZOOM.

IF THERE'S ANYONE ON ZOOM.

ROBERT, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF,
PLEASE?

CAP YOU SEE
THE TIMER?
GO AHEAD, PLEASE.

I GO BACK AND FORTH ON THIS.

IN A SENSE, IT SEEMS

LIKE IT
WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO DO IT.

I THINK IF THE HOUSE WAS IN

ORDER, SO TO SPEAK,

THAT THERE

WAS STAFF THAT HAD CAPACITY
AND

KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITY TO WORK ON

IT AND DO THE THINGS THAT
NEED

TO BE DONE WITHOUT INTERFERING

WITH THE REST OF THE WORK OF
THE
CITY.

THE OTHER SIDE IS THE

FINANCES.

RIGHT NOW YOU'RE FEELING RICH

BECAUSE OF THE TAX INCREASE.

BUT IF YOU GO BACK,

WHEN THIS

FIRST STARTED WE WERE
IN
FINANCIAL CRISIS.

THAT FINANCIAL CRISIS
WAS

TRIGGERED BY THE FACT

THAT SALES
TAX REVENUES WERE DECLINING.

IT'S A LITTLE

HARD BECAUSE OF
THE NEW SALES TAX.

BUT LOOKING AT THE FINANCES
THAT

WERE RELEASED RECENTLY, IT
STILL

LOOKS LIKE THE SALES

TAXES PRIOR

TO -- PRIOR TO THE LAST INCREASE

ARE DECLINING OR MAYBE JUST

STARTING TO INCREASE BY A
TINY,
TINY FRACTION.

THAT MEANS THAT

THE REVENUE

GROWTH THAT YOU NEED

TO MEET

YOUR GROWING EXPENSES
HAS TO
COME FROM PROPERTY TAX GROWTH.

AND THAT HAS BEEN, ACCORDING TO

ANA, SHE'S PROBABLY RIGHT, ABOUT
2% A YEAR THAT WE SEE IN GROWTH

IN THAT.

THAT GROWTH IS WHAT'S

GOING TO

FUEL YOU FOR THE NEXT FEW
YEARS

UNTIL YOU FIND A WAY TO GROW THE

SALES TAX BASE AND START THAT
IN
A POSITIVE WAY.

GIVING AWAY PART OF THE

PROPERTY

TAX GROWTH MIGHT TURN OUT TO
BE
A FINANCIAL DISASTER.

AND YOU DON'T HAVE A LOT
OF

FLEXIBILITY TO FIX IT

BECAUSE

YOU CAN'T RAISE SALES TAXES
AGAIN.

SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF
THE QUESTIONS HERE.

I THINK IF I WAS GOING TO
DO

THIS, NUMBER ONE, I

PROBABLY

WOULDN'T DO IT RIGHT NOW
UNTIL
YOU GET STAFF.

NUMBER TWO, I WOULD ASK
FOR

SOMEBODY TO DO A REALLY

CAREFUL

ANALYSIS AND VETTED

FORECAST FOR

THE FUTURE ABOUT WHERE

EXPENSES

ARE LIKELY TO BE REALISTICALLY,

WHAT OUR REVENUE INCREASES ARE

LIKELY TO BE REALISTICALLY,
WHAT

IT LOOKS LIKE IN TEN
YEARS,
TAKING $10,000 OUT OF THE
BUDGET
THEN?

IS IT GOING TO BE
OKAY OR NOT?

I SUSPECT IT'S NOT GIVEN

CURRENT
CIRCUMSTANCES.

IF WE GET A HOTEL, ALL BETS ARE
OFF.

ROBERT, THAT'S TWO
MINUTES.

MAYBE THAT'S WHAT YOU WAIT
FOR,
THANKS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC

COMMENT.

NEXT, I WILL COME INTO CHAMBERS?
I'M THE OPPOSITE OF KYLE.

I TRUST THE GUARANTEES

ABOUT AS
FAR AS I CAN THROW A TRUNK.

HERE'S THE BASICS.
14% OF PROPERTY

TAX IF WE'RE
LUCKY.

SALES TAX.
7,500 PEOPLE, WHATEVER
IT IS
SQUARE MILES AWAY, TINY.

I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE
TIME

TO BLEED ANY MORE MONEY OUT ON

SOMETHING WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT
YIELD SOME MONEY IN THE FUTURE.

I JUST FEAR THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF

GRANTS AND SO ON IS VERY
QUESTIONABLE.

SO WHO KNOWS WHERE WE'LL BE IN

FIVE, SEVEN YEARS WHERE

THERE'S

A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY, SEE
IF WE

CAN START TO EXPLORE GRANTS

BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A COUPLE
OF

EXTRA STARS IN THE, YOU
KNOW,
GRANTS APPLICATION COLUMN.

SO I'M JUST NOT SEEING
WHERE
THIS MAKES ANY KIND OF SENSE.

THIS HUGE OVERHEAD, A LOT
OF

EXPENSE IN ACTUALLY DOING
THE

BUREAUCRACY TO GET INTO BED
WITH
A COUNTY AND WHOEVER ELSE.

I CAN'T SEE THE BENEFIT OF IT.

WHO KNOWS WHERE WE'LL BE IN

SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS'
TIME,

WHERE THE DOLLAR MAY HAVE BEEN
SEVERELY DEPRECIATED.

I'M NOT SEEING ANY KIND OF
CLEAR
PATH HERE.

ALMOST BE BETTER TO TAKE
THAT

MONEY AND INVESTMENT IT IN
AN

ACCOUNT SOMEWHERE AND GET
INTEREST.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON SAID IT.

I CAN'T GET MY HEAD AROUND IT.

LIKE ON A BUSINESS

PRESENTATION

AND YOU CAN'T GET THE
SLIDES.

NOTHING REALLY KIND OF
MAKES
SENSE HERE.

SOMEWHERE THERE MIGHT
BE

SOMETHING GOOD BUT YOU'RE NOT
SURE.

AND THERE'S OTHER
PEOPLE

PARTICIPATING IN THE DEAL
WHO

YOU DON'T TRUST BY EITHER
COUNTY.

THAT'S KIND OF HOW I FEEL ABOUT

IT.

I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A NO-GO
AND

WE SHOULDN'T WASTE ANY MORE TIME
ON IT.

THAT'S MY FEELING.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT.

NEXT, I WILL GO BACK OUT TO
ZOOM.

IF THERE'S ANYONE ON ZOOM
THAT

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A
PUBLIC

COMMENT ON THE DISCUSSION OF
THE

EIFD, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND
VIRTUALLY.

SEEING

NONE, I WILL COME BACK
INTO CHAMBERS.

MY THIRD COMMENT IN THREE
YEARS.

IS IT ON?
OKAY.

SO -- YOU KNOW, I DON'T
UNDERSTAND.

I MOVED HERE THREE YEARS AGO.

I LIVED HERE BACK IN THE '90s.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE

SIZE OF
THIS COMMUNITY.

I LOVE IT.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU --

MAYBE I DIDN'T SEE THE
FIRST

PART OF THIS -- ABOUT HOW

THIS IS

SUPPOSED TO

ENCOURAGE,

ESPECIALLY THE

SMALL CORRIDOR

THAT HE JUST DREW OUT --

I DON'T

UNDERSTAND HOW THAT'S

GOING TO
GET ALL THAT MONEY.

AND I'M NOT AN ECONOMIST OR
A
BANKER OR ANYTHING.

IT JUST SEEMS REALLY IRRATIONAL.

AND I'M COMING INTO THIS LATE.

THE OTHER THING THAT I
FIND

REALLY INTERESTING IS, I DIDN'T

HEAR WHETHER THAT COMMENT
ABOUT

THE COUNTY, WILL THEY BE THERE
FOR YOU LATER?

IS IT A COMMITMENT ON THEIR
PART
ETERNALLY FOR THE TIME FRAME?
I DON'T KNOW.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT.

NEXT BACK OUT TO ZOOM.

IF THERE'S ANYONE ON THE
ZOOM

THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A

COMMENT ON THE EIFD,
PLEASE
RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY.

STEVE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF
PLEASE?

YES, THANK
YOU.

CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
I CAN,
THANKS.

GO AHEAD, PLEASE.

WELL, I'M INTERESTED IN THE
EIFD.

I AM CONCERNED THAT IF WE
USE

MORE STANDARD DISCOUNT

RATES OF

THE HIGHER END, THE
MORE
CONSERVATIVE WOULD BE 5%.

INSTEAD OF THE 3%.

HOW DO THINGS LOOK THEN AT
THE

10 AND 50-YEAR LEVEL?

I THINK WE'D BE LOOKING AT THE

VALUE OF THAT DOLLAR

BEING QUITE
A BIT LESS.

AND WHEN YOU STACK IT UP --
I

JUST WONDER WITH THIS LONG
LIST

OF THINGS THAT WE'RE INTERESTED

IN, TEN YEARS DOWN THE

ROAD, HOW

MUCH MONEY ARE

WE REALLY TALKING
ABOUT HAVING AVAILABLE?
$2 MILLION DOESN'T TAKE YOU
VERY

FAR IN MODERN

CONSTRUCTION
COSTS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT.

NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO

CHAMBERS, ANYONE THAT WOULD
LIKE

TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE
EIFD?

SEEING NONE, I WILL GO BACK
OUT
TO ZOOM.

MARY, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF,
PLEASE?

YES.

CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
I
CAN.

GO AHEAD,
PLEASE.

I JUST WONDER WHAT HAPPENS
IF
THE PROPERTY TAXES DON'T GO UP.

BECAUSE THIS IS DEPEND ANTANT

PROPERTY TAXES.

THAT'S
MY UNDERSTANDING.

AND THEY DON'T ALWAYS GO UP.

LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED IN 2008,
2010.

I THINK

WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT
THAT ACTION TOO.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT.

NEXT BACK INTO CHAMBERS,
ANYONE

THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC
COMMENT?

SEEING NONE, I WILL GO BACK

OUT

TO ZOOM, IF THERE'S ANYONE ON

ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE
A

PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE RAISE
YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY.

SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT
IS

CLOSED ON THIS
ITEM.

THANK YOU, MARY.

BRINGING IT BACK UP TO THE
DAIS
FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR MOTION.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

YEAH, I WANT TO MAKE SOME
COMMENTS.

FIRST OF ALL, I'VE
BEEN

SUPPORTIVE OF THIS SINCE IT
WAS
INTRODUCED IN 2023.

WE MOVE FORWARD ANDAND

SUPERVISOR SUPPORTED US
BY

PAYING I BELIEVE ALL OUR
COSTS
TO DATE TO INVESTIGATE THIS.

WE HELD OFF THIS YEAR OR LAST

YEAR BECAUSE WE WERE WAITING
FOR
OUR TAX MEASURE.

WE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT MORE

DEMAND ON OUR GENERAL FUND
WHEN

WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WOULD
HAPPEN
WITH OUR TAXES PASSING.

SO WE'VE

BEEN KIND OF DRAGGING
THIS ALONG.

AND I JUST REALLY

DON'T SEE --

IF YOU DON'T ASK, YOU DON'T

GET -- WHY SHE'D NOT

CONSIDER
HELPING US FUND THE NEXT PHASE.

I'M SURE THE COUNTY IS

FUNDING

THE UNINCORPORATED PART OF
IT
AND WE'RE PART OF THE 5th
DISTRICT.

I ALSO AGREE WITH

THE MEMBER OF

THE PUBLIC THAT AS I ASK THE

QUESTION, BUT I ALREADY KNEW
THE

ANSWER, THERE ARE DISTRICTS

BEING FUNDED IN EVERY
SINGLE

SUPERVISOR DISTRICT EXCEPT
FOR
DISTRICT 4, AND THAT'S

BECAUSE

THERE'S GOING TO BE A RACE THERE

BECAUSE JAMES GORE IS NOT
GOING
TO RERUN.

EVERY OTHER FOUR OUT OF

FIVE

SUPERVISORS ARE TRYING TO
MOVE

FORWARD WITH THIS KIND
OF
FINANCING DISTRICT.

AND IT IS A MATCH.

SO SOMEBODY ASKED, ARE WE
IN

BUSINESS FOREVER WITH
THE
COUNTY?
YES.

THEY ARE GOING TO MATCH US
IF
THEY PASS THE RESOLUTION.

THEY'RE GOING TO DO DOLLAR FOR
DOLLAR.

SO THERE'S NO DIFFERENT THAN
THE
OPEN

SPACE MATCHING GRANT THAT
THE COUNTY DOES AS WELL.

SO I TELL MY

KIDS TO START THEIR
401(k) IN THEIR 20s.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
DOING.

WE'RE ESTABLISHING A

SAVINGS

PROGRAM THAT IS FOR A RAINY
DAY,

THAT WE COULD DISSOLVE IT AT
ANY
TIME IF WE GOT IN TROUBLE.

PAY THE COUNTY BACK THEIR
MONEY,

WE TAKE OUR

MONEY.

I'M IN FAVOR OF IT.

SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT,
AND

I'LL MOVE TO PASS THE

RESOLUTION

TONIGHT AND TRY TO MOVE

FORWARD
ON THIS.

OTHER DISCUSSION?
MOUNTAIN SILL MEMBER MAUER?

SO THERE'S A MOTION ON
THE

TABLE --

I WOULD HAVE TO SAY IT

OFFICIALLY, BUT
YEAH.

CAN I MAKE A COUNTER-MOTION?

YOU CAN ASK THE MOVER OF

THE -- WELL, THERE'S NO SECOND
YET ON THAT MOTION.

SO WE COULD SEE IF THERE'S A
SECOND.

IF NOT, YOU CAN MAKE ONE,
OR YOU

CAN ASK COUNCILMEMBER IF SHE'D

BE WILLING TO AMEND HER
MOTION.

SO MY AMENDMENT

REQUEST WOULD
BE

TO WAIT SIX MONTHS AND BRING
IT BACK.

AND THAT WAY, WE'D HAVE A
BETTER

IDEA WHAT WAS OUR BUDGET WAS

LOOKING

LIKE --

CAN WE TALK ABOUT
THIS
NEGOTIATION?

YEAH.

SO I LIKE TO MAKE
THE

RESOLUTION TONIGHT SO WE
COULD

GO TO OUR SUPERVISOR AND ASK IF
SHE'S WILLING TO FUND.

BUT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE SHORT ON
STAFF.

AND WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WAIT
SIX
MONTHS TO FINALIZE IT.

MOVING FORWARD ON THE

RESOLUTION

TONIGHT, I DON'T THINK,
HAS TO
BE ACTED UPON IMMEDIATELY.

FURTHER DISCUSSION?

NOW I KIND

OF DON'T

UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

SO IF WE GO FORWARD WITH
THIS

RESOLUTION TONIGHT, IT'S KIND OF

KICKING THE CAN, BUT IT'S
REALLY

ASKING IF THE COUNTY IS GOING TO
CONTRIBUTE.

BUT WILL WE IMMEDIATELY INCUR
$100,000 IN WORK?

NO, MY UNDERSTANDING
IS
OPTION "B" IS CITY

COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF

INTENTION TO

FORM A SEBASTOPOL
EIFD.

SO WE'RE JUST DOING A

RESOLUTION, AND THEN WE'RE

TRYING TO FIGURE IT
OUT.

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING
OF
OPTION "B" AS PRESENTED BY STAFF
IN THE AGENDA TONIGHT.

SO APPROVING THIS

TONIGHT

IMMEDIATELY INCURS NO FINANCIAL
BURDEN IMMEDIATELY?
OR LIKE INITIALLY?

AND IT WILL ONLY BECOME
IN

EFFECT AFTER WE EXPLORE
THIS

FURTHER AND BRING IT BACK UP AND
VOTE ON IT FORMALLY?
MARE YOU, CAN YOU EXPLAIN?

YES, THAT -- WERE YOU

JUMPING
IN?
SORRY.

THAT IS CORRECT.

THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION
JUST
GIVES THE COUNCIL THE INTENT.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO ACT ON IT.

THIS RESOLUTION CAN STAY IN
PLACE.

YOU CAN LOOK AT IT A FEW
MONTHS
DOWN THE ROAD.

YOU CAN TALK TO THE

SUPERVISOR

IF YOU WANTED TO SEE IF
THEY

WOULD BE WILLING TO HELP
FUND

THE NEXT STEPS, WHICH WOULD
BE
THE 55 TO $75,000.

BUT YES, IT DOES NOT HAVE
ANY

FINANCIAL IMPACT TONIGHT FOR

THIS RESOLUTION.

IT WOULD JUST BE THE

RESOLUTION

OF YOUR INTENTION, AND

THEN WE
COULD

REVISIT IT TWO MONTHS,

FOUR MONTHS,

SIX MONTHS, A YEAR
DOWN THE ROAD.

SEE, THIS IS MY MAJOR CONCERN
IS WE PAY $78,000 FOR THE
OPTION
OF BORROWING $2 MILLION.

WHICH DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A
GREAT
DEAL.

IF WE'RE -- THE WAY I SEE
THE

RESOLUTION, IF WE'RE

NOT WILLING

TO PASS A RESOLUTION TO
SAY

WE'RE STILL INTERESTED IN
MOVING

FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO LOSE

MOMENTUM, AND WE NEED TO GO SAY

WE STILL HAVE INTENT AND TALK
TO
OUR SUPERVISOR.

THAT'S THE WAY I SEE
THE

RESOLUTION WE'D BE PASSING
TONIGHT.

WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED IS

THAT
JOE, ARE YOU STILL ON THERE?

I'M ASSUMING YOU'VE BEEN
FOLLOWING THIS CONVERSATION?

SO WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY
ABOUT
IT?
THANK
YOU.

COMPLETELY SUBJECT TO YOUR
OWN
THOUGHTS AND STAFF THOUGHTS.

FROM THE IDEA IF

YOU'RE WILLING

TO DO THE RESOLUTION
OF

INTENTION AT ALL IS YOU CAN
DO

THE ACTION, NO CURRENT FISCAL

IMPACT, AND NOTHING HAPPENS

UNTIL AND UNLESS YOU DO A BUDGET
APPROPRIATION AT SOME POINT.

MAYBE THAT IS SIX MONTHS
DOWN
THE LINE OR SOMETIME SOONER.

PERHAPS WITH COUNCILMEMBER

HINTON'S SUGGESTION IN THAT SIX

MONTHS, YOU WOULD HAVE SOME
IDEA

OF WHETHER THE COUNTY'S IN OR
NOT.

IN SHARING THE COSTS.

YOU

WOULD AT LEAST KNOW WHAT
THAT BUDGET APPROPRIATION IS.

HALF OF 60 OR ALL
OF 50 AND IT

WOULD BE A DECISION PERHAPS
IN

YOUR BUDGET DISCUSSIONS TO

ACTUALLY FUND THAT NEXT PHASE OR

JUST STOP AT THAT POINT AS

ANOTHER OFF-RAMP IN YOUR
PROCESS.

THAT COULD BE A WAY TO SORT OF

ADVANCE THE BALL BUT NOT COMMIT

ANY MORE DOLLARS IF THERE'S AN

INTERIM BEING
SOUGHT.

SO IF WE DO WHAT'S BEING

DISCUSSED HERE, AGAIN,
YOU'RE

SAYING THAT IT WOULD INCUR
THE
CITY ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY?
IS THAT A YES?

CORRECT.

THAT IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING
TOO, MARY?

THAT IS CORRECT, THAT IS
MY

UNDERSTANDING AS WELL.

COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?
WHAT ABOUT STAFF TIME?

THE ONLY STAFF TIME WOULD
BE

TO EITHER HAVE A

COUNCILMEMBER

DISCUSS WITH THE SUPERVISOR OR

WHEN THIS -- WHEN IT GOES TO
BUDGET.

THAT'S WHEN WE'D BE

DISCUSSING

THE NEXT
OPTION.

SO MINIMAL?
EXACTLY.

I BELIEVE WE STILL HAVE

SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS
GOING

FORWARD IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE
TO MEET, CORRECT, STEVE?

I MEAN, I'M JUST ASSUMING,

THIS AD HOC THAT WE'VE
BEEN
SERVE ONNING, ALEX?
YES, IT CAN CONTINUE.

OKAY.

I'LL SECOND THE
MOTION.

OKAY.

AND
THERE WE GO.

SO ROLL CALL.

SO MOVED BY

COUNCILMEMBER

HINTON, SECONDED
BY

COUNCILMEMBER MAUER,

TO APPROVE

THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION
TO
FORM THE SEBASTOPOL EIFD.

CARTER?
YES.

HINTON.

AYE.

MAUER.

YES.

McLEWIS.

AYE.

ZOLLMAN.

YES.

MOTION PASSES
UNANIMOUSLY.

MOVING BACK ON TO AGENDA
ITEM
NUMBER 5 THAT WAS PULLED
EARLIER.

AND AGAIN, FOR THOSE FOLLOWING

ALONG AT HOME, THAT IS THE

APPROVAL OF GRANT OF

EASEMENT

DEED TO PG AND E AND

AUTHORIZING

THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE GRANT
DEED
ON BEHALF CITY COUNCIL.

COUNCILMEMBER MAWER?

I PULLED THIS ITEM

BECAUSE

PG&E IS PLANNING TO --
RIGHT

NOW, THAT VILLAGE PARK IS, THIS

IS A HIGH-DENSITY, LOW-INCOME,

HOUSING-INSECURE

RESIDENTIAL
AREA THAT THE CITY OWNS.

AND PG&E IS PLANNING TO --
IT

HAS ONE MASTER METER AT THIS

POINT, AND THE REST ARE
ALL

ANALOG SUBMETERS.

AND THEY'RE PLANNING TO GO
IN

THERE AND SWAP OUT ALL
THE
METERS FOR SMART METERS.

AND BACK IN 2019, THEY
WERE

DOING SOMETHING SIMILAR TO
FIR
CREST MOBILE HOME PARK.

AND FIR CREST MOBILE HOME
PARK

RESIDENTS ORGANIZED, AND THEY

STARTED A PETITION -- THEY
HAD

ADVANCE NOTICE OF THIS
HAPPENING.

THEN THEY BROUGHT THE PETITION
TO THE CITY.

THE CITY IN TURN, IN
2019,

SIGNED BY MAYOR HINTON AT THE

TIME, ASKED PG&E OR THE
PARK

OWNERS TO ALLOW THE TENANTS TO
MAINTAIN THEIR ANALOG METERS.

AND IN THIS SITUATION,
THESE

RESIDENTS HAVE NOT BEEN

NOTIFIED
OF THE CHANGEOUT.

AND MY CONCERN IS THE HEALTH
AND
SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS.

WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM ANY OF
THE

RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO,
THEY

HAVEN'T BEEN NOTIFIED, SO
THEY

WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW TO EXPRESS
CONCERNS.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE THIS

ISSUE SO THAT WE CAN --
I

BELIEVE THE CITY REALLY HAS A

RESPONSIBILITY, BECAUSE

THEY'RE

THE PARK OWNERS, TO ENSURE
THE

HEALTH AND SAFETY OF
THE
RESIDENTS IN THAT PARK.

AND THAT PG&E ALSO HAS THAT
RESPONSIBILITY.

BUT I -- MY EXPERIENCE
OVER

PROBABLY A DOZEN YEARS

WORKING

ON ISSUES OF SMART METERS, ET

CETERA, AND WORKING WITH
PG&E,

IS THEY'RE JUST GOING TO COME
IN

AND SLAM THOSE METERS ON

WITHOUT

NOTIFYING AND WITHOUT
GIVING

PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO OPT
OUT,
WHICH THEY DO HAVE.

SO MY OTHER CONCERN IS THAT THE

OPT-OUT DOESN'T -- IS NOT REALLY

PROTECTIVE OF COMMUNITIES
LIKE

TRAILER PARKS WHERE YOU
COULD
HAVE METERS IN CLOSE SUCCESSION.

BECAUSE LIKE ONE TRAILER
PARK,

ONE TRAILER SLOT COULD BE TEN
FEET
WIDE.

THEN YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER
METER,
ANOTHER METER.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SITUATION
IS THERE.

BUT I DO KNOW IT'S HIGH DENSITY.

AND THAT

MAKES IT POTENTIALLY
MORE PROBLEMATIC.

SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
IS

TO POSTPONE THIS TO BE SURE THATPG&E

NOTIFIES EVERYONE, AND
THAT

GIVES US SOME TIME TO

NEGOTIATE

WITH P G&E OR HEAR FROM
THE

RESIDENTS AND SEE WHETHER OR
NOT
THERE ARE CONCERNS.

BECAUSE IF THE OPT-OUT IS
NOT

REALLY PROTECTIVE IN THOSE

HIGH-DENSITY SITUATIONS,

BECAUSE

ONE PERSON CAN OPT OUT ON
THEIR

OWN BUT THEY COULD HAVE ANOTHER

NEIGHBOR'S METER AIMING RIGHT
AT
THEIR BEDROOM.

AND IT'S HARD TO KNOW, I

HAVEN'T

BEEN INTO THE PARK, BUT I
KNOW

THOSE WERE SOME OF THE

CONCERNS

OF THE FIR CREST PARK RESIDENTS
FROM 2019.

OTHER DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS?
IS THERE A MOTION?

I'M KIND OF WONDERING,
LIKE,

THESE -- WOULD DELAYING THIS

INCUR, LIKE, IMMEDIATE PG&E
RESPONSE?

SO, I HAVE NOT BEEN

INVOLVED

IN THIS, BUT I DO HAVE PG&E ON

THE LINE TO ADDRESS THESE
QUESTIONS.

THEY ARE ACTUALLY HERE ON
ZOOM.

PUBLIC WORKS HAS BEEN

GOING BACK

AND FORTH WITH THEM AS
TO

POTENTIAL ISSUES IF WE DODO

VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

THE CITY WOULD BE

RESPONSIBLE

FOR THE FINANCES OF WHAT THEY'VE

DONE TO DATE IS MY UNDERSTANDING
ON THIS.

SO I WOULD RECOMMEND -- ERIC,
IF

YOU HAVE ANY

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
ON THIS.

OTHERWISE, WE CAN ASK PG&E TO
PROVIDE COMMENTS AS WELL.

MARLENA'S ON THE LINE
TO
ANSWER QUESTIONS.

THEY HAVE STARTED THE

PROJECT,

SO THERE'S BEEN DESIGN
COSTS

INCURRED BY PG&E SO
FAR.

IF WE CHOOSE TO BACK OUT OF
THE

PROJECT, WE WILL BE ON THE
HOOK
TO PAY THOSE COSTS.

I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE BACK
OUT.

I'M JUST SUGGESTING WE
BRING

THIS ISSUE

BACK SO THAT WE CAN

HOLD PG&E ACCOUNTABLE

FOR

NOTIFYING THE NEIGHBORS
AND

GETTING MORE
INFORMATION.

RIGHT.

I DID REACH OUT TO
PARK
MANAGEMENT STAFF.

THE GUY I REACHED OUT TO

WAS OUT

OF THE OFFICE AND WON'T BE
BACK
TILL TOMORROW.

CURRENTLY IS RESIDENT MANAGER IS
IN A TRANSITION.

ONE'S LEAVING, ANOTHER ONE

HASN'T STARTED YET, SO

I HAVEN'T

HAD A CHANCE TO TALK WITH
THEM.

BUT PG&E WILL

NOTIFY BEFORE THE
PROJECT STARTS CONSTRUCTION.

AND MARLENA CAN SPEAK MORE TO
THAT.

BUT THERE IS AN OPT-OUT
FOR

RESIDENTS AS WELL THAT WILL
BE

GIVEN DURING THAT PUBLIC
NOTIFICATION.

GREAT.

OTHER QUESTIONS?

ERIC, DO YOU KNOW IF THERE'S

A DEADLINE FOR THIS WITH
PG&E?

IF WE DELAY IT, DOES THAT
HINDER
US?
I'M NOT SURE.

MARLENA WOULD BE MORE IN LINE
WITH
THAT.

VICE MAYOR, DO YOU HAVE A
QUESTION?

OR TALK TO THE REPRESENTATIVE ON
PG&E?
COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
THIS IS A RELATED QUESTION.

MARLENA, IF WE DELAY TO GIVE US

THE OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF

ADDRESS THIS AS COUNCIL

PEOPLE --

YEAH, I DON'T THINK THIS IS,

LIKE, A DROP-DEAD, HAS TO
BE
DECIDED TONIGHT.

BUT THIS HAS BEEN A PROJECT

ONGOING SINCE 2021.

IT'S BEEN A LONG PROCESS.

OKAY.

SO CAN WE HEAR FROM
MARLENE?
IS SHE STILL THERE?

YEAH.

SIMON HAS HIS HANDS UP.

HE'S FROM PG&E
AS WELL.

WHOEVER CAN ANSWER THE

QUESTION, WHAT ARE
THE
DETRIMENTS FOR DELAYING?

IN ORDER TO GIVE NOTICE TO
THETHE
LIVING THERE?
ANYONE?
THANK YOU, SIMON.

CAN YOU HEAR US OKAY?
YES, I CAN.

CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME?
WE CAN.

CAN YOU PLEASE ADDRESS COUNCIL'S

QUESTIONS REGARDING

THE TIMING

IF WE DELAY THIS FOR A
FEW
WEEKS?
SURE.

CURRENTLY, WE'RE WORKING ON
A

SCHEDULE THAT SHOWS GETTING

STARTED LATE DECEMBER

WITH SOME

OF THE PREDUCTION
ACTIVITIES.

SO THAT WOULDN'T BE ACTUAL
CONSTRUCTION.

PUT THAT WOULD BE STAGING FOR

CONSTRUCTION IN ADDITION TO
THE
ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATION.

WE TYPICALLY SCHEDULE
WHAT I

THINK WAS REFERENCED AS FAR AS

THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND OPEN

HOUSE MEETING THAT WOULD ALLOW
MORE INFORMATION TO RESIDENTS.

AND IT WOULD ALSO

INCLUDE I

GUESS WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED AS

KIND OF

THE OPT-OUT FOR THE
SMART METER.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE --
VICE MAYOR?

I HEARD THE MENTION

THAT THE

CITY WOULD BE ON THE HOOK FOR
COSTS.

IF WE DID THIS DELAY.

ARE THERE ANY COSTS THAT
WE
WOULD INCUR?

IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS HAS BEEN

ONGOING FOR SO
LONG.

SO YEAH, NO, THERE'S --
AT

THIS POINT, THERE WOULDN'T
BE
COSTS INCURRED FOR THE DELAY.

PER SE.

TYPICALLY THE COSTS INCURRED
ARE

FOR CANCELATION OF THE
MHP
AGREEMENT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE MAY HAVE BEEN

SIGNED BY A PREDECESSOR,
CITY

FOLKS THAT WERE INVOLVED
WITH

THIS WHEN IT FIRST STARTED
BACK
IN 2021.

SO WE'RE CURRENTLY THROUGH
DESIGN.

WE'VE EXECUTED A CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACT WITH OUR CONSTRUCTION
PC.

THAT'S BASICALLY WHERE
THINGS
ARE.

WE UNDERSTAND THE FACT THAT
IT

SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A

NEED TO
HAVE MORE INFORMATION PROVIDED.

AND I BELIEVE THERE WERE
A

NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THAT
WERE

SENT OVER IN REGARD TO THE

CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION

PORTION IN

ADDITION TO THE EASEMENT AND
THE
REMOVAL OF SOME VEGETATION.

SO WE WANTED TO DEFINITELY
BE

INVOLVED ON THIS CALL TO GET ANY

OF THOSE QUESTIONS

ANSWERED SO

THAT THE COUNCIL COULD VOTE ON

THE APPROVAL OR

DISAPPROVAL OF

THE EASEMENT, WHICH IS

REQUIRED

FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH
CONSTRUCTION.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?

HOW MANY UTILITY METERS
IN

THE PARK WILL YOU BE SWAPPING
OUT?
SO THIS IS A UNIQUE PROJECT.

TYPICALLY, THE MOBILE HOME
PARKS
ARE OWNED BY AN INDIVIDUAL.

THIS ONE IS OWNED BY THE CITY.

SO YOU GUYS HAVE PERMITTED
A
TOTAL OF 28 METERS TO BE
REPLACED, GAS AND ELECTRIC.

SO 28 GAS, THEN 28 ELECTRIC?
THAT'S CORRECT.

AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE A COUPLE

OF LOCATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY

BUNCHED TOGETHER THAT ARE --

WERE PREVIOUSLY BEING
SERVED
DIRECTLY BY PG&E.

SO THAT'S KIND OF THE

INTENT OF
THE PROGRAM.

IT'S FOR SAFETY.

AND THAT WOULD BE TO REPLACE
THE

INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE METER AND

THEN BEYOND THE METER, WHICH

WOULD INCLUDE A DIRECT PG&E

METER AT EACH OF
THOSE 28
SPACES.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

YES, SO IN THE STAFF

REPORT,

THERE'S A CONTRACT AMOUNT ON

VETERAN

PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION OF
$228," 248?
THAT IS WHAT THE CITY'S PAYING?

OR THAT'S WHAT PG&E IS

PAYING,

AND WE COULD BE ON THE

HOOK FOR

A PORTION OF
THAT.

THAT IS THE PORTION
THAT'S
BEING PAID FOR BY PG&E.

IN ESSENCE, IT'S RATE
PAYER

MONEY THAT'S

BEING REIMBURSED
FOR THIS SCOPE OF WORK.

EARLIER, OUR INTERIM CITY
MANAGER WAS GATHERING ANSWERS.

SHE SENT ME THAT PG&E HAS DONE
$100,000 OF PRELIMINARY
WORK,

AND THE CITY WOULD BE ON

THE
HOOK FOR THAT.

ABOUT A HALF-HOUR LATER,
THAT

COST WAS BUMPED UP TO
$330,000
OF PRELIMINARY WORK.

SO CAN YOU JUSTIFY WHAT
$330,000
WAS SPENT ON?

AND PLEASE EXPLAIN IF
THE

PROJECT IS ONLY GOING TO COST
$228,000, HOW IS IT THAT
WE

ARE -- YOU'VE ALREADY SPENT
$330,000?
THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.

CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT?

I'M THINKING THAT'S BASED
ON
THE

PROJECT COSTS, ENGINEERING
AND CONSTRUCTION.

SO WHY ISN'T THAT

INCLUDED IN
THE TOTAL COST?

I BELIEVE THAT IS THE TOTAL
COST.

BUT IN OUR STAFF REPORT, IT
SAYS THE TOTAL COST IS $228,000.

MARLENE, IS THERE
A

DISCREPANCY THERE FOR
THE

INFORMATION THAT WAS SENT OUT
YESTERDAY?

I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM,

BECAUSE

IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE MIGHT
HAVE
BEEN A DIFFERENCE.

SOUNDS LIKE THE TOTAL
COST

VERSUS WHAT WAS ISSUED AS FAR AS

THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO GET
TO THAT $330,000 NUMBER.

SO WHEN YOU PULLED
OUR
REPORTER FOR THE $330,000,
THAT

WOULD BE ALL THE COSTS FOR
THE

CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING
HOURS UP TO DATE.

SO THAT WAS FOR BOTH GAS
AND
ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

I'M NOT SURE THE
$200,000, WHERE
THAT'S COMING FROM.

THE INFORMATION THAT I

PROVIDED
TONY WAS $300,000.
$330,000, APPROXIMATELY, WHAT IS

I LET HER KNOW.

SO I'M

NOT SURE WHERE THE OTHER
VALUES ARE COMING FROM.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
SURE, GO AHEAD.

SORRY.

VICE MAYOR?
SORRY, I'VE JUST BEEN WAVING.

I WAS JUST WONDERING, I'M

LOOKING AT THIS, AND IT SAYS

VETERAN PIPELINE IS

TENTATIVELY

SCHEDULED TO START IN FEBRUARY
2026.

SO ANY KIND OF DELAY HERE,
WHAT

RIPPLE EFFECT DOES THAT
HAVE,
AND ARE THERE CONSEQUENCES?

WHERE WOULD THE CONSEQUENCES BE,

IF ANY, WITH THIS

PROJECT, WITH
THE RESIDENTS?

I JUST WANT TO BETTER

UNDERSTAND

THIS AS A PROJECT MANAGER
MYSELF.

SURE.

SO THE IMPACTS TO -- OBVIOUSLY

THERE'S A PRETTY TIGHT

SCHEDULE

THAT WE'RE TRYING TO

MAINTAIN

BASED ON FUNDING FOR THE

CURRENT
YEAR AND THEN INTO 2026.

ANY POTENTIAL HOLD OR DELAY
MAY

RISK US HAVING TO SHELF THE
PROJECT.

MEANING IT WOULD BE ON
HOLD

UNTIL WE COULD GET IT BACK IN
THE SCHEDULE FINANCIALLY.

SO THAT WOULD

BE THE OTHER
ALTERNATIVE.

AND THAT COULD BE THE

POTENTIAL
IMPACT OF A DELAYED DECISION.

BECAUSE WE NEED TO MAKE --

OBVIOUSLY MAKE BUDGET PLANS FOR
2026

IF THIS PROJECT ISN'T GOING
TO MOVE FORWARD.

FIND ANOTHER CANDIDATE
THAT

MEETS THAT BUDGETARY

FRAMEWORK

IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO

MAINTAIN
THAT FOR THIS UPCOMING YEAR.

SO THAT WOULD BE

THE POTENTIAL

OF A DELAYED

DECISION AT THIS
POINT.

OBVIOUSLY, TO THE

RESIDENTS,

THERE HAS BEEN
THAT

COMMUNICATION VIA
OUR

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR AND

PG&E, AS FAR AS THE

INFORMATION
GOING OUT.

WE'RE OBVIOUSLY TRYING TO GET A

MEETING SCHEDULED FOR

PRECONSTRUCTION TO KIND OF GET
A

LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT SO
THAT

THERE'S AWARENESS OF
WHAT'S

GOING TO HAPPEN OVER THE
NEXT

SEVERAL MONTHS IF

THE PROJECT
DOES
PROCEED.

SO THOSE ARE THE POTENTIAL
IMPACTS.

LIKE I SAY, IT

WOULDN'T

NECESSARILY BE

FINANCIAL AT THIS

POINT UNLESS THE CITY DECIDED
TO
OPT OUT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE IMPACT
TO

CONSTRUCTION AND POTENTIALLY NOT
MOVING
FORWARD IN 2026 ARE HIGH
AT THIS POINT.

SO WHAT IMPACT --
SO THE

QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHEN DO
YOU
DEFINE CANCEL?

IF IT'S BUMPED OUT OF THE
BUDGET, NOT BACK IN THE BUDGET?

I JUST WORRY ABOUT ANY, YOU

KNOW, RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CITY
WOULD HOLD AT ANY POINT.

SURE.

IT WOULD BE

CONSIDERED CANCELLED

IF THE CITY WERE EITHER
UNABLE

TO COME TO A DECISION

ON WHETHER

OR NOT TO PROCEED, AND YOU
KNOW,

OBVIOUSLY I THINK THERE
ARE

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT WERE
MENTIONED.

THE FIRST OF WHICH WAS THE
EASEMENT.

SO WE WOULD

DEFINITELY NEED TO

GET THAT EASEMENT

ESTABLISHED

AND UNDERSTOOD BEFORE WE
COULD
GET STARTED IN CONSTRUCTION.

BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF YOU GUYS

WERE TO DECIDE TO CANCEL AND

SAY, WE DON'T WANT TO MOVE

FORWARD, THIS IS THE BEST
FOR

THE COMMUNITY OR FOR THE

RESIDENTS, THEN THAT WOULD BE
WHEN COSTS WERE INCURRED.

SO IT WOULD REALLY NEED
TO BE

THE UNDERSTANDING FROM THE
CITY

ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU GUYS
ARE
ANTICIPATING PROCEEDING.

OR IF THERE'S JUST
MORE

CLARIFICATION THAT'S
NEEDED

BEFORE YOU'RE ABLE TO
PROCEED.

MARLENE, I SEE YOUR HAND UP.

DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING,
MARLENA?
YES, SORRY.

I WAS TRYING TO GET UNMUTED.

I HAD TO DO THE PERMISSION.

I WAS ABLE TO FIND

INFORMATION

FOR THE $228,000.

AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A
MISUNDERSTANDING.

TONI HAD ASKED TO GET A COPY OF
THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS SIGNED.

AND THAT DOLLAR VALUE IS FOR
THE
CONSTRUCTION PORTION OF IT.

SO WITHIN THAT AGREEMENT ON
PAGE
24, IT OUTLINES THE COST THAT
IS

GOING TO BE COVERED FOR THE NEW
ELECTRIC SYSTEM.

AND THE NEW GAS SYSTEM.

THE COST THAT I GAVE HER

YESTERDAY WAS FOR ALL THE

ENGINEERING SERVICES, DESIGN

WALKS, PG&E COSTS,

CONTRACTOR
COSTS UP UNTIL THAT POINT.

SO THE OVERALL TOTAL

PROJECT

WOULD BE GETTING OVER
$500,000

WHEN YOU COMBINE

CONSTRUCTION
AND DESIGN.

BUT I BELIEVE THAT'S WHERE THAT
$228,000 VALUE IS COMING FROM.

SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT

CAUSED A

LITTLE BIT OF THE CONFUSION.

THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU GUYS --

WHAT WE HAVE SPENT TO DATE.

THAT IS SPECIFICALLY

BREAKING

OUT WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST
TO

PUT THE NEW ELECTRIC SYSTEM
AND

THE NEW GAS SYSTEM, AND THEY'RE
BOTH BROKEN OUT ON PAGE 24 OF

THE CONTRACT THAT WAS

ALREADY

SIGNED BETWEEN THE CITY AND
PG&E.

GREAT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE
GO
TO PUBLIC COMMENT?
COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?

SO I WANT TO ASK ABOUT YOUR
REMOVING SOME TREES IN THE PARK.

CAN YOU PLEASE SAY HOW
MANY

TREES YOU'RE REMOVING AND
WHAT
TYPE OF TREES THEY ARE?

WE HAVE NOT IDENTIFIED
ANY

TREES TO BE REMOVED AT THIS
TIME.

I KNOW THIS WAS A QUESTION
THAT
TONI HAD SENT OVER.

SO I HAD REACHED OUT TO OUR

VEGETATION MANAGEMENT

DEPARTMENT

TO PROVIDE THE NOTIFICATION
PROCESS.

IF THERE WOULD BE A TREE
THAT
WOULD NEED TO BE REMOVED.

BUT AT THIS TIME, WITH
OUR

CURRENT DESIGN, THERE HAS
NOT

BEEN ANYTHING IDENTIFIED FOR A

TREE TO BE REMOVED THAT I'M
AWARE OF.

I LOOKED THROUGH ALL OF OUR

DOCUMENTS, BUT I

UNDERSTAND THAT

IS SOMETHING WITHIN
PG&E'S

EASEMENT THAT THEY DO STATE,
IF

IN FACT IT NEEDS TO BE

REMOVED,

TO WHERE THEY CAN MAINTAIN
AND
OPERATE THEIR SYSTEM.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?

SEEING NONE, MARY, PUBLIC
COMMENT?

THANK YOU,
MAYOR.

THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR
THE

PG&E EASEMENT DATE FOR THE
SMART
METERS AT VILLAGE PARK.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC
COMMENT, KYLE?

PY REALLY WANT TO THANK THE CITY

AND PG&E FOR THIS GREAT PIECE
OF
ENTERTAINMENT FOR TONIGHT.

FIRST OFF, THIS WAS
PLACED

DELIBERATELY ON THE

CONSENT

CALENDAR WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE

THAT, ONE, THERE
WASN'T

NOTIFICATION THAT

WAS HAPPENING

TO RESIDENTS OF CITY-OWNED

PROPERTY, THAT WE HAD FAULTY

INFORMATION COMING FROM A STAFF

REPORT, FROM A CONTRACTED

PLANNING DIRECTOR TO GROSS,
GROSS OVERESTIMATION OF COSTS.

LIKE THE IDEA THAT PRECOSTS ARE
$300,000, BRINGING A TOTAL
COST
TO $500,000?

WHAT THAT ACTUALLY

MEANS FOR THE

NUMBER OF RESIDENTS OF THE CITY

OF SEBASTOPOL, IF YOU LOOKED
AT

EACH HOME, WE'RE ALL PAYING
AN

EXTRA PG&E BILL JUST TO PAY FOR
THIS PROJECT.

BECAUSE AGAIN, THESE ARE RATE
PAYER-FUNDED PROJECTS HERE.

SO WE ARE PAYING FOR THIS,
EVEN

IF THE CITY IS NOT INCURRING THE
COST.

WE, THE CITY -- SORRY, NOT
THE

BUDGET GENERAL FUND --
ARE
PAYING THE COST.

SO I APPRECIATE

COUNCILMEMBERS

LOOKING AT THE CONSENT

CALENDAR

WITH GOOD EYES TO MAKE SURE
THAT

THEY ARE ACTIVELY PULLING THOSE
ITEMS.

BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF
ITEMS

THAT ARE BEING THROWN ON
CONSENT.

REGULARLY.

AND HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF
WHERE

WE HAVE AMAZING

ENTERTAINMENT

ABOUT THE PUBLIC IMAGE OF PG&E

ON DISPLAY AND THE WAY THAT THEY

ARE INTERACTING WITH THE
PUBLIC

AND THE WAY THAT THEY
ARE
ENGAGING WITH PUBLIC PROJECTS.

THANK YOU, KYLE, FOR
YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT.

OUT TO ZOOM.

MARGARET, CAN YOU UNMUTE
YOURSELF, PLEASE?
THANK YOU.

CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER STILL?
I
CAN.

GREAT, GO AHEAD,
PLEASE.

WHERE'S LINDA BERG WHEN
WE
NEED HER?
SHE'S DISAPPEARED.

ISN'T THERE AN ORDINANCE
IN

SEBASTOPOL THAT PROHIBITS SMART
METERS?
I'M NOT SURE WHEN IT WAS PASSED.

OR THAT IT HAD ANY REAL TEETH

TO
IT.

IN PRINCIPLE, I THINK

THE LAST

TIME THAT THE CITY -- A
CITY

COUNCIL GOT TOGETHER AND
TALKED

ABOUT THIS, THEY VOTED NOT TO
HAVE AS A MATTER OF FACT SMART METERS IN SEBASTOPOL.

SANDRA MAY KNOW THE ANSWER TO
THAT.

THE SECOND PART,

I HATE TO AGREE

WITH KYLE SOMETIMES, BUT I
WAS
WITH HIM THERE.
$300,000 FOR THE DESIGN WORK?

IF YOU TOTAL UP THE TOTAL
COST

OR VALUE OF ALL THE UNITS
IN

PARK VILLAGE, I DOUBT IF IT'S
$300,000.

NOW IT'S A $500,000 PROJECT.

ORIGINALLY, IT WAS JUST
TO PUT
IN SMART METERS.

THAT WAS THE EARLY DISCUSSION.

IT CAME WHEN -- I FORGOT HER

NAME, I THINK MARLENE CAME
ON,

SHE SAID THIS IS TO REPLACE
THE

GAS AND ELECTRIC SERVICE
INTO
THAT VILLAGE.

SO THAT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT
STORY.

IT MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY IT'S
COSTLY.

WHY ARE WE REPLACING THE GAS AND
ELECTRIC INTO THE VILLAGE?

IS IT IN POOR CONDITION AND THE

INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE
UPGRADED?
IS IT A SAFETY ISSUE?

IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE GOING
ON
THERE?

OR IS THIS A SMART METER
PROJECT?

IF IT'S A SMART METER

PROJECT,
DON'T
WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE?
THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT.

NEXT, ANYONE IN CHAMBERS THAT

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A
PUBLIC

COMMENT?
PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM.

SEEING NONE, BACK OUT TO ZOOM.

IF THERE'S ANYONE ON ZOOM
THAT

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC

COMMENT FOR THE SMART METERS
AT

VILLAGE PARK, PLEASE RAISE YOUR
HAND VIRTUALLY.

SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS
CLOSED.

THANK YOU.

BRINGING IT BACK UP TO THE
DAIS
FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR MOTION.

COUNCILMEMBER
MAUER.

THERE WAS A MAN HERE

EARLIER,
PAUL ANDRE.

HE DID HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

I'M NOT SURE WHERE HE WENT.

HE HAD WRITTEN TO ME ABOUT THIS
ISSUE.

SO I DID THE
MATH.

AND $500,000 DIVIDED BY 28 IS
$17,857.

IF I DID THAT MATH

CORRECT, I

DON'T KNOW THAT SOUNDS LIKE

INSANE FOR HOW MUCH THIS
IS

COSTING FOR THIS LITTLE
TINY
PARK VILLAGE RESIDENCE.

SO -- ANYWAY, MY REQUEST IS TO
POSTPONE THIS ISSUE.

THE PURPOSE BEING IS TO
ENSURE
THAT PG&E NOTIFIES THE PUBLIC.

AND I JUST THINK IT'S ONLY
FAIR

THAT THE CITY OVERSEE THIS
AND

DON'T JUST LET PG&E DO WHAT

THEYTHEY

BECAUSE I'VE SEEN
THEM

COMING IN, SLAMMING ON THE
METERS WITHOUT NOTIFICATION.

THIS IS HOW THEY BEHAVED BACK IN
2010, 2011, EARLY ON.

AND I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM

NOTIFYING THE RESIDENTS
THERE
AND INFORMING THEM OF AN OPTOUT

AND POSSIBLY HAVING THE CITY BE

PART OF THAT TO TRY TO
WALK

THROUGH HOW TO BE MORE

PROTECTIVE OF ANYONE WHO'S
IN

THAT PARK THAT MIGHT BE MORE

VULNERABLE.

BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
56 NEW WIRELESS TRANSMITTERS IN A
TINY AREA.

AND SOME OF THESE METERS
THAT

PG&E HAS, THE SMART

METERS,

ESPECIALLY THE ELECTRIC
ONES,

THEY CAN BE TRANSMITTING

CONSTANTLY THROUGHOUT THE
DAY,

DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY ARE
IN
THAT MESH NETWORK.

I WORK AT THE CPUC ON THIS
I

HELPED GET THE OPT-OUT FOR
ALL
CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS.

AND

I JUST CAN'T -- I JUST THINK

THE CITY HAS A RESPONSIBILITY
TO

BE RESPONSIBLE ON THIS

AND MAKE
SURE PG&E IS ACCOUNTABLE.

THAT'S MY REQUEST, TO

POSTPONE

IT TO ENSURE THAT -- THAT'S MY

MOTION, TO POSTPONE IT AND
HAVE

THE CITY BRING IT BACK TO TELL

PG&E TO MAKE SURE THEY DO
THAT

MEETING AND GIVE THE RESIDENTS
NOTICE.

VICE MAYOR?

I WONDERED IF OUR INTERIM

CITY MANAGER COULD HELP, OR OUR
ATTORNEY.

IT SEEMS TO ME

THERE'S SOME

CONFUSION ABOUT THE
ACTUAL
ORDINANCE WE HAVE.

JUST AS A COUNCILMEMBER, I
WOULD

LIKE TO HEAR FROM THEM

EXACTLY

WHAT THAT ORDINANCE IS AND JUST

FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND
WHAT THAT MEANS.

IT SEEMS AS THOUGH
THAT'S

IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF US TO
UNDERSTAND.

COUNCIL ADOPTED A

MORATORIUM,
I BELIEVE IN 2013.

BEFORE MY TIME HERE.

RELATED -- ENACTING A
MORATORIUM.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WAS

TIED TO THE COMPLETION OF
PHASE
TWO PROCEEDING AT THE CUPC.

AND EXPIRED WHEN THAT OCCURRED.

WE CAN CERTAINLY GET
THAT

INFORMATION, AND IF THE COUNCIL

DECIDES TO POSTPONE

THIS, COME

BACK WITH A MORE COMPLETE ANSWER
TO THAT QUESTION.

FURTHER DISCUSSION AND/OR
MOTION?

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON, I SAW YOU
FIRST.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I
AM

BUILDING AN ADU, AND I JUST
HAVE

DEALT WITH PG&E A LOT ABOUT
UPGRADED METERS.

TO PULL UPGRADED METERS JUST FOR

MY STREET, TO MY LITTLE
HOUSE,
IS 20 TO $25,000.

IF YOU WANT TO FULLY UPGRADE.

AND I KNOW ABOUT
THEIR

ENGINEERING COSTS AND ALL THESE
EXPENSES.

SO $17,000 DOESN'T

SOUND, BASED

ON THIS CONTRACT, THAT
OUTRAGEOUS.

BASED ON MY RECENT
EXPERIENCE.

JUST WANTED TO CONTRIBUTE THAT.

COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?

I'M SORRY YOU HAD TO PAYPAY
THAT.

AND I'M SORRY PG&E FEELS
LIKE
THEY HAVE TO PAY THAT.

I'M KIND OF CONCERNED ABOUT

PG&EPG&E

GENERAL PASSING ALONG
THESE

COSTS AND JUST DOING WORK TO DO
WORK.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I
DON'T

REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM

POSTPONING
IT OR PASSING IT.

BUT I DEFINITELY WANT TO

ENFORCE

THE -- PG&E'S OPEN HOUSE AND

BEING ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, JUST
BE

FAIR AND FULL AND GIVE THEM THE
OPPORTUNITY TO OPT OUT.

THE PG&E REPRESENTATIVE
HAS

HER HAND
UP.

OKAY, MARLENA?

YES, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE
A

LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY

TO SOME OF

THE COMMENTS THAT WERE BEING
MADE.

JUST TO LET YOU GUYS KNOW.

YOU CAN TOTALLY OPT OUT, THE
RESIDENTS.

I HAD ALREADY CONFIRMED THAT
FOR
TONI, GAVE HER THAT INFORMATION.

THERE IS AN OPTION FOR
ANALOG

METERS THAT THEY CAN OPT OUT FOR
THAT.

THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.

I EVEN PROVIDED ALL
THE
INFORMATION REGARDING THE EMF.

SO THAT CAN BE PROVIDED.

THE OPEN HOUSE.

WE'RE VERY, VERY CLEAR
ABOUT

THAT IN LETTING OUR

RESIDENTS
KNOW THAT THAT IS AN OPTION.

WE'RE NOT FORCING THEM TO HAVE A
SMART METER.

IN ADDITION, I WANTED TO
POINT

OUT THAT THIS PROGRAM WAS NOT A

REQUIREMENT OF PG&E, THIS
IS
ACTUALLY A CPUC PROGRAM.

AND IT WAS VOLUNTARY THAT THE

CITY OF SEBASTOPOL HAD

REQUESTED

TO BE A PART OF THAT
DURING

THEIR APPLICATION PROCESS
WITH
THE CPUC.

I HAD ALREADY PROVIDED
THAT
INFORMATION TO TONI AS WELL.

SO IF SHE CAN GIVE YOU GUYS A

COPY OF THE APPLICATION THAT
WAS

SUBMITTED BY THE CITY TO THE

CPUC TO BE A PART OF
THE

VOLUNTARY
PROGRAM.

AND THAT IS WHY YOU GUYS WERE
SELECTED.

IT WASN'T THAT PG&E HAS SELECTED
YOU GUYS.

AND YES, THIS WAS BOTH A GAS
AND
ELECTRIC UPGRADE.

BECAUSE THIS PARK IS

CURRENTLY

SERVED BY BOTH GAS AND ELECTRIC
INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO THAT'S WHY IT QUALIFIES TO
BE

ALLOWED TO HAVE BOTH

UPGRADES,

NOT JUST CHANGING OUT APRIL

ANALOG CENTIMETER TO SMART
METER.

THAT IS CURRENTLY METERED BY
A
SMART METER.

I PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION
TO

TONI AS
WELL.

OKAY, GREAT.

SIMON, I SEE YOUR HAND
UP.

KIND OF JUST TO DOVETAIL
OFF

WHAT MARLENA IS SAYING, THIS
PROGRAM'S COMPLETELY OPTIONAL.

NO ONE'S FORCING THE CITY
TO
MOVE FORWARD.

THE CITY DID APPLY TO BE PART
OF
THIS PROGRAM.

ADDITIONALLY, I KNOW THERE
WAS

SOMEONE THAT STATED KIND OF THE

COST.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS

SOMETHING

THAT THERE'S FULL TRANSPARENCY
ON.

THE INFORMATION IS INCLUDED IN

THE HP AGREEMENT AS FAR AS WHAT
WE SPENT.

WE CAN BREAK OUT THAT

CONTRACT

COST SO THERE'S MORE

VISIBILITY

AS FAR AS THE

ENGINEERING AND

THE INTERNAL RESOURCES FOR
PG&E

TO GET TO THIS POINT OVER THE
LAST FOUR YEARS.

AND THEN ALSO, TOO, JUST SO
THAT

THERE'S NO

MISUNDERSTANDING,

THIS ISN'T A PROGRAM TO

SWAP OUT
THE METERS.

THIS IS A PROGRAM TO PUT

NEW GAS
AND ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE IN.

AND IT'S PREDICATED ON SAFETY,
RIGHT?

SO PG&E'S GOAL OBVIOUSLY

THROUGH

LESSONS LEARNED IN WHAT WE

EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST IS THAT,

YOU KNOW, THIS PROGRAM IS
GOING

TO BRING A LEVEL OF SAFETY
AND

RELIABILITY TO RESIDENTS
IN

COMMUNITIES THAT ARE TYPICALLY,

YOU KNOW, OVERLOOKED AND
UNDERSERVED.

SO THOSE ARE THINGS TO KEEP IN
MIND.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S ALSO
THE

NOTIFICATION PORTION THAT'S
BEEN
CONSTANTLY BROUGHT UP AGAIN.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
THE

PROGRAM HAS OUTLINED AND
WE'RE
HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

BOTH NOW AND THEN AFTER THE FACT

AS FAR AS WHAT MOTIVATION
IS
GOING OUT TO RESIDENTS.

BECAUSE THE

RESIDENTS AT THIS

POINT ARE NOT PG&E CUSTOMERS,
WE
CAN'T INFORM THEM.

HOWEVER, THE CITY AS THE OWNER

OF THE PARK AND AS OUTLINED
IN

THE MHP

AGREEMENT IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR THAT LEVEL OF NOTIFICATION.

SO THAT CAN HAPPEN IN
THE

BACKGROUND WHILE WE'RE STILL

WORKING THROUGH THE

EASEMENT
PORTION.

SO JUST AN ENCOURAGEMENT TO
NOT

LET THAT PARTICULAR POINT HINDER
YOUR GUYS' DECISION.

WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE

THERE'S THAT LEVEL OF

TRANSPARENCY BOTH WITH THE
CITY

AND THEN ALSO THE

UNDERSTANDING

THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN
WITH

THE RESIDENTS AS
WELL.

THANK YOU.

COUNCILMEMBER MAWER?

YOU SAID THAT THIS IS

OPTIONAL, BUT PG&E TODAY

TOLDTOLD

CITY THAT

THEY'VE ALREADY
INVESTED $330,000.

SO THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A
REAL

OPTIONAL OPTION HERE, I DON'T
THINK.

AND THE OTHER THING

IS,

SOMETHING YOU SAID, I'M JUST
CURIOUS.

I WANT TO DOUBLE-CHECK.

ARE YOU WILLING TO LEAVE
THE

ANALOG METERS IN PLACE AS THEY

ARE, RATHER THAN SWAP

SWAPPING
THEM OUT FOR SMART METERS?

TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST

QUESTION, THE CITY, MAYBE
NOT

WITH THE FOLKS INVOLVED ON THIS

CALL, BUT THE CITY CAME INTO

AGREEMENT WITH PG&E ON

KIND OF

THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE

PROGRAM
AND
THE COSTS INCURRED.

IT WAS IN THE

APPLICATION

PORTION, YOU KNOW, OF
THIS

ENDEAVOR IDENTIFIED THAT, YOU

KNOW, AN OPT-OUT
COULD

POTENTIALLY INCUR THE COSTS
TO
DATE.

AND AGAIN, PG&E WOULD HAVE
TO
SHOW FULL TRANSPARENCY.

I CAN SAY FROM PREVIOUS

EXPERIENCE IN ALL THE PARKS
THAT

I'VE CHANGED OVER THE LAST TEN

YEARS, WE'VE NEVER ACTUALLY

GONEGONE

ANY PERSON THAT HAS CHOSEN
TO OPT OUT.

I WOULD SAY EVEN THIS LATE
IN
THE PROCESS.

SO I DON'T THINK
THAT'S

SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE A HUGE
CONCERN.

I THINK, AGAIN, WITH
THE

UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS
A

PROGRAM THAT'S RELATED TO

SAFETY, AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO

WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF
THE CUSTOMER.

I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING
MOVING FORWARD.

AND YOUR SECOND QUESTION?

ARE YOU WILLING TO LEAVE
THE

ANALOG METERS IN PLACE AND
NOT
SWAP THEM OUT FOR SMART METERS?

SO THE ANALOG METERS THAT
ARE

THERE ARE CURRENTLY OWNED BY
THE
CITY OF SEBASTOPOL.

WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SWAP OUT
THE

METERS, BUT THEY WOULDN'T
BE
OWNED BY CITY OF SEBASTOPOL.

IF THE RESIDENT, YOU
KNOW,

DECIDED THAT THAT THEY DID NOT

WANT A SMART METER, THEY
HAVE

THE ABILITY TO GET A METER
THAT'S NOT A SMART METER.

BUT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO

LEAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE
THAT'S
IN
PLACE.

I'M GOING TO GO TO THE VICE
MAYOR.

MAYOR.

I OF ALL PEOPLEPEOPLE

SKEPTICAL
OF PG&E BECAUSE OF HISTORY.

AT THE SAME TIME, LISTENING
TO

ALL OF THIS BACK AND FORTH, I

JUST DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH

MORE WE

CAN DO TO VERIFY THAT

THEY'RE

GOING TO DO WHAT THEY'RE
GOING

TO DO.

THE CITY'S ALREADY PAID FOR
IT.

I MEAN, COMMITTED TO
IT.

WE'VE SIGNED IT.

WE'RE ON THE HOOK FOR THE
COSTS
IF WE DON'T DO THIS.

SO I PERSONALLY AM OKAY WITH

MOVING THIS FORWARD SIMPLY

BECAUSE, I MEAN -- HOW

MUCH MORE

CAN WE GET INTO THE WEEDS WITH
THIS?

WHEN WE'VE ALREADY AS A
CITY

APPLIED FOR THIS AND SIGNED
AND
COMMITTED TO IT ALREADY?
I KNOW THAT WE DID NOT DO IT.

IT MAY NOT ALIGN

WITH SOME OF

THE VALUES THAT WE HAVE
CURRENTLY.

I JUST DON'T KNOW AT THIS
POINT,

FOR ME PERSONALLY -- I'M
OKAY

WITH MOVING IT FORWARD BASED
ON

ALL THE INFORMATION WE'VE HEARD
HERE
TODAY.

AND AGAIN, I'M ALWAYS

SKEPTICAL

OF PG&E.

BUT AT THIS POINT, AS FAR
AS

BEING A STEWARD OF

THE CITY AND
NOT GETTING THESE COSTS.

AND ALSO, WE'RE

CONSTANTLY

TALKING ABOUT STAFF TIME AND IF

WE'RE TRYING TO GET INTO
THE

WEEDS MORE AND PUT MORE STAFF

TIME INTO THIS, WHAT ARE WE

PULLING AWAY FROM ON THE THER

PROJECTS

OF TRYING TO MANAGE MG AND
E
EVEN MORE?

I'M OKAY WITH
MOVING FORWARD.

COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?
YEAH, IN 2019, THE

RESIDENTS

OF FIR CREST MOBILE HOME PARK

HAD REQUESTED TO KEEP
THEIR

ANALOG METERS AND PG&E DID
GRANT
THEM THE ANALOG METERS.

SO I KNOW THAT YOU CAN DO
IT IF
YOU WANTED TO DO IT.

SO THAT'S JUST ALL I HAVE TO
SAY, THANK YOU.

SO THERE'S A MOTION.

I SAW HANDS, BUT

WE'RE GOING TO

GET BACK TO THE PROCEDURAL PART
OF ALL THIS.

OF THIS PROCESS TONIGHT.

THERE'S A MOTION ON THE
TABLE
FROM COUNCILMEMBER MAUER.

IS THERE A SECOND?
SEEING NONE, THEN WHERE ARE WE?
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

I THOUGHT

COUNCILMEMBER
McLEWIS MADE ANOTHER
MOTION?

YES, YOU'RE
RIGHT.

I WAS JUST STATING MY
POSITION.

I DON'T KNOW.

I MEAN, WE CAN MAKE A MOTION IF
YOU WANT.

BUT I THOUGHT WE HAD TO
DEAL

WITH THE FIRST MOTION
FIRST.

YES, SO BASICALLY, IT

DOESN'T

SEEM LIKE THERE WAS A SECOND ON

COUNCILMEMBER
MAUER'S.

VICE MAYOR, ARE YOU MAKING
A
MOTION?

YEAH, I JUST DON'T HAVE IT IN
FRONT OF ME.

JUST TO

APPROVE MOVING ON WITH
THIS PROJECT.

I'M SORRY.

IT WOULD BE THE APPROVAL OF

THE GRANTING OF THE EASEMENT
TO

PG&E FOR THE VILLAGE
PARK

CONVERSION PROGRAM
AND

AUTHORIZING THE CURRENT DEED
ON

BEHALF OF THE
CITY.

OKAY, YES.

THAT.

COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?

I'M WILLING TO SECOND
THAT.

MARY, ROLL CALL?

MOVED BY VICE MAYOR
McLEWIS,

SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER

HINTON, TO APPROVE A GRANTING
TO

PG&E AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR
TO SIGN THE GRANT DEED.

COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
YES.

HINTON?
AYE.

MAUER?
NO.

McLEWIS?

AYE.

ZOLLMAN?

YES.

MOTION PASSES 4-1 WITH
.

ON THE AGENCY, I DON'T SEE

THE SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD.

I THINK THAT DEFINITELY
DOES
NEED TO HAPPEN, RIGHT?

YES, THANK YOU,
MAYOR.

IF WE CAN MOVE TO THAT.

THIS IS SECOND PUBLIC

COMMENT

PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA.

MARY?
THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SO THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY
FOR

THE SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD

FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON
THE
AGENDA.

AGAIN, A TWO-MINUTE TIME LIMIT.

I WILL GO TO CHAMBERS
FIRST,
THEN GO TO ZOOM.

KYLE?

I'M GOING TO TRY TO
FIGURE

OUT HOW TO MAKE THIS BE NOT AN
ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA.

WE'RE ABOUT TO MOVE INTO A
NEW
TRANSITION OF POWER.

WE'RE ABOUT TO RECEIVE
NEW
LEADERSHIP IN YOU'RE CITY.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING
THE
DIRECTION THAT THINGS GO.

WHAT I'M REALLY HOPING FOR IS
CONSISTENCY.

JUST WITHIN THE LAST MONTH,

WE'VE HAD COUNCILMEMBERS THAT

DELAYED PROCESS IN ORDER TO

INFORM LARGE-SCALE

PROPERTY

OWNERS OF MULTI UNITS SO
THAT

THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION
AND

ARE INFORMED AND HAVE
THE
ABILITY TO PROCEED.

BUT YET TONIGHT, THAT SAME

ACCOMMODATION, THAT SAME

REQUESTREQUEST

INFORMING STAKEHOLDERS WAS
IGNORED AND DENIED.

SO WHAT I'M REALLY HOPING FOR IS

THAT WE CAN HOLD OUR

LEADERS

ACCOUNTABLE TO BEING

CONSISTENT

IN THEIR ACTIONS, ESPECIALLY
IN

PROTECTING THOSE THAT ARE
THE

MOST VULNERABLE AND NOT

THOSE
THAT ARE THE MOST WELL TO DO.

THANKS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENT.

NEXT OUT TO ZOOM.

IF THERE'S ANYONE ON ZOOM
THAT

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A
PUBLIC

COMMENT DURING THE

SECOND PUBLIC

COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT
ON
THE AGENDA?
SEEING

NONE, I'LL COME BACK INTO
CHAMBERS.

SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS
CLOSED.

MOVING ON TO THE PORTION OF

COUNCILMEMBER REQUESTS
FOR

FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEMS.

LOOKING TO MY LEFT TO SEE
IF
THERE'S ANY REQUESTS?
LOOKING TO MY RIGHT?

SEEING NONE, VICE MAYOR,
ANY

REQUESTS FOR FUTURE

AGENDA
ITEMS?

SEEING NONE, WE ARE MOVING ON TO

CITY COUNCIL/CITY STAFF
REPORTS.

MAYOR?

I JUST WANT TO

LET YOU KNOW

THAT I'M LOGGING OFF HERE, AND
I

WILL MAKE MY WAY TO THE
ANNEX.

TO
THE ANNEX, OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

TURNING TO OUR WONDERFUL INTERIM
CITY MANAGER FOR STAFF UPDATES?
THANK YOU, MAYOR.

JUST TO GIVE -- SO IN

GENERAL,

COMMITTEE MEETING TOMORROW,
THE

CHRISTMAS TREE LIGHTING AS
THE
CHAMBER KNOWS ON THURSDAY.

WE HAVE DONE RECRUITMENT FOR THE

PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR POSITION,

WHICH WILL BE CLOSE TO
AN

ANNOUNCEMENT ON THAT NEXT

WEEK.

WE WILL BE INTERVIEWING

PLANNING
DIRECTORS IN TWO WEEKS.

SO WE'LL HAVE MORE AFTER THOSE.

WE DO HAVE TWO
NEW

ADMINISTRATIVE

TECHNICIANS THAT
ARE COMING ON BOARD.

ONE'S COMING ON DECEMBER 15th.

ONE SHOULD BE ON THE END OF
DECEMBER.

ONE WILL BE DOWN IN THE
PUBLIC
WORKS DEPARTMENT.

ONE WILL BE IN THE BUILDING
AND
PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
HAS

DONE A CONDITIONAL OFFER FOR
AN
OFFICER AS WELL AS A DISPATCHER.

WE ARE STARTING TO COME TO
STAFF
STRENGTH.

THAT'S ALL I
HAVE.

GREAT.

AND SO MY COLLEAGUES WHO WOULD

LIKE TO REPORT ON ANYTHING?
LOOKING TO MY LEFT?

COUNCILMEMBER MAUER?
I HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT.

OKAY.

WELL, THERE WE GO.

LOOKING TO MY RIGHT?
NOTHING TO REPORT.

BUT I DO HAVE NEXT MONDAY A
VERY

LONG SCPCA MEETING THAT
STARTS

AT NOON AND WILL RUN ALL
AFTERNOON.

COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?

JUST A HEADS-UP THAT AS YOU
KNOW, I'M A SOCCER PLAYER.

AND AS SONOMA COUNTY ZERO WASTE

IS WEIGHING THE OPTION
OF

PUTTING A MORE -- OF BUILDING
A
MORATORIUM ON ARTIFICIAL TURF.

SO THAT'S JUST BEING STUDIED.

AND MY NORMAL

MEETINGS,

ACCELERATED BY THE ISSUANCE OF
A

NEW NOFA FROM

OUR FEDERAL

ADMINISTRATION IS CAUSING
THE

COALITION BOARD TO HAVE

EMERGENCY MEETINGS BECAUSE

THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TIME TO HAVE

STAFF WADE THROUGH ALL
THOSE

APPLYING FOR

PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.

US SUPPORT MEMBERS

ARE WEIGHING
IN FROM GROUND ZERO.

THAT'S ON -- NOT CHRISTMAS
EVE,
THE DAY BEFORE CHRISTMAS EVE.
23rd.

SO THERE YOU HAVE IT.

THERE'S A LITTLE SNAPSHOT INTO
THAT.

AND SEBASTOPOL COMMONS

MEETINGS
ARE GOING STRONG.

THE

SUBCOMMITTEES ARE MEETING ON
THE REGULAR.

SO PLEASE DIAL IN IF YOU'RE
INTERESTED.

ON THAT.

AND THEN ALSO PLEASE

COME TO THE
TREE LIGHTING.

IT'S
FABULOUS.

SEND ALL THE LITTLE
CHILDREN.

IT'S GOING TO BE AMAZING.

SO THAT'S ALL I SEE.

OH, ADDITIONAL STAFF
REPORTS?
MARY, I'M GETTING A MOTION.

DID YOU NEED TO SAY

ANYTHING
MORE, WANT TO SAY ANYTHING MORE?
NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

JUST A REMINDER, I DID RECALL

SOMETHING THAT, WE DO HAVE

CLOSED SESSION ON CITY COUNCIL

CLOSED SESSION MONDAY
NIGHT,
STARTS AT 5:30.

SO THAT IS
IT.

GREAT.

SO THEN WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO

THE LAST PORTION OF THIS,
WHICH

IS THE CITY COUNCIL

REORGANIZATION/ELECTION

OF MAYOR

AND VICE MAYOR, AND I'M TURNING

THIS OVER
TO MARY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SO THIS IS THE TIME THAT WE
GET

TO RECOGNIZE OUR OUTGOING MAYOR

FOR ALL THE SERVICE
AND

DEDICATION THAT HE HAS DONE
FOR
THIS COMMUNITY IN THE LAST YEAR.

AND WE WILL BE DOING THE --
I'LL

HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY WHEN
WE

GET TO THAT IDENTIFY THE

PROCESS

FOR THE NEW MAYOR AND VICE
MAYOR.

SO I AM GOING TO PROVIDE
A

PLAQUE TO OUR OUTGOING
MAYOR,

AND I'M GOING TO READ IT REALLY
QUICK.

SO IT IS OUR OUTGOING

MAYORAL

PLAQUE WHERE IT SAYS,

PRESENTED
TO STEVEN ZOLLMAN ON THE 2nd DAY
OF DECEMBER, 2025 IN

GRATEFUL

APPRECIATION AND RECOGNITION
OF

YOUR LEADERSHIP AND DEDICATED

SERVICE TO THE CITY OF
SEBASTOPOL.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICES,

MAYOR, THE CITY

OF SEBASTOPOL
FROM DECEMBER 3rd, 2024
TO
DECEMBER 2nd, 2025.

I WANT TO SAY PERSONALLY,
I

HAVE -- WORKING WITH YOU
THE

LAST YEAR, IT HAS BEEN TRULY AN

HONOR, IT'S BEEN AN

INSPIRATION,

AND THE AMOUNT OF WORK YOU'VE
PUT IN IS TRULY ADMIRABLE.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU,
OUR

COMMUNITY THANKS YOU, OW
STAFF
THANKS YOU.

THIS IS FOR YOU.

OH.

GETTING ALL CHOKED UP.

GOODNESS.

SO NOW IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY
TO

PROVIDE COMMENTS AS THE

OUTGOING
MAYOR.

WELL, THANK YOU.

JUST VERY BRIEFLY, I WANT TO
SAY

THANK YOU SO MUCH,

FIRST AND
FOREMOST FOR THE TEAMWORK.

IT TAKE TEAMWORK AND I
AM

GRATEFUL FOR EACH

AND EVERY ONE

OF YOU, AND I AM

GRATEFUL FOR

OUR ONGOING COLLECTIVE
WORK
TOWARDS OUR SIX COUNCIL GOALS.

AND IN FURTHERANCE OF THE
THREE

SONOMA COUNTY MAYORS AND

COUNCILMEMBERS ASSOCIATION
GOALS.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, THOUGH, I
AM

ETERNALLY GRATEFUL FOR ALL THE

MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO

EVEN VOTED FOR ME, MUCH

LESS HAD

ANY FAITH THAT I COULD DO
ANYTHING.

AND IT DOES MEAN A LOT BECAUSE
I

TYPED THIS HERE, I
SAID I

WOULDN'T GET EMOTIONAL, BUT
FOR

A SMALL GAY BOY WHO GREW UP
IN

AN ISOLATED RURAL AREA,
WHO

NEVER IN HIS WILDEST
DREAMS

THOUGHT ANY OF THIS WOULD EVER
HAPPEN.

IT'S VERY IMPACTFUL TO

THINK
THAT I WILL REMEMBER FOREVER.

MOVING FORWARD TO, I HAD

MENTIONED BEFORE, AND

THIS MAY

BE THE CHANGE OF VONE
SEASON
WHEN WE ALL GET SENTIMENTAL.

MARGARET MEAD'S QUOTE, NEVER

DOUBT A SMALL GROUP OF

THOUGHTFUL, COMMITTED

CITIZENS
CAN CHANGE THE WORLD.

IN FACT, THAT'S THE ONLY
THING

THAT EVER
HAS.

THAT I DO FEEL ABOUT OUR

COMMUNITY IN LIGHT OF

EVERYTHING
THAT'S GOING ON IN THE WORLD.

AND I'LL JUST SAY
IT.

I KIND OF REFER TO WHAT'S GOING

ON, ON A FEDERAL

LEVEL, IT'S
JUST -- IT'S A -- IT'S A LOT.

SO WE CAN CREATE OUR OWN WORLD
HERE.

AND TO THAT END, WHAT

GIVES ME

CONSISTENT HOPE IS THE FACT THAT

WE ALWAYS UNITE AROUND OUR YOUTH
IN PARTICULAR.

I AM EXTREMELY PROUD,

THE FACT

THAT THIS CITY DID
YOUTH

INTERNSHIPS AND IT'S BEEN
AMAZING.

AND I CONSISTENTLY HEAR THAT.

OUR ONGOING WORK AROUND MICAH

HUG BOXES TO MAKE SURE OUR
YOUTH

ARE AS PROTECTED AS WE POSSIBLY
CAN.

AND OUR ONGOING EFFORT, WHICH
IS

STILL OUT THERE, TO

MEET WITH

OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS WHO
MIGHT

BE STRUGGLING, WHO COULD
MAYBE

WANT TO MEET WITH US US
EVERY

NOW AND AGAIN TO JOINTLY
HELP
OUR YOUTH.

ALSO HAVING OUR VARIOUS

POLICIES

TO UPLIFT THE VOICES AND
MAKE

SURE THAT THEY'RE SEEN AND
THAT

THEY'RE HEARD AND

THAT THEY'RE
HOPEFULLY FEELING VALUED.

IT MIGHT SOUND SMALL, BUT
OUR

FLAG POLICIES, OUR OTHER

POLICIES, TO RECOGNIZE

THE

MARGINALIZED PARTS OF OUR

COMMUNITY WHICH I HAVE TO SAY

IT, IT'S THE QUEER,

OUR TRANCES

BROTHERS AND SISTERS,

THOSE THAT

ARE DIFFERENTLY ABLED,
THOSE
WITH FEW FINANCIAL MEANS.

I CAN'T THANK MARY ENOUGH.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE
TO

DO ANYTHING, LITERALLY, AND
YOU

SHOULD BUY MARY ALL THE ROSES
IN

THE WORLD AND ALL THE MEALS IN

THE WORLD AND ALL THE
OTHER

THINGS SHE NEEDS IN THE
WORLD,

BECAUSE

YOU'LL LITERALLY NOT DO
ANYTHING WITHOUT HER.

SO, THANK
YOU.

THE VICE MAYOR DUCKED OFF.

BUT I WILL LET HER KNOW
AGAIN

THAT IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE

WORKING WITH HER AND ON AGENDA

REVIEW, AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD
TO HER LEADERSHIP.

MOST IMPORTANTLY -- I

THINK MY
PARTNER IS ON THERE SOMEWHERE.

HE'S SHY.

ANYWAY, NONE OF THIS WOULD
HAVE

BEEN POSSIBLE, TRULY NONE OF US

POSSIBLE WITHOUT THE
LOVING

SUPPORT OF MY PARTNER,
JIM.

AND OF COURSE, I ALWAYS MAKE
A

PLUG FOR OUR WONDERFUL RUSTY
CAT, BEN.

THANK YOU, THANK
YOU, THANK YOU.

THEN WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON
TO
OTHER THINGS.

COUNCILMEMBER
MAUER.

I WANTED TO THANK

YOU BECAUSE

YOU HAVE SET THE BAR FOR RUNNING
VERY EFFICIENT MEETINGS.

AND I'M VERY GRATEFUL FOR THAT.

SO YOU DID A GREAT JOB

RUNNINGRUNNING
EFFICIENTLY.

THANK YOU.

AGAIN, IT'S ALL TEAL WORK.

IT'S ALL TEAMWORK.

SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU FOR

LISTENING TO ALL OF

THAT.

I'M TURNING IT BACK OVER TO
MARY

FOR THE REST WHAT WAS WE NEED
TO

MOVE THROUGH OR
WHICHEVER.

I'LL TAKE FROM IT HERE.

JUST AS THE COUNCIL IS AWARE,

LAST YEAR YOU ADOPTED A
POLICY

ON THE SELECTION OF THE
MAYOR
AND VICE MAYOR.

IT IS SUMMARIZED IN THE

AGENDA,

AND I'LL SUMMARIZE IT EVEN MORE

BRIEFLY HERE.

THAT THE VICE MAYOR SHALL
BECOME
THE MAYOR, AND THE SENIORMOST

MEMBER WHO HAS NOT YET SERVEDSERVED
MAYOR SHALL BACK THE VICE MAYOR.

ACCORDING TO THAT ADOPTED POLICY

THIS YEAR THE MAYOR WOULD
BE
COUNCILMEMBER McLEWIS,

CURRENTLY
VICE MAYOR McLEWIS,
AND
COUNCILMEMBER MAUER WOULD BECOMEVICE MAYOR.

WE DO NEED A MOTION AND A VOTE

AS A FORMALITY TO APPOINT
THOSE

TWO INDIVIDUALS TO THOSE

POSITIONS.

THAT'S JUST A FORMALITY TO

IMPLEMENT THIS ALREADY ADOPTED
POLICY.

THANK YOU, ALEX.

WITH THAT, YES, I'D
BE

PRIVILEGED TO MOVE THAT OUR

CURRENT VICE MAYOR,
JILL
McLEWIS, BECOME OUR MAYOR AND

COUNCILMEMBER MAUER TO BE OUR
VICE MAYOR.

I'LL SECOND IT.

MARY, ROLL CALL?
THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SO MOVED BY -- SORRY, I FORGOT
PUBLIC COMMENT.

OH, YES,
SORRY.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR

PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE

CONFIRMATION OF THE INCOMING
MAYOR.

MAYOR McLEWIS.

AND THEN THE INCOMING VICE
MAYOR, VICE MAYOR MAUER.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC

COMMENT, I

WILL COME TO CHAMBERS
FIRST.

KYLE?

I REALLY APPRECIATE

COUNCIL

COMING TO THE

DECISION THAT THEY

HAD IN TERMS OF THE SELECTION OF
MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR.

MANY MAY NOT REMEMBER A
FEW

YEARS BACK, THE TRAVESTY AND
THE

REALLY, REALLY

DRAMATIC

SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE

MAYOR THAT WAS JUST REALLY,
REALLY I THINK IN POOR TASTE.

JUST A BAD

REFLECTION OF
LEADERSHIP FOR OUR CITY.

SO I THINK THIS MOVE IS
VERY,

VERY HOPEFUL AND I'M
VERY

PLEASED THAT THERE WAS A
VERY
SMOOTH MOTION AND SECOND.

AND I'M REALLY LOOKING

FORWARD
TO JUST MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, KYLE, FOR
YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT.

NEXT, I'LL GO OUT TO ZOOM.

IF THERE'S

ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT

WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AA

COMMENT ON THE CONFIRMATION OF
INCOMING MAYOR McLEWIS AND
INCOMING VICE MAYOR MAUER.

KATE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF,
PLEASE?

THANK YOU, CAN YOU SEE THE
TIMER?
KATE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF?
THERE YOU GO.

THANK YOU.

CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?

YES, I CAN, THANK
YOU.

GO
AHEAD.

I JUST WANT TO SAY,

CONGRATULATIONS
TO
COUNCILMEMBERS McLEWIS AND
MAUER.

THEY'VE BOTH DONE

AN EXCELLENT
JOB SERVING THE COMMUNITY.

AND IT'S REALLY A MOMENT OF

PRIDE TO SEE TWO WOMEN
IN

LEADERSHIP IN THE UNITED
STATES
AT THIS MOMENT.

SO BEST
WISHES TO YOU BOTH.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

THANK YOU, KATE, FOR YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT.

NEXT, I WILL COME BACK INTO
CHAMBERS.

IF THERE'S ANYONE IN

CHAMBERS

THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A
PUBLIC
COMMENT?

SEEING NONE, I WILL GO

BACK OUT

TO ZOOM, IF THERE'S ANYONE
ON

ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A

PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE
RAISE
YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY?

SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS
CLOSED.

THANK YOU.

SO THERE'S A MOTION ON THE

FLOOR FROM MAYOR ZOLLMAN
AND

SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON
TO CONFIRM McLEWIS AND MAUER?
CARTER?
YES.

HINTON.

AYE.

LEWIS.

YES.

ZOLLMAN.

YES W WE HAVE A NEW MAYOR
AND
VICE
MAYOR.

CONGRATULATIONS.

WITH

THAT, I THINK WE ARE
ADJOURNED, RIGHT?

NO?
OH, SORRY.

THE INCOMING MAYOR

WOULD LIKE

TO MAKE INCOMING
COMMENTS.

YES, PLEASE, COME
UP.

THANKS, YOU
ALL.

I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

I WENT BACK AND FORTH WHETHER
TO

COME HERE OR NOT, GIVEN
EVERYTHING.

IT'S BEEN A ROUGH SIX MONTHS.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I'M

TRULY HONORED TO SERVE AS
SEBASTOPOL'S MAYOR FOR 2026.

IN THE YEAR AHEAD, I REALLY
AM

COMMITTED TO ADVANCING OUR

SHARED GOALS THAT WE'VE
ALL
WORKED ON THIS YEAR.

STRENGTHENING OUR FISCAL
STABILITY.

A VIBRANT DOWNTOWN

SUPPORTED

THROUGH OUR COLLABORATION
WITH

COMMUNITY PARTNERS.

THE WELL-BEING OF OUR

SEBASTOPOL
RESIDENTS.

I JUST THANK YOU ALL
FOR
CONFIRMING ME TONIGHT.

I KNOW IT'S BEEN ODD WITH ME ON
ZOOM AND EVERYTHING.

AND I REALLY JUST APPRECIATE
YOU
ALL UNDERSTANDING THAT.

I ACTUALLY ONLY HAVE TWO
MORE

WEEKS BEFORE MY

LAST CHEMO
TREATMENT.

THEN I HAVE NO OTHER TREATMENT

REQUIRED AFTER THAT, SO I'M

HOPING TO BE BACK HERE IN

JANUARY, ACCORDING TO
THE

DOCTORS, TO GIVE MY
IMMUNE

SYSTEM A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO
RECOVER.

THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR
CONFIRMING.

I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

IT MEANS A LOT TO ME.

THANK YOU.

AND WITH THAT?

WITH THAT, WE CAN

ADJOURN TO
EAT CAKE AND COOKIES.

CAKE!
ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, ALL.

HAVE A GOOD SEASON.
[ ADJOURNED AT 8:11 P.M. PST ] [Event Concluded]