[0:06] Welcome to everybody. Welcome here to
[0:08] the city council meeting today, Monday,
[0:09] July 13, 2026. I now call this meeting
[0:12] to order. Roll call, please.
[0:14] >> District 1, council member Casey,
[0:17] >> here.
[0:17] >> District two, council member Vieiraa
[0:19] >> here.
[0:20] >> District three, council member Oro
[0:22] >> here.
[0:23] >> District 4, Vice Mayor Martinez,
[0:24] >> present.
[0:25] >> Mayor Lopez
[0:26] >> here. Everyone, please stand for the
[0:28] invocation by Connor Lar Roza from
[0:30] Valley Grace Community Church, followed
[0:32] by the pledge of allegiance from the
[0:33] American Legion Post Commander, Pete
[0:35] Cement.
[0:37] Welcome.
[0:38] >> Good evening everybody. Please join me
[0:40] in a word of prayer.
[0:42] Almighty God, creator of the heavens and
[0:44] the earth. We thank you for another day
[0:46] on earth. Another day that you have
[0:48] raised the sun on us, given breath for
[0:50] our lungs and strength for our bodies.
[0:52] We thank you for your goodness in all
[0:54] these moments every day, the seen and
[0:56] the unseen moments of goodness. Lord, I
[0:58] pray for your blessing on the city. I
[1:00] pray for the families to be united and
[1:02] to love one another. For the safety of
[1:04] series and her citizens, as well as
[1:06] those who serve her and our police and
[1:08] our fire departments. Thank you for this
[1:10] council, this collection of individuals
[1:12] that you, God, have sovereignly placed
[1:14] here. I pray that they govern well. I
[1:17] pray that you would give them courage
[1:18] and strength. I pray that they would
[1:20] serve you and that they would serve the
[1:22] people of this city well. Thank you for
[1:24] their lives. Thank you for their
[1:26] families. Thank you for what they have
[1:27] dedicated themselves to. Thank you,
[1:30] Lord, for your faithfulness. Thank you
[1:32] for your mercies that are new every
[1:34] morning. I pray for the well-being and
[1:36] the redemption of all who live in series
[1:38] and call her home. It is in the name of
[1:40] Jesus Christ that I pray these things.
[1:42] Amen.
[1:49] Good evening everyone. Please remain
[1:50] standing.
[1:52] Place your right hand over your heart.
[1:54] Remove your covers and join me in the
[1:56] pledge of allegiance. I pledge
[1:58] allegiance to the flag of the United
[2:01] States of America and to the republic
[2:04] for which it stands, one nation under
[2:07] God, indivisible, with liberty and
[2:10] justice for all. You may recover and be
[2:13] seated, please. Thank you.
[2:19] Pete. We'll now begin with a
[2:22] presentation from Stan RTA.
[2:28] Welcome.
[2:29] Hello. Good evening. Uh Siri City
[2:31] Council. I'm
[2:34] Adam Bar. I'm the chief executive
[2:35] officer for the Stannos Regional Transit Authority or ST standard. I have
[2:39] Angela Swanson here. Angel.
[2:42] >> Good evening. I'm Angela Swanson. from a
[2:43] senior transit analyst at Stan RTA and
[2:46] the project manager for this short range
[2:48] transit plan update.
[2:51] >> Um so tonight we're um providing an
[2:53] update to um our um transit routes and
[2:56] have a have a presentation up on the
[2:57] screen and sure
[2:59] my
[3:08] » All right, here we go. Awesome. Um so
[3:11] the Sanier was formed about five years
[3:13] ago and start started operations and we
[3:15] made a few uh service changes at the
[3:17] beginning of our service um at beginning
[3:19] of the San RTA. Um we're at a point now
[3:21] where we're re-evaluating our routes uh
[3:23] due to a due to a couple things. One, we
[3:25] just need to take a fresh look at our
[3:26] routes, see where they're see they're
[3:28] see where they're working and see where
[3:29] they're not working and make some make
[3:31] some refinements. Um although we're also
[3:34] in a in a time right now where we are
[3:37] having to make some service cuts due to
[3:39] a funding reduction in our revenue. Um
[3:42] so because of that we're looking at our
[3:43] routes trying to find ways to make to to
[3:45] make them better but also trying to deal
[3:46] with this funding funding shortfall and
[3:49] how we can better craft our route. So
[3:51] tonight we're going to talk through um
[3:52] what the routes look like today and h
[3:54] and what we propose them to to look like
[3:56] in the future. Uh we do have next steps
[3:59] here. We're in this um public
[4:01] participation phase today where we're
[4:03] looking to the looking to you and
[4:05] looking to the public to provide us some
[4:06] comments on the proposed routes, what
[4:08] they what they look like, would they
[4:10] work for would they work for you or not?
[4:12] And that uh public feedback will help us
[4:14] refine our service changes, which we'll
[4:16] start to do in the late in the here in the late summer and come to a
[4:20] final resolution in the fall on what
[4:22] routes that we're going to change and
[4:23] how we're going to change it. And then
[4:24] we'll implement th those changes that we
[4:26] come to next [clears throat] year.
[4:29] So just a recap of the existing
[4:31] conditions. Uh again like I said our
[4:33] service formed in 2021 um and it was um
[4:37] [clears throat] uh formed uh between
[4:40] where JPA that that was formed in 2022
[4:43] and 2023. We did a big a big big
[4:45] planning effort where we looked at all
[4:46] the routes looked at all the former
[4:48] routes and how we could better align
[4:50] them. Um so in that in that process we
[4:53] ended up with 27 routes with four types
[4:55] of routes. So we have the frequent
[4:57] routes, local routes, the inner city
[4:59] routes which run obviously be between
[5:01] the city. Then we have express routes
[5:02] and inner county routes where we run
[5:04] over to the park station in Pleasanton,
[5:05] the A station in Leup and then um down
[5:09] here down to down to Turlock as well.
[5:13] So you can see this is a wrership trend
[5:16] since um tw since July of 2022. So we we start off low and there's ups and
[5:21] downs through throughout this time. But
[5:23] you can see there's an upward tra upward
[5:25] trajectory of of of these of our of our
[5:28] ridership, which is awesome to see. You
[5:30] know, more and more people are are are
[5:31] riding the bus or using the bus to get
[5:33] around to to medical to jobs to
[5:35] education and whatever they need to do.
[5:37] But it's been great great to see how the
[5:38] routes have really the route changes
[5:41] that we did back in 2022 and 20 2023 re
[5:44] really took hold and provided a better
[5:46] service for the communities that we
[5:48] serve. So we really get more people
[5:49] around to more places which is really
[5:51] the goal of what of what we wanted to
[5:53] do.
[5:54] So this uh this screen um shows uh the ridership distribution amongst all
[6:00] the all the bus stops that we have in
[6:02] the Modesto series area. So the so each
[6:05] dot is a bus stop and the larger the dot
[6:08] the more people use that bus stop. And
[6:10] so we this is one of the tools that the
[6:12] planners use to figure out where the
[6:14] wrership is at and how we could better
[6:16] you better run the routes to get more
[6:18] people on the bus. Obviously that does
[6:21] doesn't make a whole lot of sense to run
[6:22] routes on on roads that um have bus
[6:24] stops but no one's on the bus. So we
[6:26] want to focus the efforts and focus the
[6:28] resources on on on areas where more
[6:30] people
[6:32] ride the bus. Although we do need to
[6:34] balance that with our rural areas as
[6:36] well because there are some rural areas
[6:37] in our county that we serve that we
[6:39] don't want to cut off service to
[6:40] completely but we do want to provide
[6:42] some service but we need to need to
[6:44] balance that. So this is just one one of
[6:46] the tools that the planners use to um to that they use as they develop the
[6:50] proposed routes for what they want to
[6:52] do. Um if you if you look at some of the
[6:54] Billy big big big dots, those are really
[6:56] those those key um destination points
[6:59] and all the that are listed there on the
[7:01] screen from from MJC to the mall in
[7:04] Modesto to the Walmart here in series.
[7:08] Um route performance. This is a graph to
[7:11] show the different routes that we have
[7:13] and how many people ride the bus versus
[7:16] how many people um how many people are
[7:19] on are on the bus each hour. And so you
[7:22] can see that that we have some high high
[7:24] ridership routes are on the right hand
[7:25] side of the graph. Um middle routes are
[7:27] in the middle obviously and the ones
[7:28] that are down below in the lower left
[7:30] hand quadrant are the are the routes
[7:32] that don't do the best. There are rural
[7:34] routes or they have other other other
[7:36] limitations to to them. But it shows
[7:39] gives you some perspective on which
[7:40] routes do well and which routes don't.
[7:43] The ones that are circled in red are
[7:44] routes that serve that serve here here
[7:46] in series and go to different parts of
[7:48] town depending on the route. And so it's
[7:50] another tool that the planners used as
[7:52] they looked at the different routes.
[7:53] Which routes are doing well and which
[7:55] routes aren't.
[7:57] So as the planners continued with their
[8:00] process, they um did a lot of had a lot of other inputs that they
[8:04] used to develop their the the proposed
[8:06] route. So we'll start on the left hand
[8:08] side the existing conditions report
[8:10] which was showed the existing condition
[8:11] of the routes themselves. The routes as
[8:13] ex exist today. They did an analysis of each route and an analysis
[8:17] of the market as well. Moving on to the
[8:20] community input phase. We were out in
[8:22] the community back in December to get
[8:23] input from the writers on what's working
[8:25] well for them today, what's not and use
[8:27] that input to help craft the proposed
[8:29] routes that we'll talk about here just a
[8:31] moment. We had a survey back then as
[8:33] well which helps help help which help
[8:35] infor inform that. Uh we have some some
[8:38] financial um some financial realities
[8:40] that I talked a little bit about the
[8:42] beginning of the presentation. And we
[8:43] are seeing a decrease amount of revenue
[8:46] in our in our system which is making um
[8:48] us look at some route reductions due to
[8:50] that decrease in revenue. And then they
[8:53] also also talked to staff. Obviously we have a good a good um a good
[8:57] perception of the system and want to get
[8:58] our input as well on the best way that
[9:01] we saw that we could improve the routes.
[9:04] Our priorities were to preserve coverage in the area. That
[9:08] means that we want to stay in our
[9:10] service area, stay in it, stay stay in
[9:11] the county, and even if there's routes
[9:13] that don't serve, don't uh don't perform
[9:14] the best, but they still serve a a
[9:17] population that that needs to be served.
[9:19] So, we still want to maintain that coverage, but we still
[9:22] want to optimize the network, make sure
[9:24] that we're serving the best way we can,
[9:26] needing to balance the service versus
[9:28] coverage areas. Um so we're looking at
[9:31] connections as well connections on how
[9:33] we can better place connections or
[9:35] transit hubs throughout the system to
[9:37] better connect people to the different
[9:40] um looking at simplifying the routes
[9:42] making them easier to understand which
[9:44] is a key principle to make it easier to
[9:45] use as well and then improving the
[9:48] schedule reliability. Um also looking at
[9:51] service efficiency as well to prioritize
[9:54] the productive prioritize the productive
[9:56] services but still balance um the less
[9:59] effective services.
[10:02] With that with that I'm going to hand it
[10:03] over to Angela. She's going to talk
[10:04] through the proposed changes.
[10:07] >> And I can start off by saying we can all
[10:09] take a deep breath here in series. Your
[10:11] service is essentially going to remain
[10:13] unchanged under the plan and the
[10:15] proposals being brought forward. So we
[10:17] know that that that's very meaningful to
[10:19] you all especially because I remember
[10:21] being part of the team that came here
[10:23] when seriesir um terminated running
[10:25] operating CAT and entrusted it to Max
[10:28] and then allowed it to move forward to
[10:29] us as standard RTA. So we're happy that
[10:32] we are continuing in good faith to serve
[10:35] the community of series. So is it down?
[10:39] Oh, there we go. Okay. So we're looking
[10:41] at so one of the things that we're
[10:43] trying to do that's transformative in
[10:44] the long run and I'll focus on series is
[10:47] originally as max we ran everything
[10:50] coming out of hub and spoke coming in
[10:52] and out of Modesto downtown and the
[10:54] Modesto transit center. What we're
[10:56] finding though is that people don't
[10:57] always need to come from the outer areas
[10:59] of the the cities and the rural areas
[11:02] into downtown Modesto and then pulse
[11:04] back out again. We need hubs to move
[11:06] around more the way airlines are are
[11:08] designed we're distributing. So you're
[11:10] moving people around without having to
[11:12] go into the center. So a key place that
[11:15] we see still needing to have a satellite
[11:17] hub is to develop the series Walmart
[11:20] property more to be able to do more than
[11:23] what we have for our street level where
[11:25] we have the five routes that come in and
[11:27] out. Right now we're looking longterm to
[11:29] be able to do some sort of an off-site
[11:31] facility and to really develop that. But
[11:33] that we really with the new service
[11:35] plan, one way to cut hours and but not
[11:39] cut service is to do shorter routes that
[11:42] come to these other um satellite hubs
[11:45] and then moving people out from there.
[11:47] So that's one of the key changes we're
[11:49] making and continuing to keep it. And
[11:51] then here we're looking at the routes
[11:53] that affect you. West Modesto and series
[11:55] are kind of clustered together. The key
[11:58] routes you're looking at though are the
[11:59] 29, the 42, the 47, and then the 10 that
[12:03] comes down that's are expressed between
[12:07] Modesto and um Turlock that now is
[12:10] coming into SE we propose to bring into
[12:12] series. We've also redesigned a little
[12:15] bit of how people are moving around in
[12:17] West Modesto. The one piece right here I
[12:20] can call your attention to where we the
[12:22] only service you are losing is the
[12:25] connectivity coming from West Modesto on
[12:28] the 47. It was on Hatch that connected
[12:30] over to the um into where the 20 and 21
[12:35] are. That was something that was
[12:37] requested that never um writership never
[12:39] materialized. So we had to let that
[12:42] segment go even though people like the
[12:44] idea of it. Otherwise, you remain it um
[12:47] as you are and keeping you intact.
[12:49] Again, everyone being able to get to the
[12:50] churches, to get to business down here,
[12:53] to get to series, Walmart, and the CSA
[12:55] and those services operated by the
[12:57] county. Then the 2019 is being
[13:00] reorganized a little bit. This is the
[13:02] primary connection between Modesto,
[13:05] Series, Keys, and Turlock. Keeping that
[13:07] connection going through the county
[13:09] going minor realignment, but keeping the
[13:11] service essentially unchanged.
[13:15] And then the east county the 61 comes
[13:17] directly from Houston to seriesir
[13:19] Walmart and then goes up to to the
[13:22] transit center midestto we are looking
[13:24] at some options um to because this is an
[13:27] underutilized service but Houston is
[13:29] loud and clear they still need to come
[13:31] to seriesiries they need to get to
[13:32] downtown so do we run maybe fewer hours
[13:35] do we run more express hours we're
[13:37] looking at some options but again that
[13:39] remains a service and then to a real
[13:42] quick summary We looked, as I talked
[13:45] about, simplifying it where sometimes
[13:47] it's being able to make the route
[13:48] shorter so it's more efficient so we
[13:50] aren't tying up as many buses, really
[13:52] making the system flow better. Um,
[13:54] really prioritizing frequency where we
[13:57] need it. We are asking people, the
[13:59] common theme underlying all this is
[14:01] we're asking people to walk a little bit
[14:02] further. Right now, our standard in the
[14:04] urbanized areas is about a quarter mile
[14:06] or about a five to seven minute walk.
[14:09] We're looking now at asking people to
[14:11] walk up to a third of the mile, but
[14:13] we're keeping their frequency up so that
[14:15] it's worth it to walk that little bit
[14:17] further to the bus, but that allows us
[14:19] to make the routes a little more
[14:21] streamlined. And then I will tell you
[14:22] the place to send everybody in your
[14:24] community to if they want to learn more
[14:26] or be more involved is connectthes.org.
[14:31] And this is a sample of what goes on. So
[14:34] right now you'll see on the website
[14:40] should start going
[14:43] I got impatient with it. What we have is
[14:45] the bar will start swiping from the
[14:47] right to the left.
[14:50] It's done it every other place but
[14:51] series.
[14:54] Oh okay.
[14:56] won't keep you on this, but anyway,
[14:58] where it will show the existing is
[15:00] overlaid over the proposed, so you can
[15:02] compare how the routes look in
[15:04] relationship to each other, going back
[15:05] and forth with this toolbar moving back
[15:07] and forth across. I apologize that that
[15:09] didn't work tonight. And then this is
[15:12] one more way of showing you how we're
[15:14] making those 15% cuts without
[15:16] compromising service. The navy blue
[15:18] lines show you the pro the proposed
[15:21] routes that we're doing. The red lines
[15:25] are where we've given up service. And
[15:27] what you can see is generally there's
[15:30] service happening within a third to a
[15:32] half mile of where that red line was.
[15:35] That there is still service available.
[15:36] You just have to walk a little further
[15:38] or do it a little differently to be able
[15:40] to make your connections. But no service
[15:43] is completely gone.
[15:45] And then another thing again where I
[15:47] referenced cout one of the key concerns
[15:49] your community had at that time was
[15:51] preserving paratransit service for the
[15:53] elderly and individuals with
[15:55] disabilities so they would still have
[15:56] the rides. This route shows in the pink
[15:59] is where the couple of areas where our
[16:02] transit network is a little smaller so
[16:04] they won't receive service. And if you
[16:06] look at it as you see the Modesto series
[16:09] area, we're really only talking about
[16:11] very rural areas and anyone who's
[16:13] currently served what we proposed to
[16:15] grandfather in to keep them in the
[16:16] service. So essentially all of the
[16:18] paratransit service and that within the
[16:20] city of series limits will remain
[16:22] unchanged.
[16:24] There is one change that we are
[16:26] proposing though that's a a no-brainer
[16:28] costsaver. We think is currently
[16:30] parransit operates 365 days a year but
[16:32] fixed rout is closed for six holidays.
[16:35] We're proposing to close for four out of
[16:37] six holidays, but to still operate
[16:39] paratransit on Christmas and
[16:41] Thanksgiving, so those individuals with
[16:43] limitations and mo for their mobility
[16:45] will still be able to be with friends
[16:47] and loved ones.
[16:49] And then next steps, I won't need to say
[16:51] anything except at the bottom
[16:53] connects.org. If any of the folks in
[16:56] this community of series have any
[16:57] questions or comments, they're more than
[16:59] welcome to please go to the website,
[17:01] learn more. There's ways you can leave
[17:03] questions asked for us to respond to.
[17:05] Come to our next board meeting in
[17:07] August. We'll be talking about it and
[17:09] then it'll go be going to our board in
[17:10] September. Again, connectbs.org.
[17:14] And then this is the note we love being
[17:17] able to close on. In other news, coming
[17:20] to series fall 2029, the new standard TA
[17:22] headquarters facility at the corner of
[17:24] Pro Landing and Service Roads across the
[17:27] street from the county service areas. We
[17:29] want to um give a huge shout out to your
[17:33] planning and community and um staff here
[17:36] at the city. You have been the most
[17:38] amazing partners to us. We are so
[17:40] looking forward to moving forward. This
[17:42] is the latest rendition of the um
[17:46] facility that will include our
[17:47] administrative operations headquarters
[17:50] and our fleet maintenance facility to
[17:52] house up to 200 buses. So, we thank you
[17:54] and look forward to joining you and I'll
[17:56] hand it back to Mr. Bur.
[18:00] And so with that, um, definitely thank
[18:03] you for the time. Thank you for for the
[18:04] time tonight and, um, happy to answer
[18:06] any questions you might have.
[18:07] >> Thank you very much. Council have any
[18:09] comments or questions?
[18:11] >> Thank you very much for the
[18:12] presentation. Appreciate that.
[18:22] Moving on to citizens communications.
[18:24] While the city council welcomes and
[18:25] encourages participation in the city
[18:26] council meetings, adopt the rules allow
[18:28] no more than five minutes. Resolution
[18:30] 2007106 for expression of non-aggenda
[18:33] items. Matters under the jurisdiction of
[18:34] the city council and not on the posted
[18:36] agenda may be addressed by the general
[18:38] public. However, California law
[18:40] prohibits city council from taking any
[18:41] action on any matter which is not posted
[18:43] on the agenda unless it is determined to
[18:45] be an emergency by the city council.
[18:47] Citizens are entitled to address city
[18:48] council on any agenda item subject to
[18:50] the five-minute provision. Anyone
[18:51] wishing to address city council must
[18:53] adhere to the rules of decorum and the
[18:54] rules of decorum are posted outside the
[18:56] chambers doors. Are any of our
[18:58] representatives here today?
[19:01] Seeing none and we'll go ahead and start
[19:03] off with some in-person comments. And
[19:06] the first person I have here is I
[19:07] believe it's Gary Condit.
[19:16] Okay, sir. My apologies.
[19:21] Please state your name, please. That's
[19:24] probably why I thought it was Gary
[19:25] Condid. I just saw the last name.
[19:27] Welcome, sir. Please state your name.
[19:28] >> Good evening. My name is Burl Condid. I
[19:30] live at 3613
[19:32] Dormia Court and Series. Been here for
[19:35] 60 years.
[19:37] The other a week ago, yesterday, I was
[19:40] having lunch at Amaritas
[19:43] and I came out and I noticed a flock
[19:46] camera in the parking lot.
[19:49] I hadn't seen it when I went in. Had I
[19:52] seen it, I wouldn't have went in. I
[19:53] would have left.
[19:55] I talked to the manager and I asked her,
[19:57] "Where did that thing come from?" And
[19:59] she said the city of Siri put it there.
[20:03] And so I got home, I called Mr. Casey
[20:06] and I asked him about it and he said he
[20:09] had find out. He called me back Monday,
[20:12] last Monday today, and um told me that
[20:15] the city didn't have anything to do with
[20:17] it.
[20:18] So, I'm kind of puzzled who put it
[20:20] there. Manager said they didn't do it.
[20:24] Mr. Casey says the city didn't do it.
[20:27] Now, I know what these flock cameras are
[20:28] all about and they're not good. And I
[20:32] don't I won't I told the manager I won't
[20:35] come back and I've been going to Lamaras
[20:37] for a lot of years. I won't go back as
[20:40] long as that camera is parked in front
[20:41] of their business. And I won't go to any
[20:44] business that has those cameras parked
[20:46] in front of me. I went up toies last
[20:48] week and has one. I told the lady there,
[20:52] I said, "I'm not coming back again until
[20:54] that camera's moved." City of Medesso
[20:56] put that one in. City of Medessa is in
[20:58] bed with flock. They got them all over
[21:00] the town. You can't go nowhere in
[21:02] Modesto without being recorded. These
[21:05] things take your license plate, your cell phone, any medical device that
[21:10] transmits anything to your doctor, your
[21:13] kids cell phones. They take track and
[21:15] they keep track of everything. This is
[21:17] all going to these data centers. It's a
[21:19] highly sophisticated surveillance system
[21:21] going in to control the people of this
[21:24] country. If you don't believe that, then
[21:27] feel sorry for you. But I hope the city
[21:29] of Series doesn't have anything to do
[21:31] with this flock people or these cameras.
[21:34] I understand the license plate readers
[21:36] are a cop for 31 years. That's all good.
[21:39] Cameras inside these businesses,
[21:41] security cameras, we have them at our
[21:43] church. They're not connected to They're
[21:45] connected to the internet because I can
[21:48] watch them at home, but they don't go
[21:50] anywhere. They don't go to the
[21:53] government or there some place, some it
[21:56] or AI place or whatever. I just want to
[21:59] I don't think the people of Siri want
[22:01] them here watching them 24 hours a day.
[22:05] It's our constitutional rights under the
[22:07] Fourth Amendment to live without this
[22:09] stuff. And I urge you not to have
[22:11] anything to do with it. Thank you.
[22:14] >> Thank you, Mr. Condit. The next person
[22:16] that I have is Linda Rhino,
[22:24] » former council woman Linda Rhino.
[22:34] Well, this is a different side for me to
[22:37] be speaking for from, but before the
[22:40] 2627 budget was adopted by the city
[22:42] council, our parks were already showing
[22:44] signs of neglect. In fact, it was so bad
[22:47] that residents were posting on social
[22:49] media about the condition of the parks.
[22:52] Yet with 14 parks, five of which have
[22:55] restrooms totaling approximately
[22:58] 148 acres, the city council still
[23:01] eliminated one full-time parks worker,
[23:04] now leaving four
[23:06] employees to maintain all those parks.
[23:09] Since the council eliminated the
[23:11] contract for the company that had been
[23:13] cleaning those five park restrooms, who
[23:15] will do that? One of those four
[23:18] remaining park workers. The city council
[23:21] also eliminated two part-time code
[23:24] enforcement officers who gathered up
[23:26] homeless leftovers in parks. Who will do
[23:29] that? The city council also cancelled
[23:32] the contract for security at the park
[23:34] which included locking park restrooms at
[23:37] night. Is that even being done by city
[23:40] staff? Because that's what I heard
[23:42] during the discussion on the budget cuts
[23:45] that other city staff would step up and
[23:48] take care of that. The city council also
[23:50] cancelled the contract for right-of-way
[23:53] landscaping.
[23:54] Were you thinking those four park
[23:56] workers could add that to their duties
[23:58] or did you want our right-of-way
[24:00] landscaping to look as bad as our city
[24:03] parks?
[24:05] Hopefully, the council will find a way
[24:07] to make cuts somewhere else and do a
[24:09] budget amendment to get the help our
[24:12] city parks desperately need and not let
[24:15] them continue to look like parks in
[24:17] third world countries unless that's the
[24:20] plan to get that 1 cent tax passed in
[24:23] November.
[24:25] >> Thank you very much, Councilwoman. I
[24:27] think it is appropriate for me to ask
[24:28] the city manager, I believe, that you
[24:30] could possibly answer some of her
[24:32] questions if that's okay.
[24:34] Yes. Good evening. Thank you, mayor and
[24:36] council members. [snorts]
[24:40] >> [clears throat]
[24:41] >> Uh it is true that one park full one
[24:44] full-time park maintenance worker was
[24:46] eliminated from this year's budget as
[24:49] well as the funding for the Bright View
[24:53] landscaping contract which included
[24:56] service at
[24:58] Smyrna Park and Riverluff along with
[25:02] several right-of-way landscaping duties
[25:05] throughout the city. And that work
[25:07] currently falls on city staff to do. The
[25:11] public works superintendent intends to
[25:13] put out a request for proposal very soon
[25:17] specifically for landscape and lighting
[25:19] district areas as well as uh CFD areas.
[25:24] But unless there is a budget amendment
[25:26] or some other additional funding
[25:29] recognized that those duties will
[25:31] continue to fall on city staff.
[25:35] And in fact, we have a meeting tomorrow
[25:38] at 8:00 in the morning uh to discuss the
[25:41] current condition of Smyrna Park along
[25:45] with OOA Park Independence Park so that
[25:49] we can develop a realistic staffing
[25:53] deployment plan with our limited staff
[25:55] that is available. Since we no longer
[25:58] have the maintenance agreements,
[26:00] we will be able to create and make
[26:04] available a schedule of activities so we
[26:06] can know when each park is planned to be
[26:09] served, how often it's going to be
[26:12] served, by how many staff members it
[26:15] will be served. So that way that will be
[26:17] a document that can be shared and
[26:19] everyone can be aware of what the
[26:21] expectation will be moving forward. That
[26:23] meeting is at 8:00 tomorrow morning.
[26:26] Thank you very much, city manager. Is
[26:28] there anybody else that would like to
[26:29] ask a question? Please step up to the
[26:31] podium, please.
[26:46] » Good evening, city council, city staff,
[26:48] community. I don't have a question, but
[26:50] I do have my report for the chamber.
[26:52] So, my name is Brandy Meyer, president
[26:55] and CEO of the series Chamber of
[26:57] Commerce. I just wanted to give some
[26:59] updates. Um, this past weekend, we had
[27:03] at the Modesto Roadsters baseball game a
[27:07] 19 time
[27:10] boxing champion Damian Flores throughout
[27:12] the first pitch. He did an awesome job.
[27:15] So, if you guys see him, make sure you
[27:16] tell him congratulations. He did he got
[27:18] it right over the plate. So, he did
[27:19] great. And there's videos online if you
[27:21] want to see them.
[27:22] Um, second, I'd like to thank everybody
[27:24] who came to our grand opening for Little
[27:26] Papa. Uh, it was from when I heard
[27:28] standing room only, it was packed and I
[27:30] really felt the love and I really
[27:31] appreciate it. Um, we had a great time.
[27:34] I wasn't expecting that many people, but
[27:36] um, we got through it and we've been
[27:38] busy ever since. So, if I look exhausted
[27:41] and dirty and tired, I am exhausted,
[27:43] dirty, and tired, but it's a good thing.
[27:45] It's a good problem to have, so I'll
[27:46] take it. Um, I just want to remind
[27:48] everybody that on September 19th, we are
[27:51] trying to plan our one table one
[27:52] community. So, stay tuned for that. And
[27:54] on September 25th, we're doing our golf
[27:57] tournament. This is our third annual
[27:58] golf tournament starting at 8:00 at the
[28:01] uh River Oaks Golf and Event Center. And
[28:05] uh we'll bring some more details for
[28:06] that as well. We are looking for teams
[28:07] of four plus sponsor whole sponsors. And
[28:11] um once again, we're going to be
[28:14] providing all the funds raised will be
[28:15] going back into the community to
[28:17] nonprofits around the area. So, we want
[28:19] to make sure that we continue that
[28:20] tradition. Any questions? You know where
[28:23] to find me. Come see me. Thank you.
[28:26] >> Thank you very much, Brandy. Is there
[28:28] anybody else that like to make a
[28:29] comment?
[28:36] » [clears throat]
[28:37] >> Greetings, mayor, vice mayor, council,
[28:40] city staff. My name is Nason Sanchez and
[28:44] series is a city that I call home.
[28:47] Excuse me as I read this really quick. A
[28:50] definition of philanthropy.
[28:54] It is a derived word, Greek word of
[28:57] philos and anthropist.
[29:00] Philanthropy is an active effort to
[29:04] promote positive human welfare
[29:08] and improve the quality quality of life.
[29:13] The key concepts philanthropy
[29:17] acts are driven
[29:19] by the desire to help others without
[29:23] expecting immediate immediate personal
[29:26] or financial gain.
[29:30] It is of giving of time,
[29:33] talent,
[29:35] and treasure.
[29:37] The reason I bring up this word
[29:39] philanthropy
[29:40] here in the next couple of weeks, we all
[29:43] know what's going to be taking place not
[29:46] only here in our beautiful city of
[29:48] Series, but also in the neighboring
[29:51] towns and the towns nationwide.
[29:55] It is a day set aside. we all know as
[29:59] national night out.
[30:02] This day is driven, this day is
[30:05] specifically focused to bring the
[30:08] community together and to recognize and
[30:12] to give proper recognition and
[30:14] appreciation
[30:16] to all of our 911 emergency services.
[30:21] But this day on National Night Out,
[30:24] there is going to be many neighborhoods.
[30:27] There's going to be many families, not
[30:29] only myself and my beautiful wife Sonia
[30:32] and my fellow neighbors on Saturn Court,
[30:35] but also citywide. We are going to be
[30:38] doing this what we call philanthropy.
[30:42] Nobody is asking us to do it. Nobody's
[30:45] saying here is a paycheck for you for
[30:47] your own personal gain to do it to spend
[30:50] on yourself.
[30:52] Surely there are individuals and
[30:54] businesses and directors and and other
[30:57] elected officials that are helping out
[30:59] to cover costs for it.
[31:02] But I sent an email the other day to
[31:06] reserve a time slot to have our our
[31:09] police department join us. And as I was
[31:11] reading this email, I came across a
[31:14] section where it said that there could
[31:16] be possible
[31:18] um fees
[31:20] to to pay.
[31:23] Now, to do this would damper it.
[31:28] What I'm asking for the council and the
[31:30] city staff or whoever is going to be the
[31:31] one to make the final decision on if
[31:34] there's going to be permit fees that are
[31:36] going to have to required to be paid
[31:39] on this day. If there is a day to wave a
[31:42] fee, let it be this day.
[31:46] Why to keep it alive? Keep what the
[31:49] community is doing, taking time out of
[31:51] their time, out of their own time to do
[31:54] this.
[31:56] It would be a good thing. It would be a
[31:58] positive thing to have the support and
[32:00] to know the backing for this. I've
[32:02] called various cities, our neighboring
[32:04] towns, and I've asked them. I didn't
[32:07] give them the details on what the
[32:08] question was or why I was even asking
[32:10] them to begin with, but I questioned
[32:12] them, are you guys going to require
[32:16] permits and pay permits? And they uh
[32:20] were a little bewildered when I asked
[32:23] them that question, confused in a way,
[32:25] like
[32:27] uh no, it it was almost uh one of them
[32:31] almost started laughing at that
[32:33] question. not necessarily to me but just
[32:36] a thought of that.
[32:38] So I ask again, keep in mind on this day
[32:43] whenever you do decide, please let it be
[32:45] so to wave the fees regardless of the
[32:48] size of the event that they are having.
[32:50] Nurture it, protect it what we are doing
[32:52] as a community. And I'm going to leave
[32:55] some flyers here to invite our elected
[32:57] officials and of course our chief and
[33:02] our fire department representative. We
[33:03] thank you time and time again for being
[33:05] involved in all aspects. Thank you.
[33:08] >> Thank you, Nason. City manager, I think
[33:11] that it's warrant that we answered that
[33:13] question about fees, but I don't think
[33:14] that we've ever given direction about
[33:16] fees. That correct?
[33:18] >> That's correct. The council has not
[33:20] given direction about fees, but I
[33:21] believe the chief has a plan. Chief, do
[33:24] you have anything to share?
[33:27] >> Yes. Thank you for that. Uh we do have a
[33:29] staff report coming to city council that
[33:32] we're going to ask that any fees
[33:34] associated with the uh uh conditional
[33:36] use permit are waved for that one night.
[33:39] If you have a registered National Night
[33:41] event with the police department, it
[33:44] goes against the whole uh premise of
[33:47] National Night Out, if we're charging
[33:48] the communities to hold these events,
[33:50] but I also think it's important that
[33:53] they don't hold events without the
[33:55] proper work where they're shutting down
[33:57] roadways uh where we could have issues
[34:00] um getting emergency vehicles in for
[34:02] emergencies and stuff. So, that that
[34:04] will be coming at the next council
[34:06] meeting.
[34:07] >> Thank you very much.
[34:08] Nason, I hope that helps answer your
[34:11] question, sir. I know that we talked
[34:12] about it at the concert in the park and this is your answer, but thank you
[34:15] very much for bringing that to our
[34:16] attention. Is there anybody else that
[34:18] would like to make a comment?
[34:22] Closing the public period. Is there any
[34:24] emails?
[34:25] >> We're no emails and there's no hands
[34:27] raised on Zoom.
[34:28] >> Okay, thank you very much. Now move on
[34:30] to
[34:32] there's actually can I ask the council
[34:34] if there is any conflicts of interest?
[34:39] Seeing none, moving on to appointments
[34:41] to boards and commissions. Measure H,
[34:43] Citizens Oversight Committee interviews
[34:45] and appointment. City clerk. Thank you,
[34:48] mayor and councel. Uh, our Measure H
[34:50] oversight or Measure H Citizens
[34:52] Oversight Committee currently has one
[34:54] vacancy. The term is July 1st, 2026
[34:58] through June 30th, 2029. So, it's a
[35:00] three-year term. The final filing date
[35:03] to submit an application for this
[35:05] vacancy was June 15th. We did receive
[35:07] two applications, Angela Huerta and John
[35:10] Fiad. Both applicants were notified via
[35:13] email and phone call of tonight's
[35:14] interviews and appointment. Um, a list
[35:17] of questions have been provided to the
[35:18] council to ask the applicants. I do see
[35:21] one of the applicants is on Zoom and I
[35:23] do believe another the other applicant
[35:25] is here in person. So, with that said,
[35:27] I'll turn it over to the council.
[35:29] >> Thank you very much. And we'll go ahead
[35:30] and open this up for public comment. Is
[35:32] there anyone in the chambers that would
[35:33] like to make a comment on this item?
[35:36] Seeing none, anybody on Zoom?
[35:39] >> There are no hands raised.
[35:40] >> And we'll bring this item back to begin
[35:42] the interviews. And the first person
[35:44] that we will interview will be Angela.
[35:48] Please step up to the podium.
[35:51] >> Angela is actually um attending via Oh,
[35:54] >> no. She's right there.
[35:57] Thank you, Angela, very much for being
[35:58] here. And city council, everyone has
[36:00] questions right in front of them from 1
[36:02] to 5. And it is labeled with your name
[36:04] on it. And we'll begin with question
[36:06] number one.
[36:11] » What is the purpose and the goal of
[36:14] measure H? What do you think it is?
[36:19] » I believe the purpose is to collect a
[36:21] tax from the city uh taxpayers. Uh it's
[36:25] about a half cent tax. It's a
[36:27] transaction and use tax. Uh it's voter
[36:31] approved. Um, and this the goal is to
[36:33] help provide funding to improve critical
[36:36] um, public safety services to the police
[36:41] and fire departments to utilize, you
[36:44] know, equipment and tools
[36:46] to help keep us safe.
[36:56] » Go ahead.
[36:59] >> Thank you. Um, question two. Should you
[37:02] be chosen, what do you see your role
[37:04] being on the committee?
[37:07] >> Uh, as a committee member, my role would
[37:09] be um
[37:12] uh help uh
[37:16] oversight of the cost containment and
[37:19] public reporting um based on the um
[37:25] budgets that are being presented to us
[37:27] from the departments.
[37:35] Thank you. Please tell us please tell us
[37:38] about yourself and what you feel best
[37:40] qualifies you to serve on the measure H
[37:42] citizens oversight committee.
[37:47] » I just completed three years terms as a
[37:51] measure H committee member in the city
[37:53] of series. I have lived here since 2010.
[37:57] Um, I've also served on the Centennial
[37:59] Committee hearing series. Um, I
[38:02] currently as a case manager for homeless
[38:05] individuals, uh, sometimes work
[38:08] alongside fire and police in the county.
[38:12] Um, and I was interested in being able
[38:16] to be on such a good committee to help
[38:18] oversee the budget in the city for fire
[38:22] and safety.
[38:27] Thank you, Angela, for being present
[38:28] this evening. Uh, question number four
[38:30] is, as an advisory committee responsible
[38:32] to make recommendations to the council,
[38:34] the final decision-making process is
[38:35] held by the council. Please describe any
[38:38] experience you have in an advisory
[38:40] committee and how you will carry out
[38:41] your duties.
[38:44] >> Um, uh, I have served on various home
[38:48] homeless oversight committees, uh, in
[38:51] the county. Um I have served through
[38:53] measure H here in the city of seriesir.
[38:56] Um I am a executive director of a
[38:59] nonprofit here in Santa Los County where
[39:01] we do annual budget and reviews.
[39:04] Um
[39:11] uh have experience in safeguarding uh
[39:14] intent for tax money's use.
[39:17] um
[39:18] and help identify any financial
[39:22] discrepancies
[39:24] um and address any community concerns or
[39:27] expenditures regarding the funds.
[39:31] » Thank you. Do you have any questions for
[39:34] us relating to the application to be a
[39:36] member of the Measure H oversight
[39:38] committee?
[39:41] >> You said related.
[39:43] >> Yes. Do you have any questions for us?
[39:45] >> I do have a question. Um, how can we
[39:47] incentivize the community to learn and
[39:49] participate in Measure H meetings?
[39:52] >> That's a great question. I think that
[39:55] would really fall on the city manager.
[39:58] >> Sir,
[39:59] >> yes. Thank you, good, mayor. Um, as a
[40:02] city, we are just now in the process of
[40:08] transitioning to a more formalized
[40:10] communication plan with the public to
[40:13] include social media, updating our
[40:16] website, and really engaging with the
[40:18] community in an effort to get them
[40:21] engaged with us. So this effort through
[40:25] social media, website update, word of
[40:28] mouth, and just community engagement is
[40:32] something that we will be focusing
[40:34] strongly on over the next month.
[40:37] >> Thank you. Thank you everyone for your
[40:39] time.
[40:39] >> Thank you very much.
[40:42] City clerk, you said John is in person
[40:44] or is he on Zoom? John, you're here.
[40:48] Please step up to the podium, sir.
[40:51] Evening council members. Thank you very
[40:53] much for coming. Council member Casey,
[40:55] go ahead, sir.
[40:58] >> Sure. What is the purpose and goal of
[41:01] measure H?
[41:03] >> Measure H was voted on and approved back
[41:06] in 2007
[41:08] uh with the taxes the sale the
[41:09] additional half percent sales tax to aid
[41:13] police, fire, and emergency services.
[41:18] » Thank you. Should you be chosen, what do
[41:20] you see your role see your role being on
[41:23] the committee?
[41:25] >> I would like to think that with my 35
[41:27] years of service at Mission Linen, I
[41:29] managed my own successful route that I
[41:32] understand profit and loss. I understand
[41:35] about return on investment. Being a
[41:37] member of that council, I would be in a
[41:40] collective with other people where we be
[41:42] passing ideas that would benefit the
[41:44] citizens of Sir.
[41:51] Thank you.
[41:52] Please tell us about yourself and what
[41:54] you feel best qualifies you to serve on
[41:56] the Measure H Citizens Oversight
[41:59] Committee.
[42:00] >> I'm uh I'm retired now. Uh I like to
[42:03] volunteer. I volunteer with the What
[42:06] Would Jesus Do Ministries. I serve at
[42:09] the shower shuttle there on Hatch Road
[42:11] at the New Vision um church uh every
[42:14] Thursday. I also serve and help out with
[42:17] the 9 to99 project. Um I just uh I have
[42:21] time that uh I would like to donate back
[42:23] to my community.
[42:32] » Thank you, John, for being here this
[42:33] evening. I appreciate that, sir. As an
[42:35] advisory committee responsible to make
[42:37] recommendations to the council, the
[42:39] final decision-making process is held by
[42:40] the council. Please describe any
[42:42] experience you have in an advisory
[42:44] committee and how you would carry out
[42:45] your duties.
[42:47] >> Well, as the member of the of the
[42:50] council, what we would do is we would
[42:52] have ideas and pass them around and
[42:54] propose those to you. Also, we would
[42:57] have to discuss what the advantage or
[42:59] disadvantage would be of certain money
[43:01] spent that the money was spent u
[43:04] appropriately and not squandered.
[43:10] Do you have any questions for us
[43:12] relating the application to be a member
[43:13] of the Measure H, Citizens Oversight
[43:15] Committee?
[43:16] >> No sir, I don't.
[43:17] >> Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate
[43:19] your time.
[43:25] » Okay. I bring this item back to the
[43:27] council. Council members, any comments
[43:29] and or questions and or a motion?
[43:35] No comments.
[43:37] Okay. Councilwoman,
[43:38] >> thank you, Mayor. Well, first off, uh I
[43:41] just want to thank um Angela and John
[43:45] for being present here tonight. I know
[43:46] that, you know, sometimes it can be a
[43:49] little intimidating coming up in front
[43:50] of the public to hold these interviews.
[43:52] Um but I think it's important for the
[43:54] public to hear. Um, based on the
[43:57] interview tonight and reviewing the
[43:59] application,
[44:01] I would like to make a motion to um
[44:05] appoint John Fad, I'm sorry if I said
[44:09] the last name wrong, to the Measure H,
[44:10] Citizens Oversight Committee.
[44:15] >> I'll second that.
[44:18] Get a roll call, please.
[44:20] >> Council member Casey,
[44:23] >> yes. Council member Vieira,
[44:27] » no.
[44:28] >> Council member Otto,
[44:30] >> yes.
[44:31] >> Vice Mayor Martinez,
[44:32] >> hi.
[44:33] >> Mayor Lopez,
[44:34] >> no.
[44:35] >> Motion carries 32.
[44:38] >> Congratulations, John. You are now
[44:39] appointed to the men's race committee.
[44:47] We will now move into consent calendars.
[44:51] All matters listed on the consent
[44:52] calendar are considered routine in
[44:53] nature and will be enacted by a single
[44:55] motion unless otherwise requested by an
[44:57] individual council member and public for
[44:59] special consideration. Other otherwise
[45:01] the recommendation of staff will be
[45:03] acted and excuse me accepted. Did I skip
[45:05] something? Did I skip something?
[45:09] I'm sorry. Let me go ahead and drink my
[45:11] energy drink. I think I'm a little
[45:12] tired.
[45:16] That [clears throat] was a windful.
[45:17] Okay. Council design designating of the
[45:19] voting delegates and alternate delegates
[45:20] to represent the city of series at the
[45:22] League of California Cities for 2026
[45:24] annual conference. City clerk.
[45:27] >> Thank you again, Council and Mayor. The
[45:29] League of California Cities has their
[45:31] annual conference this year, September
[45:33] 23rd through the 25th. We have two
[45:36] council members that will be attending
[45:38] the conference. The general assembly
[45:40] meeting is a component to the annual
[45:43] conference. Uh this is where members
[45:45] consider to take action to establish
[45:47] policies with the league. The general
[45:49] assembly meeting is scheduled for Friday
[45:51] the 25th of September. It's the last day
[45:53] of the conference. In order to vote at
[45:56] the general assembly meeting, the city
[45:58] council must designate a primary voting
[46:00] delegate delegate. Uh council may
[46:02] appoint up to two alternate voting
[46:04] delegates. And in order to be a voting
[46:07] delegate, uh the they must be registered
[46:09] to for the conference and they must be
[46:12] present at the general assembly meeting
[46:14] in order to cast their vote. Uh so with
[46:17] that said, I will turn that over to the
[46:18] council for discussion.
[46:21] >> City council, any comments? Could you
[46:23] please tell the public who exactly is
[46:24] the two council members who are going?
[46:26] >> Yeah, so uh Mayor Lopez and Vice Mayor
[46:29] Martinez will be attending the
[46:30] conference at this time. Okay. Are any
[46:32] other council members going to be
[46:33] attending the conference at the moment?
[46:36] I'm not sure yet um if I'm going to be
[46:38] able to attend, but if I do, it's going
[46:40] to be for my committee that I have
[46:41] scheduled.
[46:43] >> Any other council members have any
[46:44] comments?
[46:45] >> Um no, I am available if you do need
[46:48] another alternative though. Alternate.
[46:50] Sorry.
[46:50] >> Okay, sounds good, Mr. Casey. Okay, now
[46:53] you need consensus, correct? So,
[46:56] >> yes,
[46:56] >> me and Vice Mayor will be attending the
[46:58] conference. I I can be the main
[46:59] delegate.
[47:00] >> Okay, you'll want to open up to public
[47:02] comment, too.
[47:02] >> Okay, sounds good. We'll go ahead and
[47:03] open this up to the public or any
[47:04] members of the public would like to make
[47:06] a comment on this item.
[47:08] Seeing none, bring this item back or
[47:13] just consensus. You don't need a motion.
[47:14] Correct.
[47:15] >> Correct. Consensus is fine.
[47:17] >> Okay, sounds good. Um, then it will be
[47:19] me and Vice Mayor and then I know that
[47:22] Councilwoman Serino will probably not
[47:24] likely be there, but we can also have
[47:26] you as a third just in case you change
[47:27] your mind as a second alternate just in
[47:30] case. That's fine. So, we'll need one
[47:33] primary and up to two uh alternates. So,
[47:36] Mayor Lopez will be primary and Vice
[47:38] Mayor and Council Member Oro as
[47:41] alternates.
[47:42] >> Correct. Consensus.
[47:47] Okay. Thank you very much.
[47:51] Now, we can move on to consent calendar.
[47:55] All matters listed on the consent
[47:56] calendar considered routine in nature
[47:57] and will be enacted by a single motion
[47:59] unless otherwise requested by an
[48:00] individual council member or public for
[48:02] special consideration. Otherwise, the
[48:04] recommendation of staff will be acted
[48:06] upon by a roll call vote. Is there
[48:08] anybody in the council that would like
[48:09] to pull a consent item? I am pulling
[48:11] item number nine.
[48:14] And I see councilwoman.
[48:19] Um, mayor, I'd like to pull item number
[48:21] four and
[48:27] » number. Yeah, you pulled number nine.
[48:28] Thank you,
[48:29] >> Councilwoman Beer.
[48:32] Nine. Okay. Anybody else?
[48:34] I take this out to the audience. And the
[48:36] members of the audience would like to
[48:37] pull an item on the consent calendar.
[48:43] Hello. This is Galan Guzman, City of
[48:46] Series. I'd like to pull number four. Uh
[48:48] number six, seven and nine.
[48:51] >> Six and seven, sir.
[48:54] Okay, we already pulled nine, sir, but
[48:57] thank you. Bring this item back to the
[48:59] council for a motion.
[49:00] >> Make a motion to approve items 1 through
[49:02] 3, 5, and 8 of the consent calendar.
[49:05] >> Second that.
[49:06] >> A roll call, please.
[49:08] >> Council member Casey,
[49:10] >> yes.
[49:10] >> Council member Vieira,
[49:12] >> yes.
[49:13] >> Council member Otto,
[49:14] >> yes.
[49:15] >> Vice Mayor Martinez,
[49:16] >> hi. Mayor Lopez.
[49:18] >> Yes.
[49:18] >> Motion carries 50.
[49:20] >> Okay. We'll go ahead and go to item
[49:22] number four, which was council member.
[49:25] >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh, my first question
[49:27] was, and I did email city staff earlier,
[49:30] so I apologize that it was probably a
[49:31] late question, but what is the valley
[49:34] water contribution payment for?
[49:38] >> Thank you, Council Member Terror. And we
[49:40] did receive your email this afternoon. I
[49:43] believe the public works superintendent
[49:45] is prepared to answer that question.
[49:48] >> Thank you for your question, council
[49:49] member. Um, Valley Water Collaborative
[49:52] is um an agency, a multi-jurisdictional
[49:55] agency that the city of Sir is part of.
[49:58] um the city of Siri along with uh
[50:01] agriculture, poultry, wastewater uh all
[50:05] these different agencies have
[50:07] contributed to the nitrate that's in the
[50:08] ground based on all the years of of
[50:11] running the way that you know they run.
[50:13] So all these agencies have contributed
[50:15] to this. The state required um every
[50:18] agency to either create their own path
[50:22] for mitigating these nitrate issues um
[50:26] or the the wells that have been affected
[50:30] by them um on their own and submit a
[50:34] whole process and a whole um get that
[50:36] approved by them. Or you could join in
[50:38] with a larger agency. Um us along with a
[50:42] lot of other um local cities including
[50:44] uh Modesto and Salida um went with path
[50:48] B which was joining an agency. We joined
[50:51] Valley Water Collaborative. Um it's our
[50:53] annual cont contribution. We're in the
[50:56] Turlock subbasin. So sometime there was
[50:58] a little bit of confusion when that came
[51:00] out because it said Turlock on it. Um
[51:02] there's two water basins. There's the
[51:04] Modesa subbasin and the Turlock
[51:06] subbasin. Um and we are part of the
[51:08] Turlock subbasin. So that's what some of
[51:10] the confusion comes from there. Um but
[51:12] any other questions you have with that?
[51:14] That's just our annual contribution to
[51:16] keeping the for our portion of the
[51:19] funding requirement.
[51:21] >> Thank you Josh for that explanation. Uh
[51:24] my second question is regarding the
[51:26] bright view um payment that was made.
[51:30] It's it's always interesting in
[51:31] government because you know payments are
[51:33] made sometimes to co contracts that
[51:36] maybe work hasn't actually been done. So
[51:40] uh my question is for a bright view
[51:42] payment for the month of May is was
[51:44] there somebody from the city that
[51:46] actually verified the work? Um the
[51:48] reason why I say that is because in my
[51:52] district the city rightaways haven't
[51:54] been maintained. Uh city manager is
[51:56] aware of this. I've been bringing it up
[51:57] for over well actually about a year now.
[52:00] Um I noticed that right now the city
[52:04] rightaways at least let's say for June
[52:06] they did not complete the work at all. I
[52:08] know SRNA hasn't been maintained like it
[52:10] was supposed to. Um so my question is uh
[52:15] who's verifying the work before these
[52:17] payments are made?
[52:20] >> Thank you council member.
[52:22] I understand the concern and staff um
[52:26] shares the disappointment with the
[52:30] services that um were provided as a part
[52:32] of that contract.
[52:34] [clears throat and cough]
[52:35] As you pointed out, this invoice was for
[52:37] the month of May. And I appreciate you
[52:40] asking the question by email because it
[52:42] caused me to go back and look at the
[52:44] agreement that was in place. The
[52:46] agreement is now terminated and it was
[52:48] not performance-based. It was strictly
[52:50] budget- based. So, as a result of budget
[52:52] reductions, we are no longer in uh a
[52:55] maintenance agreement with Bright View.
[52:58] But when we were in that maintenance
[53:00] agreement in May, there are provisions
[53:02] within that agreement that would allow
[53:04] us to withhold payments. But there are
[53:07] specific things that would have needed
[53:09] to have been done in May which were not
[53:11] done. things like documenting the actual
[53:14] service that was not performed,
[53:18] conducting routine and consistent spot
[53:21] checks and documenting those spot
[53:23] checks. So by you bringing up this
[53:24] question, it pointed out a weakness or a
[53:27] deficiency in the process. So moving
[53:29] forward, we are going to implement with
[53:32] all of our agreements that have this
[53:33] type of language that allows for
[53:35] withholding payments for non-service or
[53:37] unsatisfactory service the inspections
[53:41] that will be necessary, the
[53:42] documentations that will be necessary.
[53:44] It talks about photographs, it talks
[53:46] about um formalized written
[53:50] communication with the other party from
[53:53] the city. So those things will be put
[53:56] into place in the future. So, while I
[53:59] would very much agree that it would um
[54:02] it would be nice not to pay May and not
[54:04] to pay June, I can tell you that the
[54:06] steps were not taken that would allow me
[54:08] to be comfortable with withholding those
[54:10] payments at this time, even though I
[54:12] agree all of the services were not
[54:15] performed. I will be working with the
[54:17] city attorney specifically for the month
[54:19] of June to see if there's anything that
[54:21] we have done as a staff during that
[54:23] month that would allow us to withhold
[54:25] payment for June. But for May, I don't
[54:27] believe that's possible.
[54:30] >> I think um you know, the the work speaks
[54:33] for itself. The the lack of maintenance
[54:37] and the weeds are you know growing tall.
[54:39] You can tell those weren't you know they
[54:42] didn't grow in one month or a couple
[54:43] weeks. So I think that's something that
[54:44] we should evaluate as well. Thank you.
[54:49] >> We'll go ahead and open this up to the
[54:50] public. Any members of the public would
[54:51] like to comment on item number four?
[54:53] Please step up to the podium.
[54:57] Hello, City of Series Galang Guzman.
[55:00] Well, Galang Guzman and I live in City
[55:02] of Series. All right. So, the first
[55:04] question is I see that a lot there's a
[55:07] lot of like uh telephone service
[55:10] providers. Uh could you provide some
[55:12] clarification on why there is AT&T and
[55:15] then also like Verizon and then
[55:17] T-Mobile?
[55:21] That's one. Secondly, uh there's how
[55:24] much is how much does the grant writer
[55:27] get paid? Because there's a fee here for
[55:29] $7,000 specifically for Prop 64, which I
[55:32] think um it's for law enforcement. And
[55:35] then secondly, there's like another fee
[55:38] uh I mean another payment
[55:41] that was given to her. I'm like I don't
[55:45] know. This one was pretty long, so bear
[55:46] with me.
[55:51] Um I don't know. you could go back in
[55:52] and and look for it, but there's like uh
[55:55] she's paid like three times. So, I just
[55:57] have a question on like how she gets
[55:58] paid and then if it's per like contract
[56:01] or if it's per like grant that she
[56:03] writes kind of thing. Uh thirdly,
[56:07] uh the janitorial supplies. So, I've
[56:09] been keeping track mentally of like uh
[56:12] the uh how much is paid to for
[56:14] janitorial supplies. Um, so usually it's
[56:18] like 1,000 and if I'm not mistaken, this
[56:22] uh community the the series community
[56:25] center there's a contract in place uh
[56:28] for like 75,000 uh which uh I think in
[56:32] the contract it said that the um the
[56:35] company was supposed to supply uh their
[56:39] own like stuff. So I just have a
[56:41] question about that and what what does
[56:43] the jamtorial supplies actually uh
[56:45] entail and if from like what I think
[56:48] that there's a lack of transparency in
[56:49] like the voucher list uh because it's
[56:52] kind of hard to tell what uh department
[56:55] like cost center is coming from you know
[56:57] it's not really transparent to to say
[57:00] like oh like Travis Hudson's uh uniform
[57:02] allowance of like 7 or whatever it's
[57:05] allowed it's coming from like the police
[57:08] department budget you know what I mean?
[57:10] So, uh I would just like a little bit
[57:12] more of transparency in that regards
[57:14] too. I know other uh other cities they actually have it a
[57:21] little bit more organized. So, I mean
[57:23] this is a lot and it could it's hard to
[57:25] process. Um I know usually the agenda
[57:29] packet itself is like hundreds of pages
[57:32] and to the average person that takes a
[57:34] lot of mental tax. Um, so also look into
[57:38] that about condensing or providing like
[57:40] a table of contents where there's a
[57:42] hyperlink for each each thing cuz if you
[57:45] spend a few quite some time then it kind
[57:48] of like zones out and it brings you to
[57:50] the beginning and then you lose your
[57:51] place. So uh oh yeah also the PG&E uh it
[57:56] says like there's multiple addresses.
[57:58] There's one for Fort Street service and
[58:00] then Fowler, but then at the very bottom
[58:03] on page five of the voucher list,
[58:06] there's like a services for various
[58:08] locations and it's uh total amount is
[58:11] 1,962.
[58:13] What are those various locations? Like
[58:15] what other what specific addresses are
[58:17] these? Um
[58:20] uh let's see.
[58:22] So Verizon it was like 2,2500
[58:25] and then you have AT&T for like 438.
[58:28] Then there's another T-Mobile one. Um
[58:31] also how many oh yeah this one's
[58:34] important. So the the settlement it's
[58:37] listed here as 341 and I read the
[58:39] minutes um which was like 325,000. So I
[58:43] just would like some clarification on
[58:44] that. And then uh I did ask for like
[58:46] some public worker public I did submit a
[58:49] public records request and the request
[58:51] was a little bit incomplete or not to my
[58:53] satisfaction.
[58:55] Um it was very Yeah. So if if a
[58:59] department is sued I I understand that
[59:01] the insurance will you know give the
[59:03] money or whatever. Um so but in the
[59:05] future like does that money come from
[59:08] like uh that budget from that
[59:10] department? Because uh yeah it's Yeah.
[59:17] And then for like the uniform allowance
[59:19] of 646 for Travis Hudson. Uh this is the
[59:22] first time that I see this um actually
[59:24] listed but not listed for every specific
[59:28] police officer. So why why was this
[59:32] different? Um
[59:35] next. Oh yeah, Alpine Protective
[59:37] Solutions. I thought we had not I
[59:40] thought that we were no longer being
[59:42] provided services by this company but
[59:44] here it's listed uh as um 4774
[59:47] whereas like I think it was like
[59:49] sometime last year uh I think it was
[59:51] like removed from the agenda so yeah
[59:54] what happened um the AT&T you know it's a lot it's like
[59:59] >> 2069
[1:00:02] your time is up I appreciate your time
[1:00:04] we'll try to get that information over
[1:00:05] to you sir thank
[1:00:09] Anybody else have a comment on item
[1:00:11] number four?
[1:00:16] Anybody with their hands raised?
[1:00:18] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom.
[1:00:20] >> Bring this item back for a motion.
[1:00:21] >> Make a motion to approve item four, the
[1:00:23] consent calendar.
[1:00:25] >> Second.
[1:00:25] >> Roll call, please.
[1:00:27] >> Council member Casey,
[1:00:28] >> no.
[1:00:29] >> Council member Vieiraa,
[1:00:31] >> yes.
[1:00:32] >> Vice Council member Otto,
[1:00:34] >> yes. Vice Mayor Martinez.
[1:00:36] >> I,
[1:00:37] >> Mayor Lopez,
[1:00:38] >> yes.
[1:00:38] >> Motion carries 41.
[1:00:41] >> Item number six.
[1:00:44] >> Believe that was you, Guzman.
[1:00:53] So interesting. Will I get a like
[1:00:55] response to my questions?
[1:00:59] Because it does mean no service to come
[1:01:00] up here and talk to and preach to the
[1:01:02] choir if you I'm not going to get any
[1:01:03] answers. Okay, for number six, um, so
[1:01:07] yeah, there was just a typo. It was just
[1:01:09] more more so like a typo. And then why
[1:01:11] are we selling land? Um, and not
[1:01:14] maintaining it. I mean, what's the
[1:01:16] purpose of uh of number six? And then uh
[1:01:20] I hear it's exempt. And let's see. Let's
[1:01:24] go back to number six.
[1:01:32] So the typo is on
[1:01:41] Let's see.
[1:01:43] Uh oh. It would great if it would be
[1:01:45] great if these had page numbers, you
[1:01:47] know. Um,
[1:02:15] don't lost it. Oh,
[1:02:21] actually, no. The title was number nine.
[1:02:23] Um,
[1:02:29] yeah. So, I I guess I could just ask for
[1:02:31] like a public records request of like
[1:02:33] all the uh city property and then how
[1:02:35] much has been sold over the years and
[1:02:36] what for what price. So, never mind if I
[1:02:40] digress. Thanks.
[1:02:41] >> No problem. Anyone else would like to
[1:02:43] make a comment on item number six?
[1:02:48] Bring this item back for a motion.
[1:02:51] >> Make a motion to approve item number six
[1:02:52] of the consent calendar.
[1:02:55] >> I'll second.
[1:02:57] >> Roll call, please.
[1:02:58] >> Council member Casey,
[1:03:01] >> yes.
[1:03:01] >> Council member Vieiraa,
[1:03:03] >> yes.
[1:03:03] >> Council member Otero,
[1:03:05] >> yes.
[1:03:05] >> Vice Mayor Martinez, I.
[1:03:07] >> Mayor Lopez,
[1:03:08] >> yes.
[1:03:09] >> Motion carries 5-0. Item
[1:03:11] >> number seven, Mr. Guzman, this was yours
[1:03:13] as well, I believe.
[1:03:20] Uh the typos is on the notice of public
[1:03:24] uh public hearing, excuse me. Um it's
[1:03:27] mid page right where the second uh pole
[1:03:30] punch is. It says u the engineers report
[1:03:34] blah blah blah. Um landscape and
[1:03:37] lightning act of 1972. I think it should
[1:03:41] read 87 if I'm not mistaken. And then
[1:03:44] secondly, um, the company that was
[1:03:47] contracted to do this assessment and
[1:03:50] >> excuse me, I'm sorry for my
[1:03:52] interruption. You're on item number
[1:03:54] seven, correct, sir? Cuz that's the one
[1:03:55] that you had pulled.
[1:03:58] >> Oh. Uh, yeah, my bad. Okay, I'll sit
[1:04:01] down for the next one.
[1:04:02] >> Okay, no worries. Anyone else would like
[1:04:04] to make a comment on item number seven?
[1:04:10] He was referring to item number nine.
[1:04:12] Yeah, he pulled seven.
[1:04:14] Anybody else? Any back for council for a
[1:04:17] motion for number seven?
[1:04:19] >> Make a motion to approve item number
[1:04:21] seven of the consent calendar.
[1:04:22] >> Second.
[1:04:23] >> And a roll call, please.
[1:04:25] >> Council member Casey,
[1:04:26] >> no.
[1:04:27] >> Council member Vieiraa,
[1:04:28] >> yes.
[1:04:28] >> Council member Otto,
[1:04:30] >> yes.
[1:04:30] >> Vice Mayor Martinez,
[1:04:31] >> I.
[1:04:32] >> Mayor Lopez,
[1:04:33] >> yes.
[1:04:33] >> Motion carries 41.
[1:04:35] >> So item number nine, [clears throat]
[1:04:38] Mr. Bill Trans, could you please um do
[1:04:42] the report on this item and then I'll
[1:04:43] ask my questions if that's okay.
[1:04:46] [clears throat]
[1:04:46] >> Thank you, mayor, members of the
[1:04:48] council. Uh so this is uh the uh
[1:04:53] resolution to declare
[1:04:56] um our intention to levy assessments uh
[1:05:00] per the 1987 uh landscape and lighting
[1:05:04] district act. Um so this uh
[1:05:10] we this will also set the public hearing
[1:05:12] for August 10th uh which will actually
[1:05:16] levy the tax. Um and so really this goes
[1:05:21] through it presents the report um on you
[1:05:24] know for instance we the the total
[1:05:27] budget is $659,397
[1:05:31] and change. Um there are $527,597
[1:05:37] in revenue that is projected for this uh
[1:05:40] is about a 31
[1:05:43] uh% increase in the assessment that will
[1:05:46] go um and those those are all listed in
[1:05:49] the report which parcels and how much
[1:05:51] they um that they are getting. Um and so
[1:05:57] there is a general fund supplement of
[1:06:00] $131,799.
[1:06:03] However, that supplement was not
[1:06:04] approved in the budget. So that will be
[1:06:08] something that will um will not be
[1:06:11] fulfilled whether that's you know we
[1:06:13] don't provide as many services for it um
[1:06:16] for the landscape and lighting district
[1:06:18] or you know however we kind of maneuver
[1:06:20] around trying to uh make all the
[1:06:24] services happen that that we can with
[1:06:26] the funding that we are going to
[1:06:28] receive. In general, there's about
[1:06:30] $140,000
[1:06:32] in lighting um that is that is paid for
[1:06:35] lights in all the landscape and lighting
[1:06:37] districts. Um there's about $250,000
[1:06:41] in total staff. And then there's about
[1:06:43] $90,000 in contracts. Um and now, mind
[1:06:48] you, this is just for the LLDS. Um this
[1:06:51] does not include the CFDs uh that that
[1:06:53] will come to you at a separate council
[1:06:56] meeting. Um, and so
[1:06:59] if if we have questions regarding where
[1:07:01] services are provided or we want to dig
[1:07:03] a little deeper in the uh fiscal aspect
[1:07:06] of it, uh, both Vanessa, the the finance
[1:07:10] director, and the public works
[1:07:12] superintendent, we've all talked about
[1:07:14] this. Um, so we're happy to answer any
[1:07:17] questions that you guys might have uh,
[1:07:19] with regards to the LLDS.
[1:07:22] >> Thank you very much, Mr. Beltran. I had
[1:07:23] a concerned citizen reach out to me and
[1:07:25] asked several questions and I've emailed
[1:07:27] those questions to you and the city
[1:07:28] manager. You already answered the first
[1:07:30] question. The first question was how
[1:07:31] much revenue was collected for this
[1:07:34] fiscal year and you've already answered
[1:07:35] that question. And the second question,
[1:07:37] what specific services and areas are
[1:07:39] funded by those assessment dollars? I
[1:07:42] know you you kind of uh responded to
[1:07:44] that, but if you can clarify, please.
[1:07:46] >> So, uh there is a map. The map is not
[1:07:49] 100% clear. It's a color-coded map in
[1:07:52] the actual report just with the PDFing
[1:07:55] of it and those types of things. We do
[1:07:57] have a more clear map um that that we
[1:07:59] can send out. That's not a problem. Um I
[1:08:03] can I can let Josh uh Casus go over any
[1:08:06] specific geographic areas, but generally
[1:08:09] speaking um there are it's taking care
[1:08:12] of landscape in certain districts um
[1:08:15] which are all listed in the report. Um
[1:08:18] and it is taking care of the lighting
[1:08:20] also within those districts uh that are listed in the report. Um and
[1:08:25] Josh if you can give any details on the
[1:08:28] geographic areas would be great.
[1:08:31] >> Thank you Mike. Um [clears throat] so I
[1:08:34] do have uh as part of our uh as part of
[1:08:36] our work for creating a new request for
[1:08:39] bid um from the from a new a new
[1:08:43] landscaping contract.
[1:08:45] Um, I have our current rideways, uh,
[1:08:49] streets, all the medians, everything
[1:08:50] that we have listed. Um, and then going
[1:08:53] over the areas with, uh, Michael, uh,
[1:08:56] from the C, the CFDs and the LD, but
[1:08:58] specifically right now, speaking about
[1:08:59] the LDS, uh, we're seeing which areas
[1:09:02] from the current contract are already
[1:09:04] covered in, um, in the previous contract
[1:09:07] and then which areas we may have to
[1:09:09] include in the new contract. So although
[1:09:12] there may be some time, you know, in the
[1:09:14] time that we're getting this contract
[1:09:15] out that it's not being serviced by a
[1:09:18] contractor, uh the result that we have
[1:09:20] like like this uh city manager said,
[1:09:22] it's fallen on staff. So at the moment,
[1:09:25] we're trying to resolve these issues
[1:09:27] when they come up and when they're
[1:09:28] reported to us, uh we're having staff go
[1:09:30] out just because we have not had the the
[1:09:35] time to plan out the the exact um
[1:09:38] staffing allocation for for these areas.
[1:09:40] But that is something that we're we're
[1:09:42] looking at right now.
[1:09:44] >> Thank you very much Josh. So
[1:09:46] [clears throat] one of the questions
[1:09:47] that was asked of me was and I believe
[1:09:49] that you sort of answered the question.
[1:09:51] So Bright View were they responsible for
[1:09:53] any of these areas?
[1:09:58] Uh, I believe some from the from the report some of those areas are
[1:10:03] on our are listed because I know um some
[1:10:06] of the I think Eastgate was on there,
[1:10:08] some of the Eastgate streets and some of
[1:10:09] the the medians were on there, they are
[1:10:11] on the the current um list, even if they
[1:10:14] were not being serviced to the
[1:10:16] satisfaction of, you know, us. Um,
[1:10:20] Briiew was providing us with a weekly
[1:10:22] report of the areas that they hit and we
[1:10:24] would send somebody behind them and
[1:10:25] respond, hey, this is not done, this is
[1:10:27] not done. Um, so we've we've categorized
[1:10:30] all that, but um, some of those areas
[1:10:32] are in the previous contract and some
[1:10:34] will have to be added to a new contract.
[1:10:36] So our goal is to make sure that you
[1:10:38] know with with in conjunction with
[1:10:40] finance with um engineering to make sure
[1:10:43] that all the money that is um allotted
[1:10:46] for landscaping is being used for
[1:10:48] landscaping. All the money that's
[1:10:49] allotted for lighting is being used for
[1:10:51] lighting. Um we want to make sure that
[1:10:53] um and even if there's specific money,
[1:10:55] which there is specific money uh
[1:10:58] allotted to staffing versus allotted to
[1:11:01] contractors. So, we're trying to get all
[1:11:03] that separated right now and make sure
[1:11:05] that we um the new contract that we put
[1:11:07] forward is clear in those in those uh
[1:11:09] sense.
[1:11:10] >> Thank you, Josh. I know that the the
[1:11:12] question was also answered about the
[1:11:13] funding sources. You explained that.
[1:11:15] Now, this is one particular question
[1:11:16] that I think is is very warranted. How
[1:11:19] does the city ensure the homeowners who
[1:11:20] pay this assessment receive the direct
[1:11:22] benefit of those funds?
[1:11:26] So the the the citizens so we have a
[1:11:29] separate fund for for one and we've had
[1:11:31] it for a few years um that this money
[1:11:34] goes into and that's where this money
[1:11:37] comes out of. Um so we we do want to
[1:11:40] make sure that we are um acting on the
[1:11:43] behalf of citizens per the report. Um
[1:11:46] you know and that that we are servicing
[1:11:49] those areas with those specific funds.
[1:11:52] Um they shouldn't be intertwined. Um, if
[1:11:55] there's a general fund supplement that can be put in there also, but we do
[1:12:00] keep this money in a separate fund so
[1:12:02] that we know that we are spending money
[1:12:04] per the landscape and lighting district
[1:12:06] act within those district areas.
[1:12:08] >> Thank you very much. Although most of
[1:12:10] these questions, the answers were in the
[1:12:12] agenda, I believe that it's very
[1:12:15] important for the public to hear it from
[1:12:17] your staff and your team of what you
[1:12:19] guys are trying to do to make sure that
[1:12:20] these citizens are getting exactly what
[1:12:22] they're paying for. These are taxpayers
[1:12:24] and I believe that you're going to
[1:12:26] figure out a way and I do appreciate
[1:12:27] that. Those are all my questions for
[1:12:29] now. I believe I have Councilwoman Otto
[1:12:31] has pressed her button.
[1:12:38] » Go ahead.
[1:12:40] >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, for engineer, I
[1:12:42] just want to get clarification. You
[1:12:44] mentioned there will be an increase from
[1:12:47] last year.
[1:12:50] >> Yes, that is correct. So when we do the
[1:12:53] uh LLD assessments, uh they are
[1:12:55] increased by the inflation rate um every
[1:12:58] year. Um
[1:13:02] council can forego that increase uh if
[1:13:05] that is if that is the council's desire.
[1:13:08] Um it's definitely not recommended
[1:13:10] simply because it we need to keep pace
[1:13:13] with contracts um you know increases on
[1:13:17] those contracts, increases in staff
[1:13:19] wages, increases in electricity. Um so
[1:13:22] but it is something that is within the
[1:13:25] act and we can increase by up to 5%. So
[1:13:28] if inflation was actually at 6 or 7% we
[1:13:31] still can only increase by 5%. Um, and
[1:13:34] in this case, I believe it was about
[1:13:35] 3.121%
[1:13:38] this year.
[1:13:40] >> Thank you. Um, so I do understand the
[1:13:43] need to, you know, levy and collect the
[1:13:46] assessments. Um, it's something that's
[1:13:48] been happening for years, but with the collection of the levies, we have to
[1:13:54] ensure that our city is maintained
[1:13:55] effectively and uh or efficiently. And
[1:13:58] currently, I don't feel that that has
[1:14:01] taken place. Um, I've had a lot of
[1:14:03] concerns about, you know, the landscape
[1:14:05] in general. Um, with current budget
[1:14:08] concerns, I know, you know, the city's
[1:14:10] looking to make sure that we keep up,
[1:14:12] like you said, with the costs and all of
[1:14:14] that, but for me, I think we need to
[1:14:18] evaluate um the workload within the
[1:14:22] department right now and uh figure out,
[1:14:26] you know, accountability, oversight of
[1:14:28] the tasks that are being done um before
[1:14:30] we put it back on the residents to um to
[1:14:34] increase, you know, the the fees on this
[1:14:36] or the levies. Um I know last year the
[1:14:39] contract for the landscape there was a
[1:14:42] missing page. Things like that can't
[1:14:44] happen especially when we're using
[1:14:46] taxpayer dollars. So um with this I
[1:14:49] can't support um an increase in this.
[1:14:53] >> Thank you very much Councilwoman Vieier.
[1:15:00] » Thank you. And I know I emailed you a
[1:15:01] couple questions. I appreciate you
[1:15:02] getting back to me on those questions.
[1:15:04] Um, I guess one of the main concerns I
[1:15:07] had, which you kind of addressed, was it
[1:15:10] sounds like they're separate accounts,
[1:15:11] so money from one district isn't being
[1:15:13] used in a different district. And I
[1:15:15] think that's one of the concerns we had.
[1:15:17] And then the other concern was
[1:15:21] during the budget discussions, it was
[1:15:23] discussed that the medians people may
[1:15:24] not just get them cut while or the
[1:15:26] medians wouldn't be done. Well, our
[1:15:28] district has there's three separate
[1:15:29] funds specifically that I'm I contribute
[1:15:32] to. And so my neighbors are asking me,
[1:15:36] well, why am I contributing to something
[1:15:37] that I'm not receiving? And so that was
[1:15:39] my concern. Um, and then also, what are
[1:15:42] our long-term plan when it comes to
[1:15:45] addressing this since we don't have it
[1:15:47] in the general fund? we don't have money
[1:15:48] to make up the differences and the
[1:15:51] market is softening as you know that
[1:15:52] we're looking at a decline in sales tax
[1:15:55] I guess is the best way of putting that.
[1:15:57] Um and then have we considered going to
[1:15:59] solar or something that could reduce our
[1:16:01] long-term electrical uses especially in
[1:16:04] our parks and our median areas. Um and I
[1:16:07] will leave it at that for now. Um I know
[1:16:10] I emailed you a few more questions I
[1:16:12] think that you guys were going to get
[1:16:13] back to me on.
[1:16:14] >> So thank you for your questions. Um to
[1:16:18] address the the solar uh issue, um we
[1:16:22] have looked at uh citywide solar. Um it
[1:16:25] is a rather large investment uh to go
[1:16:29] with any type of citywide solar that
[1:16:31] would help reduce our costs at this
[1:16:34] point. Um and so right now that is we we
[1:16:38] have not brought that forward. Um I I
[1:16:41] believe council did hear presentations
[1:16:43] on it uh last year. Uh but at this point
[1:16:47] in time I don't know I that's probably
[1:16:50] not a feasible option for us to to do
[1:16:53] that. One clarification I do want to
[1:16:54] make is that the landscape and lighting
[1:16:57] districts in the report it breaks out
[1:16:59] how the money is is broken down into the
[1:17:02] different districts. All the money is in
[1:17:04] I believe fund 292 if I'm not mistaken.
[1:17:07] Um, and I can let Vanessa, you know,
[1:17:11] jump in there on on how it's allocated
[1:17:13] throughout uh, and goes to each
[1:17:16] district. Um, but that is something that
[1:17:18] has to be tracked because
[1:17:21] the the money that is given by a
[1:17:23] district has to be used within that
[1:17:26] district. And so that is something that,
[1:17:28] um, that I can let Vanessa and Josh on
[1:17:31] their allocation for contracts and stuff
[1:17:34] uh, elaborate a little bit on that.
[1:17:38] Okay. And then um
[1:17:41] what is our long-term
[1:17:44] strategy? I guess because right now it
[1:17:46] sounds like it's I I right now I guess
[1:17:47] the confusion is up until the RFP is
[1:17:49] done, received, and the contract
[1:17:51] presented to council. What is our goal
[1:17:54] or what is our plan in place until that
[1:17:56] process is completed, which I'm
[1:17:58] estimating is probably going to be four
[1:18:00] to 6 months. What are we doing in the
[1:18:02] term? because again we're asking the
[1:18:03] taxpayers to pay but it sounds like
[1:18:06] there's nothing in place as of today. So
[1:18:08] I want to make sure we have something
[1:18:10] that we can tell especially the ones
[1:18:12] here on the crowd and on Zoom or the
[1:18:14] ones that have emailed and text and
[1:18:16] called me I can say this is what our
[1:18:18] plan is. Um especially long term
[1:18:20] especially if we're asking for to try to
[1:18:23] I know right now we're paying out more
[1:18:25] than we're receiving. So I do understand
[1:18:27] that we still we don't have the general
[1:18:29] fund to absorb the differences and so I
[1:18:31] just want to see what our plan is in
[1:18:33] place.
[1:18:34] >> Uh so thank you for your question. Um
[1:18:37] and Mr. City Manager if if you could
[1:18:39] correct me are is the meeting tomorrow
[1:18:42] also about how we're going to provide
[1:18:44] services in the landscape and lighting
[1:18:46] districts.
[1:18:48] It is it is the streets department, the
[1:18:52] facilities department, and the parks
[1:18:54] department all coming together to talk
[1:18:56] about parks, ride ofways, landscape and
[1:19:00] lighting districts, community facilities
[1:19:02] districts, all of that tomorrow at 8 in
[1:19:04] the morning. Yes. So, the long-term
[1:19:08] plan, uh, Council Member Vieiraa, is to
[1:19:10] engage with a third-party contractor for
[1:19:13] landscaping services. That's the
[1:19:15] long-term plan. The short-term plan
[1:19:17] until we get that contract with the
[1:19:19] third party is that staff will have be
[1:19:22] responsible for maintaining these areas
[1:19:24] until that uh third party contract is um
[1:19:28] executed
[1:19:32] » and is that even with the delay is that
[1:19:35] going to affect the amount I just want
[1:19:37] to make sure we're not overt taxing
[1:19:39] especially if they're not getting the
[1:19:40] services they're paying for and I guess
[1:19:41] that's the biggest thing or concern that
[1:19:43] I have right now. So, I mean, we we
[1:19:46] obviously haven't sent out the the
[1:19:48] request for proposals yet. Um, my guess
[1:19:51] is the amount that is allocated for
[1:19:53] contracts. Um, will not serve for the
[1:19:57] entire contract. So, we will have to
[1:19:59] look at how much is allocated to the
[1:20:01] contracts uh within the LLDS and make
[1:20:04] adjustments from there. But until we get
[1:20:06] that final number, we won't have that
[1:20:09] exact answer until until we have those
[1:20:11] numbers so that we can figure out how
[1:20:13] we're going to allocate. Is there
[1:20:15] supplement needed by the city? Not
[1:20:17] general fund supplement, just supplement
[1:20:19] in staff that there is things that staff
[1:20:22] may have to continue keeping up as
[1:20:25] opposed to actually putting in a
[1:20:26] contract because we don't have the
[1:20:28] funding for that contract in full. Um,
[1:20:31] so that's that's going to be something
[1:20:33] as we receive those bids, we are going
[1:20:35] to need to uh figure out how that works
[1:20:39] in the end. Um, and that's something as
[1:20:41] soon as we get those numbers, we will we
[1:20:43] will look at.
[1:20:45] >> Thank you.
[1:20:47] >> Any other questions?
[1:20:52] » Go ahead.
[1:20:53] >> I just want clarification for this item.
[1:20:54] We're not approving the levy right now.
[1:20:57] We're just um declaring the intention.
[1:21:00] You're going your your report we're
[1:21:02] approving and then you'll bring it back
[1:21:04] for a public hearing and that's when
[1:21:05] we'll um either approve or deny the the
[1:21:10] levy.
[1:21:10] >> That is correct. This is declaring our
[1:21:13] intention to levy the tax and this is
[1:21:16] also approving the engineers report for
[1:21:19] the landscape and lighting districts.
[1:21:21] >> Thank you.
[1:21:23] >> There are no questions. I'll go out to
[1:21:24] the public. Any members of the public
[1:21:25] would like to make a comment on this
[1:21:26] item?
[1:21:29] Step up to the podium.
[1:21:31] >> Uh, Galan Guzman. All right. The first
[1:21:34] one was the typo. Uh,
[1:21:38] the city of series notice of public
[1:21:40] hearing. Uh, midpage. It should read
[1:21:43] 1987. It reads 1972 currently. Um, then
[1:21:49] I was looking at the contract or like
[1:21:51] the publication that MBS put out and it
[1:21:55] seems like they they gathered the
[1:21:56] information from they use numbers from
[1:21:58] March 2026, the CPI which is the
[1:22:01] inflation um factor or rate whatever and
[1:22:04] I checked online and then it seems like
[1:22:07] back in March of 2026 that's the highest
[1:22:10] it's been since 2005. So we're looking
[1:22:13] at we're using data that's a little bit
[1:22:15] outdated which doesn't reflect our
[1:22:17] current like economy. Um if you take a
[1:22:19] look here it says
[1:22:23] um yeah so one I guess first question is
[1:22:27] when was this uh MBS with this company
[1:22:31] uh this contract approved and then when
[1:22:34] did they start working on this and then
[1:22:36] why did they select March 2026 numbers
[1:22:40] instead of like let's say April or June
[1:22:43] numbers um before putting it out in
[1:22:45] August for uh the public hearing.
[1:22:48] notice. Uh so that's one of the things.
[1:22:50] And then secondly, um yeah, again, like
[1:22:53] the services aren't there. You know, you
[1:22:55] can't be just like increasing taxes when
[1:22:58] we're the residents aren't receiving the
[1:23:00] services. You know, there it passed last
[1:23:03] year and then again, you know, the city
[1:23:05] council is being asked to do this again,
[1:23:08] but the services weren't there last year
[1:23:10] nor the the year prior. So, it's just
[1:23:12] it's kind of mindboggling that we keep
[1:23:14] doing this and contracting out when I
[1:23:16] think we should be investing in public
[1:23:18] workers, you know, not removing them,
[1:23:21] you know, we should be allocated more we
[1:23:23] should be allocating more money to parks
[1:23:25] and wreck, you know, uh to take care of
[1:23:28] our city streets, our city parks, you
[1:23:30] know, but instead we're contracting out
[1:23:32] with like multiple landscaping companies
[1:23:34] that are not providing the services that
[1:23:36] we need and to our satisfaction. So, at
[1:23:39] what point will this council decide to
[1:23:43] invest in our workers instead? Because,
[1:23:47] you know, before like I had, you know,
[1:23:50] I'm just going to say that before, you
[1:23:52] know, if you were like a city employee,
[1:23:54] you got great benefits, you know, but
[1:23:56] that also trickled down, you know, to
[1:23:59] your family. It provided a safe um, you
[1:24:01] know, income, you know, benefits for
[1:24:03] your family. But now we're contracting
[1:24:05] out, you know, and we're asking our park
[1:24:08] crew to do more with less, you know, and
[1:24:11] I the point is like if you contract out,
[1:24:14] you lose that accountability aspect.
[1:24:17] Like if you were to have city workers,
[1:24:19] you have that immediate oversight. You
[1:24:21] know, if someone's not doing their job,
[1:24:23] okay, like we got to replace you. Like,
[1:24:26] you know, go figure. But yeah, we're cancelling contracts and then
[1:24:29] we're still losing the service and we're
[1:24:31] asking taxpayers to to you know, you
[1:24:34] know, increase $40, you know, um for the
[1:24:38] next year or 122, you know, but yet like
[1:24:41] the services aren't being given. So,
[1:24:43] it's just it's just mindboggling to me
[1:24:45] that this keeps happening and yeah, when
[1:24:48] the services aren't there like obviously
[1:24:50] public works like needs work and it
[1:24:52] needs it now like not not tomorrow or I
[1:24:55] mean it needs it now not like in a year
[1:24:57] or two you know so uh that's one thing
[1:25:01] um also I I submitted an application for
[1:25:04] adopt a park and I was looking to
[1:25:07] service the three parks where of where I
[1:25:10] live which is district two you know and
[1:25:12] I selected these parks because they're
[1:25:14] in 5 minutes from my house, you know. I
[1:25:16] have the resources and I have the time
[1:25:18] and I'm willing to volunteer and give
[1:25:21] back, you know, and I'm not seeking any
[1:25:23] compensation or any recognition.
[1:25:26] The application states that it'll go to
[1:25:28] city council and then I'll be like like
[1:25:31] uh recognized. I don't want that, you
[1:25:33] know. I'm just here to donate my time
[1:25:34] and give back to the community, you
[1:25:36] know. And I had uh I talked to I talked
[1:25:39] to Joey and they uh he said that I can't
[1:25:43] uh use the riding lawnmower to service
[1:25:45] the parks because it's a liability. You
[1:25:48] know, right now, like I said, I have the
[1:25:49] resources. I have the riding lawnmower.
[1:25:51] I know how to use it. You know, I'm
[1:25:53] willing to go out there at 6:00 a.m. 7
[1:25:54] a.m. and take care of these parks, but
[1:25:56] instead I'm being offered to pick up
[1:25:58] garbage with uh you know, the garbage
[1:26:00] holder and bags will be provided. I'm
[1:26:03] looking to do a little bit more of that
[1:26:04] more. I'm looking to do a little more
[1:26:07] than that, you know. So, that was a
[1:26:09] little bit upsetting to me. Um, yeah.
[1:26:12] Again, like the we have contracts with
[1:26:14] well, Elite Maintenance, West Coast
[1:26:16] Arborist, Grover, Bride View, we had,
[1:26:20] you know, it's just, uh, you know, why
[1:26:22] not consolidate, you know, or like I
[1:26:25] said, invest in people. So, yeah. Um,
[1:26:33] yeah. Let's see.
[1:26:39] Is that Jurassic Park? What is that?
[1:26:44] >> Your time.
[1:26:44] >> Yeah, that's it. Thanks.
[1:26:45] >> Time is up. Thank you, sir. Very valid
[1:26:47] points and thank you very much. I
[1:26:48] appreciate that. Is there anybody else
[1:26:50] in the public that would like to make a
[1:26:52] comment?
[1:26:55] » Hey, good evening. My name is Andres
[1:26:57] Ree. I've been a member of this
[1:26:58] community now for over 20 years and I
[1:27:03] want to echo some some of the sentiments
[1:27:05] that he he made. Um I live in the
[1:27:08] Eastgate community. I've been there
[1:27:10] since day one since it started and I've
[1:27:14] seen it just go downhill. Uh, I agree
[1:27:18] that we should take some of these funds
[1:27:20] and if you guys have them allocated for
[1:27:23] a certain pot, create a department that
[1:27:26] can hire some people to work with that
[1:27:29] pot. Because over the years, over the
[1:27:32] last 20 years that I've been there,
[1:27:34] we've probably got about half of the
[1:27:36] foliage
[1:27:38] that was there initially. I've seen
[1:27:40] these workers with my own eyes uh doing
[1:27:44] their job. Instead of nurturing the
[1:27:47] plants and the foliage, they'd rather
[1:27:49] weed whack them down to nothing so they
[1:27:51] don't have to worry about it the next
[1:27:52] time. So, there's lots of areas there
[1:27:54] that are just barren.
[1:27:57] There is water that runs to those areas,
[1:27:59] but they're not watering anything. So, I
[1:28:02] would just like you guys to take that
[1:28:04] into consideration.
[1:28:06] I do agree that there needs to be some
[1:28:07] oversight
[1:28:09] that when these guys go out there and do
[1:28:11] their jobs, whoever it is, I really
[1:28:13] implore you to not think about a third
[1:28:15] party. Reinvest that money into somebody
[1:28:17] that's willing to take pride in their
[1:28:19] work because a lot of these workers may
[1:28:20] not even live in our community. So, they
[1:28:23] go in there, do their eight eight hours,
[1:28:25] and they're out. They really don't care
[1:28:26] what the job looks like. I want somebody
[1:28:29] there that's actually going to care
[1:28:30] about the community that we live in.
[1:28:33] It's really gone downhill. I'm almost
[1:28:35] embarrassed to say I live here and it's
[1:28:38] really hard for me to say that. Like
[1:28:41] I've had people that live in other areas
[1:28:43] that are like, "Wow, it's really gone
[1:28:44] downhill." It has. And I really think we
[1:28:48] can make a change. I really think this
[1:28:50] city could be great.
[1:28:52] But at the same time, I have thought
[1:28:54] about leaving. And like I said, I've
[1:28:56] been here since 2002.
[1:28:59] So I have invested in this a lot of
[1:29:02] investment in this community. I'm an
[1:29:04] educator. I worked for the for series
[1:29:07] for a few years. I work in Modesto now,
[1:29:09] Modesto City Schools. My children have
[1:29:11] gone through elementary, junior high, school. They've graduated from
[1:29:16] series schools and I really feel a part
[1:29:19] of this community and I just really want
[1:29:21] to see it make a change for the better.
[1:29:23] Thank you.
[1:29:25] >> Thank you very much. Anyone else would
[1:29:27] like to make a comment?
[1:29:31] Seeing none, anybody on Zoom.
[1:29:34] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom.
[1:29:36] >> Bring this item back for a motion.
[1:29:38] >> Make a motion to approve item number
[1:29:40] nine.
[1:29:44] I'll second
[1:29:46] a roll call, please.
[1:29:48] >> Council member Casey,
[1:29:49] >> yes.
[1:29:50] >> Council member Vieiraa,
[1:29:51] >> yes.
[1:29:52] >> Council member Otto,
[1:29:53] >> yes.
[1:29:54] >> Vice Mayor Martinez. Hi.
[1:29:55] >> Mayor Lopez,
[1:29:56] >> yes. Motion carries 5-0.
[1:30:04] » We'll now take a fiveminut recess. Thank
[1:30:07] you everyone.
[1:40:49] If everyone can please have a seat.
[1:40:50] We're getting ready to start again.
[1:41:06] Welcome back everyone. We're going to go
[1:41:07] ahead and start off with new business.
[1:41:09] Item number 10, ratifying the measure H
[1:41:11] expenditure plan for fiscal year 2027
[1:41:14] beginning July 1st, 2026 and ending June
[1:41:17] 30th, 2026.
[1:41:22] » Thank you. Good evening, mayor, council
[1:41:25] members. Tonight, tonight's step is
[1:41:27] requesting approval of the resolution
[1:41:29] ratifying the fiscal year 27 measure H
[1:41:33] expenditure plan. Measure H is the
[1:41:36] city's voter approved 1/2 cent public
[1:41:39] sales tax that was approved back in
[1:41:41] 2007. By ordinance, this revenues may
[1:41:45] only be used for allegible police, fire,
[1:41:48] and emergency response services
[1:41:50] identified in the measure H expenditure
[1:41:52] plan.
[1:41:54] Um, just a little bit of background. The
[1:41:57] initial measure H expenditure plan was
[1:41:59] adopted by the city council back in
[1:42:02] April of 2008 as a 10-year expenditure
[1:42:06] plan. And the expenditure plan was then
[1:42:08] amended in 2008, 2010, 2011, and 2016 to
[1:42:15] address evolving public safety needs,
[1:42:17] including additional fire personnel,
[1:42:20] narcotics, K9 [snorts] program, crime
[1:42:23] analysis capabilities, and public safety
[1:42:26] technology. In 2017, the council
[1:42:29] approved the most recent expenditure
[1:42:31] plan, which reorganized and updated the
[1:42:33] plan's presentation and formatting.
[1:42:37] The expenditure plan before you does not
[1:42:40] authorize any new spending. It was
[1:42:43] already reviewed and incorporated into
[1:42:45] the fiscal year 27 budget adopted by the
[1:42:47] city council on June 8. And as
[1:42:50] presented, the expenditure expenditure
[1:42:52] for plan continues to fund eligible
[1:42:54] publica safety services consistent with
[1:42:57] the measure H ordinance for fiscal year
[1:43:00] 27. Measure H is funding u measure H
[1:43:03] funding supports 10 police officer
[1:43:06] positions. Um roughly 21% of the fire
[1:43:10] services contract and about 35% of the
[1:43:14] agreement for Axon for the uh the body
[1:43:17] cameras.
[1:43:18] There is no additional funding or fiscal
[1:43:21] impact beyond what has already been
[1:43:24] approved in the fiscal year 27 budget.
[1:43:27] Moving forward, this the measure H
[1:43:29] expenditure plan will be incorporated
[1:43:31] into the annual budget process to ensure
[1:43:34] that the city um has ongoing compliance
[1:43:39] with the measure H ordinance. And
[1:43:41] tonight's action formally ratifies the
[1:43:44] fiscal year 27 expenditure plan in
[1:43:47] accordance with the city's ordinance for
[1:43:50] the measure. Um staff is recommending
[1:43:54] tonight that the city council adopt the
[1:43:57] resolution ratifying the fiscal year
[1:44:00] 2027 measure H expenditure plan. And
[1:44:03] with this action, it will bring us into
[1:44:05] compliance with the measure H ordinance
[1:44:09] um with the last item, the last
[1:44:11] expenditure plan having been approved by
[1:44:14] the council in 2017.
[1:44:17] >> Thank you very much. We'll go ahead and
[1:44:20] open this up to the public and then any
[1:44:21] members of the public that would like to
[1:44:23] make a comment on this item.
[1:44:27] » Seeing none, any hands raised.
[1:44:29] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom. And I
[1:44:31] bring this item back to the council for
[1:44:33] any comments, questions.
[1:44:35] Councilwoman Otto.
[1:44:37] >> Thank you, Mayor. Um,
[1:44:40] so Measure H has been one of my
[1:44:42] concerns. Um, and for me, you know, we
[1:44:45] have a responsibility to be good
[1:44:47] stewards of the taxpayer dollars. Uh,
[1:44:49] Measure H belongs to every rep, every
[1:44:52] resident that we represent, and it
[1:44:54] affects our public safety.
[1:44:57] I'm not sure why there hasn't been a
[1:44:59] public safety expenditure plan um in the
[1:45:01] past several years or why the city
[1:45:04] hadn't been following what was stated in
[1:45:05] the ordinance, but I do want to thank
[1:45:07] our finance director and city manager um
[1:45:10] who quickly took the time to address the
[1:45:12] issue um our once I brought it to our
[1:45:16] city manager, he uh he worked right away
[1:45:18] with our finance director. So, I apprec
[1:45:20] I appreciate that. Um, but we shouldn't
[1:45:22] be out of compliance with our own city
[1:45:24] ordinance and we certainly don't want to
[1:45:27] be out of compliance with uh these
[1:45:29] requirements that governor how that
[1:45:31] govern how tax dollars are supposed to
[1:45:32] be and spent. Um, the intent of these
[1:45:35] public safety tax dollars was to
[1:45:37] supplement existing public safety
[1:45:39] funding. Um, it was supposed to provide
[1:45:42] additional resource but never uh replace
[1:45:44] the general fund um funding that was
[1:45:48] given to public safety. So, for example,
[1:45:51] through my research, um my understanding
[1:45:54] is that's probably how the street crimes
[1:45:56] unit at one point was uh maintained. So,
[1:45:59] it makes me wonder, um if we would have
[1:46:02] completed a forensic audit at the time
[1:46:05] that a measure H committee member had
[1:46:07] requested it, um would the issue have
[1:46:09] been found months ago? But again, I'm
[1:46:12] glad that we did find this and we're
[1:46:15] correcting it. Uh we must continue to
[1:46:17] evaluate our policies when it comes to
[1:46:19] our finances. We need to closely review
[1:46:21] how the funding is allocated
[1:46:24] uh and ensure our taxpayer dollars are
[1:46:26] spent as they're intended to um with the
[1:46:28] accountability and transparency in
[1:46:30] place. So with that, I know uh
[1:46:35] finance director you did mention the
[1:46:38] breakdown of positions and then the body
[1:46:40] worn camera and then some fire. Is there
[1:46:43] a way to I know it might have been too
[1:46:45] late to put in the staff report um but
[1:46:47] either in the minutes or maybe an
[1:46:49] amendment to the staff report to add the
[1:46:52] specific uh positions that are going to
[1:46:54] be
[1:46:56] uh used in this safety plan.
[1:47:03] » I'll defer to the city clerk, but I
[1:47:05] believe uh the comments from the finance
[1:47:07] director as part of the report can be
[1:47:08] included in the minutes.
[1:47:11] >> I'm sorry. Can you repeat what you're
[1:47:12] wanting uh amended or included?
[1:47:15] >> So, what I would like is I know there is
[1:47:17] a plan for the funding itself and she
[1:47:19] went over the specific positions um the
[1:47:23] body warn camera being covered by this
[1:47:25] and some of the fire cost. I would like
[1:47:28] that to be in place either in the
[1:47:30] minutes or amended on the staff report.
[1:47:32] So that way, you know, a year from now,
[1:47:34] two years from now, we're able to go
[1:47:35] back and say this is what we previously
[1:47:38] allocated the funding to. I think in
[1:47:40] that case it would be most appropriate
[1:47:42] to um have that included in the minutes
[1:47:45] as opposed to amending the staff report.
[1:47:48] Um
[1:47:50] I don't know if it's something that we
[1:47:52] would need to have included as the
[1:47:53] motion.
[1:47:55] I think I think that would be a good
[1:47:57] idea is to include as part of the motion
[1:47:59] in adopting the resolution specific
[1:48:02] language mentioned by the finance
[1:48:04] director to be included as part of the
[1:48:06] action.
[1:48:07] >> Thank you. And then just to clarify, we
[1:48:09] would um uh correct me if I'm wrong,
[1:48:12] Nubia, we would amend the resolution to
[1:48:14] include that language as well.
[1:48:16] >> Yes,
[1:48:17] >> that would be great. Thank you.
[1:48:20] >> Anything else, Councilwoman?
[1:48:21] >> No, thank you.
[1:48:22] >> City manager, could you do me a favor
[1:48:24] and please give a little bit of a
[1:48:26] background on how this happened based on
[1:48:27] this research and the conversation that
[1:48:29] we had dating back to the previous
[1:48:31] council?
[1:48:33] >> Yes. Thank you, mayor.
[1:48:35] So when I was researching this item, I
[1:48:37] recognized that the ordinance calls for
[1:48:39] an annual approved expenditure plan.
[1:48:43] An expenditure plan, as uh the finance
[1:48:46] director mentioned, was initially
[1:48:48] adopted. It was a 10-year plan beginning
[1:48:51] in 2008 and concluding in 2018. And over
[1:48:55] the course of those 10 years, that plan
[1:48:58] was amended, I believe, three times. But
[1:49:01] even though it was amended three times,
[1:49:04] the report concluded in 2018. In
[1:49:08] subsequent years,
[1:49:10] expenditure plans were not brought
[1:49:13] before the council were not approved. So
[1:49:16] when we recognized that this was a
[1:49:17] deficiency, credit to the finance
[1:49:20] director, she worked very hard to create
[1:49:22] an expenditure plan.
[1:49:25] While the measure H funds, even in those
[1:49:29] years where a plan was not formally
[1:49:32] adopted by the city council, while those
[1:49:34] measure 8 funds were technically
[1:49:37] approved as a as a part of the budget
[1:49:39] adoption process because the measure H
[1:49:42] money is included in the annual budget
[1:49:44] that the city of council approves every
[1:49:46] year, there is not a page in the budget
[1:49:49] that you can flip to to see this is how
[1:49:52] all of the measure H money is um
[1:49:54] allocated.
[1:49:55] It's spread throughout the fiscal year
[1:49:57] budget throughout the general fund uh
[1:49:59] budget.
[1:50:01] Sorry, not throughout the general fund
[1:50:02] budget because it's specific to measure
[1:50:04] H. It's just spread throughout the
[1:50:08] formalized
[1:50:09] budget that's adopted. So what this
[1:50:11] action is doing is in addition to it
[1:50:14] being within the entire budget that is
[1:50:16] approved by the city council, there is
[1:50:18] actually a document that you can turn to say this is how we're spending
[1:50:22] measure H money without having to know
[1:50:24] where it is within the adopted budget
[1:50:27] throughout all the different funds and
[1:50:29] departments.
[1:50:31] So I I do want to say thank you very
[1:50:33] much Councilwoman Otto for bringing this
[1:50:35] to the city manager's attention. He
[1:50:36] explained to me how it all unfolded. And
[1:50:39] my question is if we want to amend the
[1:50:42] minutes, could we not just amend the
[1:50:44] budget to place this item in that budget
[1:50:47] as a separate page which your hope is
[1:50:49] that in future budgets we'll provide
[1:50:51] this expenditure plan in the budget as
[1:50:53] it's supposed to be placed. Correct.
[1:50:58] If I understand you correctly that is
[1:50:59] correct. So in future years as part of
[1:51:02] the budget adoption process and again
[1:51:05] you have technically approved measure H
[1:51:07] money as part of the budget adoption
[1:51:09] process from 2018 through now. There
[1:51:12] wasn't just called out in the budget a
[1:51:15] specific this is the plan for how we use
[1:51:18] that money. It was sprinkled throughout
[1:51:20] all the different departments that are
[1:51:21] affected by measure h moving forward as
[1:51:25] part of the regular fiscy year budget
[1:51:28] adoption process. what the finance
[1:51:30] director is doing this meeting that will
[1:51:32] be a part of the regular budget
[1:51:34] adoption. So we won't have to have after
[1:51:37] the budget is adopted this item come
[1:51:40] forward. So it will be a part of the
[1:51:42] formal budget adoption process moving
[1:51:44] forward. Okay. Cuz I just want to get
[1:51:46] clarification councilomano in regards to
[1:51:48] the amendment of the minutes. You want
[1:51:50] it to be specific. Now my question is
[1:51:53] and I just want to make sure I'm I'm
[1:51:55] supportive of it. is the amendment that
[1:51:57] she's requesting. Are those specific
[1:52:00] items already included in the budget
[1:52:03] so that we don't have to necessarily do
[1:52:05] it again? I just I'm just clarifying for
[1:52:08] you.
[1:52:09] >> Those items are included in the budget,
[1:52:11] but they're not specified as an
[1:52:13] expenditure plan. So, one way to I mean,
[1:52:17] they're like city manager said, they're
[1:52:19] sprinkle or stretch throughout the
[1:52:21] different departments. That's how we
[1:52:24] section the budget book in the city. So
[1:52:28] there is partial monies um in the police
[1:52:32] sworn and partial monies in in the fire
[1:52:35] department. So there isn't one document
[1:52:37] that it compiles all of the measure age
[1:52:40] uh funding in in one one place. So this
[1:52:44] would be that this would be the page or
[1:52:46] the expenditure plan that will be
[1:52:49] incorporated in our budget. Um, one
[1:52:51] thing I know that we can amend the
[1:52:53] minutes but but my expenditure plan here
[1:52:56] it's a separate attachment so we can
[1:53:00] also incorporate the language of what is
[1:53:03] being funded on the attachment. I can
[1:53:05] update the attachment if that is pos a
[1:53:08] possibility.
[1:53:09] >> Okay. I'm in support of what
[1:53:11] councilwoman is saying, but I would also
[1:53:13] if you can maybe come back to us at a
[1:53:15] later city council meeting to clarify
[1:53:17] that that has been done and that way in
[1:53:20] the future folks can refer back to the
[1:53:22] agenda and also refer back to the budget
[1:53:25] that you have the expenditure plan
[1:53:26] placed in it. Does that make sense? City
[1:53:28] manager,
[1:53:30] >> I just want to make sure I understand. I
[1:53:32] believe what council member is asking in
[1:53:35] addition to the document that's in front
[1:53:37] of you today, the resolution approving
[1:53:39] the expenditure plan, I believe she
[1:53:42] wants
[1:53:43] included in the motion to approve this
[1:53:46] resolution
[1:53:48] an additional item that clarifies that
[1:53:51] the current year's expenditure plan is
[1:53:54] paying for 10 police officers, 21% of
[1:53:58] the fire agreement, and X% of the bodywn
[1:54:03] cameras. Is that what you're requesting?
[1:54:05] >> That's correct.
[1:54:07] >> Thank you. And those funds are already
[1:54:10] allocated. We don't need to amend any
[1:54:12] previous meeting minutes. This will just
[1:54:14] be included in that motion if that's the
[1:54:16] will of the council. If that's the
[1:54:18] easiest way to go about it, and I'm okay
[1:54:20] with that.
[1:54:21] >> Okay. Any other comments or questions
[1:54:23] from the council?
[1:54:26] >> Then we are looking for a motion.
[1:54:30] >> Um
[1:54:31] I'll make a motion uh to approve item
[1:54:34] number 10, ratifying the measure H
[1:54:37] expenditure plan for fiscal year 2027
[1:54:40] beginning July 1st, 2026 and ending June
[1:54:43] 30th, 2027
[1:54:45] with the addition of a breakdown for the
[1:54:50] 10 police officer positions, 21% of fire
[1:54:56] costs, and then a portion of the bodywn
[1:54:58] camera axon program.
[1:55:02] >> I'll second.
[1:55:02] >> Get a roll call, please.
[1:55:05] >> Council member Casey,
[1:55:07] >> yes.
[1:55:08] >> Council member Vieiraa,
[1:55:09] >> yes.
[1:55:10] >> Council member Otero,
[1:55:11] >> yes.
[1:55:12] >> Vice Mayor Martinez,
[1:55:14] >> I.
[1:55:14] >> Mayor Lopez,
[1:55:15] >> yes.
[1:55:15] >> Motion carries 5-0.
[1:55:17] >> Thank you very much. Moving on to
[1:55:19] discussion items. discussion regarding
[1:55:21] the planning commission's request for
[1:55:22] city council to adopt an interim urgency
[1:55:25] ordinance establishing a temporary
[1:55:28] excuse me morandum on a new gas station
[1:55:30] and car wash facility within the city of
[1:55:32] series.
[1:55:35] Good evening, mayor and council. This
[1:55:37] evening, um before you today, we are
[1:55:40] asking for direction uh regarding
[1:55:43] additional staff time and resources
[1:55:45] should be uh committed toward evaluating
[1:55:48] and pursuing a potential mortorium on
[1:55:51] new gas stations and car washes within
[1:55:53] the city. Um discussion has been
[1:55:55] presented both in planning commission
[1:55:57] and in hearing council and so therefore
[1:56:01] staff is bringing the matter forward to
[1:56:03] avoid any duplication efforts and asking
[1:56:06] for direction for any future work if um
[1:56:10] so desired by the council. Um the work
[1:56:14] would include
[1:56:16] under government code section 65858
[1:56:19] for the findings of immediate threat to
[1:56:23] public health and safety for a momentum
[1:56:26] which would include significant research
[1:56:28] findings evaluating existing land use
[1:56:32] pertaining to the mtorium. Um so we are
[1:56:36] asking for some direction depending on
[1:56:39] the scope of analysis required will
[1:56:41] require outside planning and legal
[1:56:43] consultant services. So this evening
[1:56:46] we're just asking for some guidance
[1:56:48] either direct staff to continue
[1:56:49] discussion with the planning commission
[1:56:52] direct staff to prepare a future agenda
[1:56:54] item evaluating the feasibility
[1:56:57] um and looking at the um impact or take
[1:57:01] no further action and allow existing
[1:57:03] zoning regulations and development
[1:57:05] review process to continue as is.
[1:57:09] >> Thank you very much. I'll go ahead and
[1:57:10] open this up to the public. Any members
[1:57:12] of the public would like to make a
[1:57:13] comment on this item?
[1:57:20] » Uh Dave Pratt of Series, I want to know
[1:57:23] at what point do you consider you have
[1:57:26] too many car washes and too many gas
[1:57:29] stations?
[1:57:31] Well, in the middle of town, you allow
[1:57:34] these super gas stations build next to a
[1:57:36] mom and pop stations and many stores
[1:57:39] been there for years
[1:57:42] have to compete with these super
[1:57:44] centers.
[1:57:45] And you allow a gas station, bigger gas,
[1:57:49] I mean car washes, uh when you got one
[1:57:52] car wash in one corner, you got now you
[1:57:55] got a another car wash on another
[1:57:58] corner. Then all the a lot of these gas
[1:58:00] stations have these drive-thru car
[1:58:03] washes. At what point
[1:58:07] you say you have enough? It's that same
[1:58:10] thing with the with the food trucks.
[1:58:14] Well, in the beginning you had had a
[1:58:17] limit on that. Now all of a sudden there
[1:58:19] was an explosion on food trucks.
[1:58:23] You're going to have to decide, you
[1:58:25] know, that
[1:58:27] are we going to have gas stations and and car washes on every corner?
[1:58:34] Is that the way it's going to be for
[1:58:37] this small town?
[1:58:40] I still call it town. You can call it
[1:58:43] whatever you want to. I've lived here 74
[1:58:46] years. I
[1:58:50] grew up here
[1:58:52] all of a sudden all of a sudden
[1:58:57] can't
[1:59:01] even the a lot of the restaurants and
[1:59:04] stuff's got to compete with the food
[1:59:06] trucks now.
[1:59:10] Are you know I'm getting I'm getting uh ice
[1:59:15] cream trucks and and and the they're
[1:59:18] coming from other cities coming through.
[1:59:21] Are you even getting taxes from those
[1:59:23] stuff? I think on I think on the food
[1:59:26] trucks I think every six months we ought
[1:59:28] to have an audit on that and find out
[1:59:30] are you actually collecting taxes on on
[1:59:33] the food trucks.
[1:59:37] I know that's getting off of hand
[1:59:38] because we're talking about the gas
[1:59:40] stations and the car washes and it's
[1:59:43] just like just like they want and want
[1:59:46] in the middle of town want to put a a a
[1:59:49] super super electric chargers in in when
[1:59:54] actually they need to be closer to the
[1:59:56] freeways because every house
[1:59:59] why do they want to go to a gas station
[2:00:01] get their vehicle charged when
[2:00:03] everybody's got chargers in their
[2:00:05] houses.
[2:00:08] That's another thing you got to realize
[2:00:10] where you're actually putting these
[2:00:11] things.
[2:00:13] Really, you need to do a lot more than
[2:00:15] just a temporary more for moratorum on
[2:00:19] this on on these. I think we're already
[2:00:22] overextended on some of these.
[2:00:27] » Thank you very much. Next person,
[2:00:29] please.
[2:00:38] Uh Gullen Guzman again. I'm in support
[2:00:41] of this discussion item. Uh I did attend
[2:00:44] the planning commission meeting when the
[2:00:47] uh six cycle housing element um
[2:00:52] took meeting took place and one of the
[2:00:54] questions that was asked to the economic
[2:00:58] development
[2:01:00] um Mr. Dragular Aar agira um was how
[2:01:05] many gas stations are pending and he
[2:01:08] stated four if I'm not mistaken and I
[2:01:11] was like you've got to be kidding me
[2:01:12] like that's too much like we already
[2:01:15] have an excessive amount of gas stations
[2:01:17] we do not need four more like so I'm
[2:01:19] into support of this um moratorum of
[2:01:23] limiting uh gas stations and car wash
[2:01:26] facilities so like I went to the Mr. car
[2:01:29] wash the new one and it scratched my
[2:01:32] car. So, I'm going to hand wash it at
[2:01:36] home. So, yeah. Um I'm in support of
[2:01:41] this cuz it's ridiculous that the amount
[2:01:43] of gas stations that we have. Thanks.
[2:01:46] >> Thank you very much. Next person,
[2:01:48] please.
[2:01:59] Good evening, council members and
[2:02:01] previous council members. John Warren,
[2:02:04] city of Sirius.
[2:02:06] Um,
[2:02:08] I don't believe the planning commission
[2:02:11] has voted
[2:02:14] yes or no on this particular item to
[2:02:18] bring it to the council for their
[2:02:21] guidance and suggestions.
[2:02:23] So, I think the cart's kind of in front
[2:02:25] of the horse. There's a process that the
[2:02:28] city has and that's not being used.
[2:02:31] That's part of the problem with our way
[2:02:34] of doing business. There's a proper
[2:02:37] order of things and it never seems to be
[2:02:39] followed.
[2:02:41] Uh, [clears throat] in talking about the
[2:02:43] planning commission, I don't think the
[2:02:45] city really needs one.
[2:02:48] they only have six or seven, possibly
[2:02:51] eight meetings out of 24 during the
[2:02:54] year. And so things should just come
[2:02:57] directly to the council and be cited
[2:03:00] upon uh at a regular council meeting. it
[2:03:03] wouldn't take that much extra time to do
[2:03:06] that and you eliminate a whole process
[2:03:10] which includes funding and people making
[2:03:13] applications and if they don't like the
[2:03:15] decision of the planning commission they
[2:03:17] bring it back to the council anyway and
[2:03:19] it cost a lot of money for them to do
[2:03:21] that. So consider when you're doing this
[2:03:25] just eliminating the planning commission
[2:03:27] altogether and having the city council
[2:03:30] take care of business. Thank you very
[2:03:32] much.
[2:03:33] Thank you, Mr. Horn. Anyone else
[2:03:39] » for a temporary moratorum on gas
[2:03:42] stations, but leave it open for them to
[2:03:45] add the electrical charges that the gas
[2:03:48] stations that are here might need
[2:03:50] because there's going to be more
[2:03:51] electric cars with time. Thank you.
[2:03:55] >> Thank you very much. Anyone else?
[2:04:01] Seeing none, any hands raised.
[2:04:04] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom.
[2:04:05] >> I'll bring this item back for council
[2:04:07] for discussion.
[2:04:08] I had Vice Mayor Martinez press his
[2:04:10] button. Go ahead, sir.
[2:04:11] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh Julian, could
[2:04:13] you answer that? Has this gone to
[2:04:15] planning and and have they voted on it
[2:04:17] to bring it to us? Can you answer Mr.
[2:04:19] Warren's statement? So this evening that
[2:04:22] is the discussion to have is if you're
[2:04:24] going to approve staff time for the
[2:04:26] research that needs to be done to bring
[2:04:29] this back to planning commission in
[2:04:31] order for us to bring it back as a staff
[2:04:33] report. There is significant research
[2:04:36] that needs to be done. And so we're here
[2:04:37] to to ask the council if that if you
[2:04:40] will your decision tonight will
[2:04:43] determine if that gets moved forward for
[2:04:47] a staff.
[2:04:49] >> Thank you.
[2:04:51] Councilwoman Otter,
[2:04:53] >> thank you. Um, I did have the same
[2:04:55] question was, you know, planning
[2:04:57] commission, did they make the official
[2:04:58] recommendation? Because when I watched
[2:05:00] the planning commission meeting, uh, my
[2:05:02] understanding is that a report would be
[2:05:04] presented to the planning commission to
[2:05:06] then further review um, what was stated,
[2:05:09] you know, in the report and then they
[2:05:12] would discuss if, um, that would move
[2:05:14] forward to the city council. Um so I'm
[2:05:17] just concerned why we would discuss this
[2:05:20] today if planning commission hasn't I
[2:05:22] guess made the official recommendation.
[2:05:25] Um my understanding is based on this
[2:05:27] series municipal code the 2.05.040
[2:05:32] planning uh commission does have the
[2:05:34] authority to make recommendations as
[2:05:36] this. So I just want to make sure that
[2:05:38] we're giving them the opportunity to do
[2:05:40] that. Um but I do have a few questions.
[2:05:44] Is there a state guidance for the number
[2:05:46] of car washes and gas stations that are
[2:05:48] sufficient for a city based on like a
[2:05:51] population?
[2:05:55] » So like a state matrix
[2:05:58] there is not so for every I believe it's
[2:06:03] 10 4,000 10,000
[2:06:07] um
[2:06:23] So the state estimates that
[2:06:25] approximately three to four gas stations
[2:06:28] per 10,000
[2:06:30] is a rough estimate is what I did a
[2:06:32] brief research on. Um but without
[2:06:36] getting too much time into it because it
[2:06:38] does take a lot of time in order for us
[2:06:40] to bring it because if we're looking at
[2:06:42] a mtorium we have to find the findings
[2:06:45] for the mtorium and to bring that in. So
[2:06:48] tonight we're just discussing that if
[2:06:50] council wants
[2:06:53] for us to continue to do the research
[2:06:56] and continue to bring it back then we
[2:06:58] just need approval for staff time to do
[2:07:00] it. Um and so the recommendation for to
[2:07:05] go back to to the planning commission is
[2:07:07] going to take staff time to bring back
[2:07:09] the research to bring back all the
[2:07:11] evaluations and stuff. And so tonight's
[2:07:13] discussion is basically on a mon is on a
[2:07:16] financial side of it to move forward
[2:07:19] then we would need the blessing from the
[2:07:22] council in order for us to do that.
[2:07:25] >> Thank you. How many um car washes do we
[2:07:28] currently have and how many gas stations
[2:07:29] do we have?
[2:07:32] Currently, we have eight car washes and
[2:07:35] 17 gas stations. The 17 gas stations,
[2:07:39] majority of them are in locations that
[2:07:42] are right off the freeway, both
[2:07:44] northbound and southbound. Easy access
[2:07:46] on, easy access off. That's where you
[2:07:48] want your clusters of gas stations to
[2:07:50] be.
[2:07:51] >> Okay. So, I understand that it's going
[2:07:54] to take staff time. I know there's
[2:07:55] research involved. Um, I've done a
[2:07:58] little bit of my own research. There are
[2:07:59] cities throughout the state who have
[2:08:01] done these moratoriums whether temporary
[2:08:04] or permanent. Um and I feel like we
[2:08:07] should reach out to those cities, look
[2:08:10] at their staff reports. Um they might
[2:08:13] have, you know, government code cited or
[2:08:16] zoning code, whatever it is. Um that
[2:08:18] might save staff some time. But for me,
[2:08:22] I I don't know that I can discuss this
[2:08:24] further without it having come from the
[2:08:27] planning commission officially. So, I
[2:08:29] would like to see go back to planning
[2:08:30] commission, let them have some
[2:08:32] discussions because ultimately right now
[2:08:34] we don't know exactly what um what their
[2:08:36] thoughts and ideas are either.
[2:08:40] >> Thank you, council members.
[2:08:43] Mr. Casey, go ahead.
[2:08:48] » Follow up on Serena's, you know, uh I
[2:08:51] think Loi I mean I'm saving money here.
[2:08:55] Loi uh and and Mantika both have
[2:08:59] proposed
[2:09:01] the
[2:09:03] no more gas stations. I'm not sure about
[2:09:06] the car washes
[2:09:08] and I'm not sure where that went, but
[2:09:11] certainly as far as staff time. Uh
[2:09:17] not that we should
[2:09:19] do things that other cities do, but you
[2:09:22] know, part of the city league meeting
[2:09:24] that our council members are going to go
[2:09:27] to, you know, you get you share ideas.
[2:09:30] So, uh, it wouldn't, you know, I'm not
[2:09:32] sure. I'm getting the impression from
[2:09:35] you that it's going to cost a lot of
[2:09:37] money and when we do this, it's going
[2:09:40] to, you know, affect our budget. I'm
[2:09:43] just suggesting that make a few phone
[2:09:46] calls, find out what, you know, we don't
[2:09:48] have to follow up on it. And I also
[2:09:50] agree with Serena because I'm confused.
[2:09:53] I thought the planning commission
[2:09:54] already had voted 50 to bring this to
[2:09:59] us.
[2:10:01] Then we Thanks,
[2:10:04] >> Councilwoman Vier.
[2:10:06] >> Thank you. Um I do agree to should go to
[2:10:08] planning first. Um and if we do, I would
[2:10:11] think that we would want to limit staff
[2:10:12] time because I know they are busy and
[2:10:14] there's a lot of other things going on
[2:10:16] right now and several businesses and and
[2:10:18] even new developments that they're
[2:10:21] currently working on. I know there's two
[2:10:22] on Mitchell Road and I know we have the
[2:10:24] G3. I don't know if they have a name yet
[2:10:26] for that shopping center in my district
[2:10:29] um as well as one um on Morgan and
[2:10:33] Whitmore that's also looking at
[2:10:34] expanding. So I guess my concern is just
[2:10:38] looking at my district alone, not the
[2:10:40] rest of the city. I only have one car
[2:10:42] wash. There's always a line there. Um
[2:10:45] we're looking at developing. We're
[2:10:46] looking at addition adding additional
[2:10:48] homes, apartments, and other stuff in my
[2:10:51] district that's already in the process
[2:10:53] or in development in a discussion. Um,
[2:10:55] we also have, um, there is no gas
[2:10:58] stations for the most part on the Crows
[2:11:00] Landing aspect where these new
[2:11:01] developments are going. And so those are
[2:11:04] my concerns because then we're not
[2:11:06] servicing my district, which is a
[2:11:08] concern for me by putting these
[2:11:09] limitations in while these developments
[2:11:11] are in the process. And while Gallow is
[2:11:14] working on adding this new shopping
[2:11:16] center with two major anchor stores, I
[2:11:19] want to make sure we're not limiting the
[2:11:21] anchor stores in their ideas and their
[2:11:24] visions of what they have for the
[2:11:25] development there, especially on Crows
[2:11:28] Landing and Whitmore, which is key, as
[2:11:30] well as what Stan RTA had mentioned that
[2:11:33] they want to do there as well. I want to
[2:11:34] make sure they'll work cuz they're going
[2:11:36] to need to do something with their buses
[2:11:39] and I want to make sure that they have
[2:11:40] the resources that they need so that way
[2:11:42] they can be sustainable and successful
[2:11:44] here in series. And I guess those are
[2:11:46] going to be my concerns right now when
[2:11:48] it comes to this. And then um gas tax
[2:11:50] does play a significant amount which is
[2:11:52] why I think we rely on gas stations when
[2:11:55] it comes to our budget and um looking at
[2:11:57] what this would affect our budget long
[2:11:59] term especially with growth and our
[2:12:01] dependence on the gas tax here in
[2:12:03] series.
[2:12:04] Thank you, Vice Mayor. Before I go to
[2:12:06] you, I do have a couple comments. You
[2:12:08] know, series cannot claim to be open for
[2:12:10] business while you're telling a lawful
[2:12:12] business we're open, but just not for
[2:12:14] you. If a project complies with our
[2:12:17] general plan, zoning code, safety
[2:12:19] standards, and required findings, it
[2:12:21] deserves a fair opportunity to compete.
[2:12:24] These projects create jobs, construction
[2:12:26] activity, property tax, growth, site
[2:12:29] improvements, ongoing revenue for the
[2:12:31] city of Siri. The Quick Quack project
[2:12:33] alone represents more than 15 potential
[2:12:36] jobs along with construction investments
[2:12:38] and additional property tax revenue. The
[2:12:40] Maverick is another example where
[2:12:42] projecting annual sales could be up to
[2:12:44] $600,000.
[2:12:46] That revenue can help relieve pressure
[2:12:48] on our city budget. This would not
[2:12:51] create an economic diversity. It would
[2:12:53] limit competition and give existing
[2:12:54] businesses a government created
[2:12:56] advantage. I am pro business and I will
[2:12:59] not participate in creating a protected
[2:13:01] market or a monopoly that benefits one
[2:13:04] business or a select group. My direction
[2:13:06] is not to take any further action.
[2:13:10] Vice Mayor,
[2:13:12] thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just have one
[2:13:13] more question for Julian. Julian, how
[2:13:15] many uh gas stations in the city
[2:13:16] currently offer electrical charging
[2:13:18] stations?
[2:13:20] And then of the eight car washes you had
[2:13:22] mentioned, how many are standalone, not
[2:13:25] attached to gas stations?
[2:13:32] So on electric
[2:13:38] is
[2:13:43] two
[2:13:45] in the city. Um and then I'm sorry, what
[2:13:49] was the next question? I apologize.
[2:13:50] >> You had mentioned that there's eight car
[2:13:52] washes currently in the city. How many
[2:13:53] of those are standalone only car washes
[2:13:56] like Quack and the quick car wash on
[2:13:58] service.
[2:14:14] » There's five.
[2:14:16] Thank you,
[2:14:19] >> council. We're looking for consensus.
[2:14:21] Today is an opportunity for us to either
[2:14:24] give direction for staff to work on this
[2:14:27] or to pass on the idea. So, I will go
[2:14:31] ahead and start from my left from
[2:14:33] consensus. No, Vice Mayor, Councilwoman,
[2:14:37] >> I would like to pass it back to the
[2:14:39] planning commission and they're provided
[2:14:41] with the report.
[2:14:42] >> Okay, that's not what I'm asking, but I
[2:14:44] understand what you're asking. Is it a
[2:14:46] consensus? No or yes?
[2:14:50] >> Yes.
[2:14:51] That's no for me. Councilwoman Vera
[2:14:54] >> mean no for me
[2:14:55] >> and council member Casey. Yes, you got
[2:14:58] the consensus.
[2:15:00] >> Okay. Thank you very much.
[2:15:03] Moving on to council member referrals.
[2:15:09] We have one, two, three
[2:15:16] roughly 13 referrals. So, please be
[2:15:18] patient with us. And we're going to
[2:15:20] start off with number 12.
[2:15:23] And this one is creation of a citizens
[2:15:26] financial oversight and audit committee.
[2:15:28] And this was requested by council member
[2:15:30] Otero on March 24th, 2026. And she will
[2:15:33] now present the item.
[2:15:36] >> Thank you, mayor. Um, so as you know, we
[2:15:39] heard tonight with measure H committee,
[2:15:41] um, we've had, uh, myself and council
[2:15:44] member Casey ask for forensic audits.
[2:15:46] Um, our city I think lacks in some of
[2:15:50] the financial over oversight. There's a
[2:15:52] lot of improvements that need to be made
[2:15:53] and I think it's best that we allow the
[2:15:56] citizens to get involved and I would
[2:15:59] request that we create a financial
[2:16:01] oversight and audit committee. We're
[2:16:02] currently lacking in committees so it
[2:16:04] doesn't give the citizens opportunities
[2:16:06] to um participate in some of these
[2:16:08] things. There may be ideas that they
[2:16:10] have that the council may not have. So,
[2:16:13] I would like to create this committee.
[2:16:16] >> Thank you, council member. We'll open
[2:16:17] this up to the public. Any members of
[2:16:19] the public would like to make a comment
[2:16:20] on this item.
[2:16:22] >> Seeing none, hands raised.
[2:16:25] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom.
[2:16:26] >> And bring this item back for comments,
[2:16:28] questions, or consensus?
[2:16:31] No comments, consensus. You're okay with
[2:16:33] it, Vice Mayor? I'm a no.
[2:16:37] Rosinda. Okay, you got your consensus.
[2:16:42] Item number 13,
[2:16:44] installing K rails at the series
[2:16:47] cemetery. This was requested by council
[2:16:49] member Casey at the April 6, 2026
[2:16:51] regular city council meeting. Council
[2:16:53] member Casey.
[2:16:56] » Yes, this U K rails is
[2:17:02] the term that I use, but actually the the situation is simple. uh because
[2:17:08] of the highways design that was approved
[2:17:10] by CALR or the city occasionally and I
[2:17:16] don't know how often but often enough uh
[2:17:19] we have cars that come over the overpass
[2:17:24] uh and then run into the fence and into
[2:17:27] the cemetery. As the cemetery grows,
[2:17:31] they're going to have
[2:17:34] our loved ones right there. And so, uh,
[2:17:38] I think that we we the city's obligated
[2:17:41] to protect the
[2:17:46] safety of the cemetery. [clears throat]
[2:17:51] >> Pretty simple.
[2:17:52] >> Thank you, Mr. Casey. Go out to the
[2:17:54] public. Any members of the public would
[2:17:55] like to make a comment or question on
[2:17:56] this item?
[2:18:00] » Who would pay for the the K rails?
[2:18:06] Who would pay for the crib rails?
[2:18:08] >> We'll get that answered for you in a
[2:18:09] second.
[2:18:10] >> In other words, are you asking the city
[2:18:12] owns the cemetery, but the cemetery has
[2:18:15] money? Would the cemetery be paying for
[2:18:18] the K rails and you only given
[2:18:20] permission or are you going to pay for
[2:18:23] them being put in? the the situation is
[2:18:26] that the the property that we're talking
[2:18:28] about belongs to the city, not to the
[2:18:32] >> the city cannot afford to keep doing all
[2:18:34] these little things. If the cemetery has
[2:18:36] the money and the cemetery is a
[2:18:38] business, then the cemetery should take
[2:18:40] care of it. That's my opinion. Thank
[2:18:42] you.
[2:18:43] >> Thank you. And and actually the the uh
[2:18:47] recommendation was for the city and the
[2:18:49] cemetery staff to get together to see if
[2:18:52] they could resolve it. Thank you. Any
[2:18:55] additional comments or questions from
[2:18:56] the audience?
[2:19:01] » John Warren, city of Siri.
[2:19:04] Um,
[2:19:08] the city of Modesto has a similar
[2:19:10] problem along Scenic Drive where the
[2:19:14] cemeteries are there, the brick wall,
[2:19:16] and they quite often have to make
[2:19:19] repairs because of some errant driver
[2:19:22] going down the street.
[2:19:24] The city of series can't control the
[2:19:26] motoring public out there as they come
[2:19:28] over the overpass and come down the
[2:19:30] highway. Accidents are going to happen.
[2:19:33] They're called accidents. Um, very
[2:19:36] seldom I don't think someone will
[2:19:38] intentionally run into the fence at the
[2:19:41] Siri cemetery.
[2:19:43] Um, if the cemetery association feels
[2:19:46] they need some sort of protection along
[2:19:49] the ride ofway between the sidewalk and
[2:19:51] the fence line, they need to install
[2:19:54] that themselves.
[2:19:56] That's my feeling. I don't think it's
[2:19:58] the city's obligation to try to
[2:20:02] determine whether someone's going to
[2:20:04] have an accident there or not and try to
[2:20:06] prevent it with a K rail so they won't
[2:20:09] run into that property. Hay rails are
[2:20:11] going to need to be maintained. Pretty
[2:20:13] soon you're going to have homeless
[2:20:14] people sleeping behind them, people
[2:20:16] riding all over the front of them with
[2:20:18] spray paint. So, there's things to
[2:20:21] consider when when that happens. If you
[2:20:24] put a wall down through there, a sound
[2:20:26] wall of sorts to protect the cemetery,
[2:20:29] which the cemetery should do themselves,
[2:20:32] they're going to have to maintain the
[2:20:33] writing on it because people are going
[2:20:35] to come along with spray paint and and
[2:20:37] do their graffiti thing. So, those are
[2:20:39] things to consider. I don't think the
[2:20:42] city has an obligation to provide um
[2:20:45] traffic safety for the cemetery. Thank
[2:20:47] you.
[2:20:48] >> Thank you, Mr. Warren. Anybody else has
[2:20:50] a comment or question?
[2:20:53] >> Mr. Mayor?
[2:20:54] >> Yes.
[2:20:55] >> Just uh for council's awareness, I know
[2:20:57] that this referral item was requested by
[2:20:59] council member Casey back on April 6th
[2:21:02] of this year.
[2:21:05] About a month ago,
[2:21:07] uh the police chief, economic
[2:21:10] development director, the city engineer,
[2:21:13] and myself went out and met with board
[2:21:15] members of the uh cemetery district
[2:21:18] along with, I believe it was the general
[2:21:21] manager, and we discussed a recent event
[2:21:24] that had occurred out there where I
[2:21:27] believe a a vehicle went through the
[2:21:29] fence that sparked uh this conversation.
[2:21:32] Uh the police chief was very good about
[2:21:34] giving some suggestions about what they
[2:21:36] can do on their own property. Um the
[2:21:38] engineer talked about right-of-way
[2:21:40] access and some different things that
[2:21:42] they can do. Um so while there is an
[2:21:45] opportunity for the city to do something
[2:21:47] on the city property, my impression is
[2:21:50] that the cemetery uh board of directors
[2:21:53] that were represented there along with
[2:21:54] the general manager were satisfied with
[2:21:57] the recommendations made by staff on
[2:21:59] what they can do on their own property.
[2:22:01] And this is not to sway the decision one
[2:22:03] way or the other. It's just to make the
[2:22:05] council aware that four of your top
[2:22:07] staff members did meet with the cemetery
[2:22:10] uh staff about a month ago regarding
[2:22:12] this issue.
[2:22:14] Thank you very much. If there's no
[2:22:16] additional comments, I'll bring this
[2:22:17] item back for the council. Additional
[2:22:20] comments or questions? I do see every
[2:22:23] button was pressed. I believe
[2:22:24] Councilwoman Vieira, your button was
[2:22:25] pressed first. Go ahead. Thank you um
[2:22:28] mayor and thank you city manager because
[2:22:31] I was going to ask because I remember
[2:22:32] having this discussion with you when
[2:22:34] that occurred. Um again I would like to
[2:22:37] concur with several of the other
[2:22:38] residents that have already spoke
[2:22:39] regarding the budget. I don't think we
[2:22:41] have a budget to be paying for it and I
[2:22:44] think with the recommendations you made
[2:22:46] um from what I had heard the feedback I
[2:22:48] heard back from the board members is
[2:22:49] that they were satisfied with the
[2:22:51] discussion and the steps that were
[2:22:52] taken. I guess my only concern are are
[2:22:55] the steps being taken so we can recoup
[2:22:57] the costs or are they recouping the cost
[2:23:00] from the drivers that are damaging the
[2:23:02] fence because ultimately it's the
[2:23:03] drivers that are damaging the fence and
[2:23:07] I think at this point in time I'm
[2:23:09] satisfied with the meeting that occurred
[2:23:11] and the board members seem to be happy
[2:23:12] that had talked to me. Again, not all of
[2:23:14] them. I only talked to a few. Um and so
[2:23:16] I'm happy with what the discussion that
[2:23:18] occurred and [snorts] the steps that you
[2:23:20] laid out moving forward.
[2:23:22] Thank you, uh, Vice Mayor.
[2:23:25] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, my issue with this is it just goes back to what
[2:23:29] I've kind of been harping on is is how
[2:23:31] quickly things are are expedited.
[2:23:33] There's 11 is it 11 council member
[2:23:36] referrals on here tonight. Uh, Mr.
[2:23:38] Casey's referral was 98 days ago, almost
[2:23:40] 100 days ago. A month ago, you're
[2:23:42] telling me that you already went ahead
[2:23:43] and did Mr. Casey's referral. And now,
[2:23:46] why are we discussing this if you guys
[2:23:47] already went ahead and did it? That's my
[2:23:49] problem. We we make a referral and then
[2:23:51] we sit around and we wait months for
[2:23:53] them to come to us. So we've got 11
[2:23:54] here, two before Mr. Casey's or one
[2:23:57] before Mr. Casey's was further along. So
[2:24:00] uh beforehand I would have said yes, I
[2:24:01] would like to sit down and see what the
[2:24:02] discussion would look like since that
[2:24:04] was Mr. Casey's initial request, but
[2:24:07] seeing as how you guys have already done
[2:24:08] it, uh I would be a no for this as it
[2:24:10] doesn't seem like it would be necessary
[2:24:11] now.
[2:24:14] >> Councilwoman,
[2:24:15] >> thank you, Mayor. Um,
[2:24:18] I know this is, you know, part of the
[2:24:21] cemetery's responsibility, but I'm just
[2:24:24] curious if there is any potential
[2:24:27] liability on the city side. Um, that
[2:24:30] overpass, I I don't know how many years
[2:24:32] that, you know, it's been a long time
[2:24:34] since it was redone, right, and it was
[2:24:35] widened. Um, is there a possibility that
[2:24:38] something with the design at one point
[2:24:40] is, you know, part of this issue? And I
[2:24:44] know people are going to speed, there's
[2:24:45] going to be accidents, but um that's
[2:24:47] what I think about when it comes to
[2:24:49] liability for the city. I would be
[2:24:51] interested in still getting a staff
[2:24:53] report um to cover like some of the
[2:24:56] things that the city manager just
[2:24:57] discussed and what was um what occurred
[2:24:59] in the meeting that they had at the
[2:25:00] cemetery. I think it's great to, you
[2:25:03] know, they did that beforehand so we
[2:25:04] have an idea. Um, but I do support uh
[2:25:07] council member Casey's referral because
[2:25:10] we should look at all options even if we
[2:25:13] don't move forward with it. Thank you.
[2:25:17] >> Okay. So, city manager, I do appreciate
[2:25:19] you going out and communicating with
[2:25:22] this the the board. Uh but I would say
[2:25:26] that I think that it's still warrant
[2:25:28] that we at least get some information
[2:25:30] back even if uh the council may not move
[2:25:33] forward with funding from our side but
[2:25:35] at least understand what you guys spoke
[2:25:38] about what the plan is and if there is
[2:25:41] liability uh city attorney what that
[2:25:44] would look like. I think that's that's
[2:25:46] fair to ask and then we can take action.
[2:25:48] I mean today is is more about consensus
[2:25:51] but at least that's I'm supportive of
[2:25:53] that. Mr. Casey, would that satisfy your
[2:25:56] request, sir?
[2:25:57] >> Sure. And you know, this is this is no
[2:26:01] fault of the staff or the council that's
[2:26:04] sitting here, but uh my understanding
[2:26:07] is that the the board and the the
[2:26:10] cemeteries come before the city uh and
[2:26:14] ask if there's [clears throat] anything
[2:26:16] we can do. And like other issues,
[2:26:21] uh they never got an answer. they no one
[2:26:23] took the time to talk to them. So, uh
[2:26:27] I'm pleased that the uh city manager and
[2:26:32] staff was able to get together and kind
[2:26:36] of agree with council vice mayor rather
[2:26:40] vice mayor Daniel Martinez that maybe we
[2:26:45] should have pulled this because it's
[2:26:46] already in the work and that was the
[2:26:48] point of it. Uh but again, the reason it
[2:26:52] was even brought up is because
[2:26:55] they they I I secondhand information I
[2:26:59] was told that uh they came before the
[2:27:03] city tried to get a hold of somebody to
[2:27:06] see if they could we could work together
[2:27:08] and they never neighbor got an answer
[2:27:10] back and so they asked me to do this and
[2:27:14] um I did it. [clears throat] Thank you.
[2:27:17] >> Sounds good, Mr. Casey,
[2:27:19] >> one more clarification, Mr. Mayor. Um,
[2:27:22] so this was a pending referral item
[2:27:24] specifically for K rails and until we
[2:27:27] got to this referral item at the council
[2:27:29] meeting, there was a request by the
[2:27:32] cemetery staff to meet with city staff.
[2:27:35] So the discussion between city staff and
[2:27:37] the cemetery staff was not part of this
[2:27:40] referral. It wasn't specifically for
[2:27:42] krolls. It was the city staff responding
[2:27:45] to the cemetery staff's request for what
[2:27:48] can they do? Can they do can they put
[2:27:50] krails on their property? Can they grow
[2:27:53] specific type of trees that if it does
[2:27:56] crash into the fence, it hits the tree
[2:27:58] instead of the the railing. So while the
[2:28:01] meeting was at the request of the the
[2:28:06] cemetery staff separate from is the city
[2:28:09] going to put kilos here. So just to
[2:28:12] clarify that that's why that meeting
[2:28:14] happened.
[2:28:15] >> Thank you. I'll go ahead and do a
[2:28:17] consensus from left to right. Vice
[2:28:18] Mayor. No. Councilwoman. Yes. Yes. For
[2:28:21] me. No for Ros Linda and Mr. Casey. Yes.
[2:28:26] Okay. Thank you very much. Moving on to
[2:28:29] item number 14. This is a joint city
[2:28:31] council and planning commission meeting.
[2:28:33] This is requested by Vice Mayor Martinez
[2:28:35] on April 13, 2026. Vice Mayor.
[2:28:38] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know we've had
[2:28:39] them in the past. Uh before they weren't
[2:28:41] referrals, they were just held. Uh but I
[2:28:44] was told this time around by the city
[2:28:45] manager need to be a referral from a
[2:28:46] council member. So that's what this is
[2:28:48] just requesting us to sit down and have
[2:28:50] our joint meeting.
[2:28:52] >> Thank you very much. Can the me any
[2:28:54] comments from the audience?
[2:28:58] Seeing none, nobody online. I bring this
[2:29:01] item back for comments, questions, or
[2:29:02] consensus.
[2:29:04] I'll go ahead and do consensus left
[2:29:06] right. Vice Mayor. Yes. Yes. for me.
[2:29:10] Okay, you got your consensus, city
[2:29:12] clerk.
[2:29:18] Moving on to item number 15. This is
[2:29:19] amending the s excuse me, amending the
[2:29:21] series municipal code to eliminate city
[2:29:23] council healthcare benefits and reduce
[2:29:25] the city's council stipen by 50%. And
[2:29:28] this was requested by council member
[2:29:29] Otter on the May 11, 2026 regular city
[2:29:32] council meeting.
[2:29:34] >> Thank you, mayor. Um, I've mentioned
[2:29:36] this a few times and the council is
[2:29:38] aware of my suggestion. Um, but I do
[2:29:42] want to put this on the record uh that
[2:29:44] we that I'm requesting to amend the
[2:29:47] municipal code to eliminate the city
[2:29:50] council's healthcare benefits um
[2:29:52] currently because of the budget crisis
[2:29:54] that we are in. Uh that's not to say,
[2:29:57] you know, later on in the future a
[2:29:59] council could come back and re-evaluate
[2:30:01] it. I also would recommend that we do
[2:30:04] our part as well in in this budget in
[2:30:08] these budget cuts and cut the stipen in
[2:30:10] half for the council members.
[2:30:13] >> Thank you very much, council member. Any
[2:30:14] members of the public would like to make
[2:30:15] a comment on this item?
[2:30:27] » Welcome to Reynolds from series
[2:30:32] I strongly agree with this and I think
[2:30:36] it should have been done prior to right
[2:30:39] now. It should have been discussed and
[2:30:41] handled when we were doing the budget
[2:30:44] cuts, but I think this is an excellent
[2:30:48] recommendation.
[2:30:51] >> Thank you very much. Is there anyone
[2:30:52] else?
[2:30:54] Seeing none, anybody on Zoom?
[2:30:57] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom. bring
[2:30:58] this item back for comments, questions,
[2:31:00] or consensus.
[2:31:03] from left to right, Vice
[2:31:04] Mayor. No. Councilwoman. Yes. No for me.
[2:31:08] Oh, I'm sorry. My apologies. I did not
[2:31:09] see your your button. Let's hold that
[2:31:11] thought for a second. Council member
[2:31:13] Vieira,
[2:31:14] >> sorry, a little fast. Um
[2:31:17] although just looking at past history,
[2:31:20] this has been we haven't adjusted the
[2:31:22] pay or the benefits in years. I saw
[2:31:23] prior council members and mayors have
[2:31:25] used this. I think um cutting the pay
[2:31:28] actually hurts not the current council
[2:31:30] members but future generations and
[2:31:32] future leaders those that are looking at
[2:31:34] coming to council working mothers I know
[2:31:36] there was one that was considering
[2:31:37] running but she's like what about
[2:31:38] daycare? What about you how do I take
[2:31:40] care of single mothers um young
[2:31:43] professionals and even um different
[2:31:45] people that are considering running
[2:31:47] because again there's a lot of cost. My
[2:31:49] um my contribution is not just coming to
[2:31:51] the council meetings. I work with our
[2:31:54] city staff. I know all of them have met
[2:31:56] with a lot of us here on the dis almost
[2:31:59] daily. I think they some of us see me
[2:32:01] daily or multiple times including I know
[2:32:03] the mayor and Martinez I know we're in
[2:32:05] almost daily. Um the cost of doing
[2:32:07] business because again we're going to
[2:32:09] these dinners and handing out
[2:32:10] certificates. We're not getting in there
[2:32:12] free. We're not eating the meals. We're
[2:32:14] usually handing out certificates while
[2:32:16] everyone else is eating and having
[2:32:18] dinner. Um we're also I sending welcome
[2:32:20] letters to new residents that bought the
[2:32:22] homes in my district. those stamps came
[2:32:24] out of my pocket. That was part of my
[2:32:26] contribution back to the community. I'm
[2:32:28] engaging with businesses. Um I'm
[2:32:30] engaging working a lot with Julian,
[2:32:32] what's open, what's available, what can
[2:32:33] I promote so I can bring businesses in
[2:32:35] because that's key. We need diversity.
[2:32:37] We need to engage in businesses so they
[2:32:40] want to come to series. But that takes
[2:32:42] time. That takes money. That takes
[2:32:44] strategy. And that's not money that I
[2:32:45] get reimbursed from the city. That comes
[2:32:47] directly out of my pocket. Um I also
[2:32:49] look at state law. um heavily lean on
[2:32:51] California's SP 329. It's a state
[2:32:54] legislator bill that actually changed
[2:32:56] the caps and then that because our pay
[2:32:58] cap hasn't been adjusted since I believe
[2:33:00] it was 1984. We're still making the same
[2:33:02] stipen that they were making in 1984 and
[2:33:05] $500 there in 1984 significantly
[2:33:07] different than what $500 is today and
[2:33:10] how far that goes when it comes to a lot
[2:33:12] of what we contribute not counting um
[2:33:15] inflation and representation. A lot of
[2:33:17] my district live in multi-generational
[2:33:20] households. So there's three or four
[2:33:22] generations living in one household
[2:33:23] because they can't afford to live in a
[2:33:25] large home or have multiple large
[2:33:28] bedrooms individually to themselves. So
[2:33:30] when I look at what the state was doing
[2:33:32] when they passed this law, I think it's
[2:33:34] important that uh we make sure that it's
[2:33:36] set up so that way those single moms
[2:33:38] that do have to pay for daycare, those
[2:33:40] that need um other reasons and the re
[2:33:43] still want to contribute to Siri still
[2:33:44] have that opportunity. and that is why
[2:33:47] I'm not supportive of it at this time.
[2:33:50] >> Okay. So, we got your consensus. Council
[2:33:52] member Casey, did you have a couple
[2:33:53] comments, sir?
[2:33:56] » Thank you.
[2:33:58] know, um
[2:34:02] those of us who are responsible for the
[2:34:04] situation that we're in, um
[2:34:09] we we should be the first ones to take
[2:34:12] the hit. So, I uh think that you think
[2:34:17] about this in the budget cut. We did
[2:34:20] away with uh the Christmas tree thing,
[2:34:23] the Easter thing, the Halloween thing,
[2:34:26] the swimming thing.
[2:34:30] So, we're we didn't do such a good job.
[2:34:33] Uh, and if you ran for this office
[2:34:38] because of the the benefits,
[2:34:42] um, maybe you should rethink it. We
[2:34:45] should be running and serving the people
[2:34:48] for their benefit, not for our benefit.
[2:34:51] So that's the way I feel. Thank you very
[2:34:54] much.
[2:34:56] >> Thank you, council member. Did you get
[2:34:57] the consensus from all? Thank you very
[2:34:59] much.
[2:35:01] Item number 16.
[2:35:06] This one is evaluating strategies of
[2:35:08] amending the zoning code to diversify
[2:35:11] business types. This was requested by
[2:35:13] council member Otero at the May 11, 2026
[2:35:16] regular city council meeting.
[2:35:20] >> Thank you, mayor. Um,
[2:35:23] when it comes to the speed limits on the streets that are listed on this
[2:35:28] agenda here, Eastgate Booth, um, I did
[2:35:30] mention Moffett Road to the
[2:35:33] >> I think Oh, you know, number 16.
[2:35:36] >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm ahead here. Um,
[2:35:38] backing up to evaluate strategies of
[2:35:40] amending the zoning code. Um, so tonight
[2:35:42] we talked about, you know, potential
[2:35:44] temporary moratorum on uh the gas
[2:35:47] stations and car washes. Um, there's got
[2:35:49] to be a better way to
[2:35:52] diversify. Like it says the business
[2:35:54] types that we have here. There's got to
[2:35:56] be a way to bring in some different
[2:35:57] types of businesses. Um, I feel other
[2:36:01] cities do it and uh that's why I brought
[2:36:05] this referral forward because I'd like
[2:36:07] to see us amend the zoning code. Um,
[2:36:09] we're going to be growing with more
[2:36:11] housing and all of that, but I don't
[2:36:14] want I want people to come here and stay
[2:36:15] here. I don't want them to leave. I
[2:36:17] don't want businesses to leave. So, um I
[2:36:20] would like us to, you know, have an
[2:36:23] option to amend the current zoning code.
[2:36:27] >> Thank you very much. Open this up to the
[2:36:28] public. Any members of the public would
[2:36:30] like to make a comment on this item.
[2:36:36] I just want to say that was quite a
[2:36:38] speech that the mayor give about the gas
[2:36:40] stations, about the diversity, and not
[2:36:43] telling anybody we couldn't have another
[2:36:45] gas station. Where were you when you
[2:36:48] budded into the Guatemala chicken deal?
[2:36:54] » Thank you very much for your comment.
[2:36:56] Anybody else have any additional
[2:36:58] comments?
[2:37:01] Seeing none, bring this item back to
[2:37:02] council. Anything on Zoom?
[2:37:05] >> There. No hands raised on Zoom.
[2:37:06] >> All right. Thank you very much. Looking
[2:37:08] for cons. Ros Linda, you're quick.
[2:37:11] Councilwoman Vieira.
[2:37:13] >> All right. I I don't exactly know what
[2:37:15] you want to change. Um, now when it
[2:37:18] comes to diversifi, I guess it comes
[2:37:19] down to Julian. Are you still attending
[2:37:21] the ICSC conferences which is where you
[2:37:24] connect with the businesses to try to
[2:37:26] convince them that series is where they
[2:37:28] want to build and live and reside and be
[2:37:32] okay and that's still part of the budget
[2:37:34] cuz I think that's going to be the
[2:37:35] biggest key is having you connect with
[2:37:37] those businesses and trying to get them
[2:37:39] in here and sitting down and having
[2:37:41] those continued meetings is I know I've
[2:37:43] been on a few of them not all of them.
[2:37:45] Um but I think that's key and making
[2:37:46] sure that you still have those
[2:37:48] opportunities. um and if that's going to
[2:37:50] be part of the strategy.
[2:37:52] >> That is correct. And we do have several
[2:37:55] items in the pipeline. I just can't
[2:37:56] share at this meeting, but we do have a
[2:37:59] lot coming through. Um and so if there
[2:38:02] is a point where the zoning is does not
[2:38:05] match, then that is the discussion that
[2:38:08] we have with those businesses for an
[2:38:10] amendment um that they're if they're
[2:38:13] willing to do that, then that is an
[2:38:15] option for them to do. Now, do we have a
[2:38:18] lot of businesses that are requesting
[2:38:20] amendments or for the most part they're
[2:38:22] going directly kind of where it's
[2:38:23] already zoned for commercial?
[2:38:24] >> For the most part, they're going to
[2:38:26] where they are permitted by right for
[2:38:28] the zoning. That's what they look for
[2:38:30] first and foremost in those areas. And
[2:38:32] so, um, a lot of them have reached out
[2:38:35] because they do their due diligence. And
[2:38:37] so, when they usually knock on our door,
[2:38:38] it's because they've done their homework
[2:38:40] and we've engaged with them over a
[2:38:43] period of time.
[2:38:45] And you're not specifically telling
[2:38:47] anyone no don't come to seriesiries.
[2:38:49] Correct.
[2:38:49] >> I would never tell anyone no not to come
[2:38:51] to series.
[2:38:52] >> Okay. And you are scheduled. I just want
[2:38:54] to make sure with the budget exped ICSC
[2:38:56] in Monterey. Yes, that is correct.
[2:38:58] >> Okay. That answers my question. Thank
[2:38:59] you,
[2:39:01] >> Vice Mayor.
[2:39:02] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Julian, it sounds
[2:39:03] like you already answered. I just wanted
[2:39:04] to have you reiterate. We already do uh
[2:39:06] the process of going and networking,
[2:39:08] finding businesses, and when you have
[2:39:09] somebody that applies for a location
[2:39:11] that doesn't fit where they should be,
[2:39:12] you work with them to move or find
[2:39:14] different site maps that they could
[2:39:15] possibly apply to. Correct.
[2:39:16] >> Yes, that is correct. So, we do pre
[2:39:18] pre-development meetings with them. So,
[2:39:20] they'll give us a site plan, a
[2:39:21] description of what they want, the
[2:39:23] zoning area, the location. We verify
[2:39:25] everything and then if it is not a
[2:39:27] permitted by right, we'll look to see if
[2:39:29] there's a conditional use permit that
[2:39:31] can be done. If not, then we ask then
[2:39:33] we'll go into possible general plan
[2:39:35] amendment or zoning amendment for them.
[2:39:37] Yeah.
[2:39:37] >> Awesome. Thank you. So, it sounds like
[2:39:39] essentially you're already doing what
[2:39:40] referral is requesting.
[2:39:41] >> Yes.
[2:39:41] >> Thank you, sir.
[2:39:42] >> And Julian, could you name an instance
[2:39:45] recently where you brought a business
[2:39:47] owner to the planning commission and
[2:39:49] gave them a conditional use permit and
[2:39:52] they were allowed to continue to run
[2:39:53] their business.
[2:39:55] So, we have the um in our industrial
[2:39:58] park area, we have a
[2:40:01] jiu-jitsu, I believe, um organization
[2:40:04] that it is not permitted by right. Um
[2:40:07] they needed a conditional use permit to
[2:40:09] establish the business there. So, we
[2:40:11] made sure that they provided all the
[2:40:14] information, documentation, site plan
[2:40:16] that they needed so that we can present
[2:40:18] that to planning commission to get it
[2:40:19] approved. Um parking was one of the
[2:40:22] things that we had discussed back and
[2:40:23] forth. So they adjusted their times and made it so that So yes, so we will
[2:40:28] work with them and we'll do our due
[2:40:29] diligence to try to bring the business
[2:40:32] to the location that they're at. We are
[2:40:34] also working on another one that's
[2:40:36] coming that is not permitted by right um
[2:40:38] but that needs a conditional use permit
[2:40:40] and so those are the options. So when
[2:40:43] they come through um we will have those
[2:40:45] discussions with them and give them the
[2:40:47] options that are available.
[2:40:49] >> Thank you very much Julian. Do
[2:40:50] appreciate that. Any additional comments
[2:40:52] or questions?
[2:40:54] We get consensus, please, vice mayor,
[2:40:57] councilwoman. No for me.
[2:41:00] >> No.
[2:41:03] >> Vice Mayor, can I get what your
[2:41:04] consensus was?
[2:41:05] >> No. So, no. Uh, for Vice Mayor, mayor,
[2:41:09] and Rosalinda, Council Member Vieiraa.
[2:41:12] >> Thank you.
[2:41:17] Item number 17, form a budget committee
[2:41:20] with a member from each council district
[2:41:22] requested by council member Casey on the
[2:41:24] May 11, 2026 regular city council
[2:41:26] meeting.
[2:41:30] » Yes. You know, I since I've been on the
[2:41:33] council, we have uh
[2:41:38] this year was probably one of the better
[2:41:40] years, but typically we we as council
[2:41:43] people, at least this council person, uh
[2:41:47] get information about the budget,
[2:41:52] the last meeting in May, if we have one,
[2:41:56] and then we have,
[2:41:58] you know, a meet first meeting in June.
[2:42:00] soon
[2:42:02] we're going to decide on an 800page
[2:42:04] thing. I think that um we should form
[2:42:09] this committee. It should be partially
[2:42:13] from the community.
[2:42:15] uh how how we select those members
[2:42:19] I don't I'm not certain but uh we need
[2:42:21] to get started on our 200
[2:42:26] 26
[2:42:28] 27
[2:42:30] uh 2728 I guess uh budget sooner than
[2:42:35] not and I I think it's important to have
[2:42:39] input on that. Thank you.
[2:42:41] >> Thank you Mr. Casey. We'll open this up
[2:42:43] to the public. Any members of the public
[2:42:44] would like to make a comment on this
[2:42:46] item.
[2:42:48] Yes.
[2:42:54] Galan Guzman for the record. Uh so yeah,
[2:42:56] I'm in support of this. Uh this
[2:42:59] uh I'm in support of this. Uh yeah, the
[2:43:02] city of series does a poor job of
[2:43:04] engaging uh its citizens in like
[2:43:07] day-to-day uh daily activities. Um but
[2:43:10] the budget it's like one of the main
[2:43:13] vital documents to a city in including
[2:43:15] the strategic plan. Um so how do you
[2:43:21] like I think it does also a poor um
[2:43:25] assessment of community needs you know
[2:43:27] from one district to another the the
[2:43:29] needs of the community are slightly
[2:43:31] different. So including a member of each
[2:43:34] district um I think is vital. Uh there's
[2:43:38] other cities that
[2:43:40] um actually engage more um more of their
[2:43:45] residents in the budget uh you know
[2:43:48] process. The city is series. Yeah, it's
[2:43:50] bad. Like if I'd give you guys a grade,
[2:43:52] I'd do like D. Like it's not passing. Um
[2:43:57] so yeah uh like I do agree with council
[2:44:00] member Casey and saying that you know
[2:44:02] for fiscal year 20 um you know 26 27
[2:44:06] budget it was a little bit better but
[2:44:09] only holding like one or two meetings a
[2:44:12] year um as far as like community and
[2:44:15] public engagement is not sufficient like
[2:44:19] and then only holding like these budget
[2:44:22] like workshops at a certain time you
[2:44:25] know It doesn't work with everyone, you
[2:44:27] know, everyone works a different
[2:44:28] schedule. Uh, you know, and creating
[2:44:31] this budget committee, it would allow
[2:44:34] more public feedback and then actually
[2:44:36] going door todoor perhaps like to get
[2:44:39] like, hey, like what do you think this
[2:44:40] district needs, you know? Um, so just
[2:44:44] stuff like that. Like obviously I live
[2:44:46] in district 2 and like the landscaping
[2:44:48] is really bad. You got plots of along
[2:44:50] like St. Clara Morgan, you know, you got
[2:44:52] a tree a a dead tree, you know, like if
[2:44:56] perhaps like allocating more money to
[2:44:58] actually beautify series would be
[2:45:00] beneficial and like it's an eyesore
[2:45:03] right now and it's been an eyesore for a
[2:45:05] long time, you know, this didn't happen
[2:45:06] overnight, you know, and the whole like
[2:45:09] financial audit that wasn't done for
[2:45:10] fiscal year 24 to uh 25, you know, it's
[2:45:14] like a year later or two years later,
[2:45:16] you know what I mean? like this if this
[2:45:18] was implemented it would be it would
[2:45:20] have been caught on time you know uh
[2:45:22] budget like turnaround time is average 6
[2:45:25] years I mean 6 months after the end of
[2:45:27] the fiscal year here we are in July we
[2:45:31] don't have it completed yet you know
[2:45:33] it's already it should have already been
[2:45:34] back you know and like for fiscal year
[2:45:37] uh 25 to 26 it we should already have
[2:45:40] submitted it so we're like behind the
[2:45:42] ball you know and it's your guys's um
[2:45:46] you guys are the checks and balances and
[2:45:48] you guys are I feel like it's you guys
[2:45:49] are doing like a great job. So honestly
[2:45:52] I think this is very needed.
[2:45:55] Thank you very much. Anyone else would
[2:45:57] like to make a comment?
[2:46:04] John Warren, City of Series.
[2:46:06] Um,
[2:46:12] forming a budget committee with a member
[2:46:15] from each district.
[2:46:18] um would be an ideal thing
[2:46:22] um for our members of the uh community
[2:46:27] to become involved in and looking at
[2:46:30] what the budget process actually takes
[2:46:32] place um starting in January or December
[2:46:38] u coming up for the next budget year. So
[2:46:43] each department's budget could be
[2:46:45] analyzed and discussed and gone over
[2:46:48] with your with your budget committee and
[2:46:50] then a report back to the to the city
[2:46:52] council or in addition to the
[2:46:57] uh five members of the community. Um,
[2:47:01] there should be someone from the city
[2:47:03] council sitting on that committee as
[2:47:05] well who's familiar with the budget
[2:47:07] process and maybe somebody from staff
[2:47:10] that could sit in occasionally as the
[2:47:13] meetings progress
[2:47:16] through the process. one or two meetings
[2:47:18] probably not enough um because it will
[2:47:22] take a while to go through line by line
[2:47:25] each department's budget and ask
[2:47:28] questions about what this expenditure is
[2:47:30] for and why this expenditure is there.
[2:47:33] And by doing that um all the things that
[2:47:37] you talked about during the regular
[2:47:38] budget process
[2:47:40] >> [snorts]
[2:47:40] >> um will be brought forward and the uh
[2:47:44] public will understand how that goes.
[2:47:47] Um, I know some of this the city manager
[2:47:50] does these things um privately or in
[2:47:54] meetings with each group as a budget
[2:47:57] year goes along and are preparing for
[2:47:58] the next budget, but citizens don't have
[2:48:01] any opportunity to see what's going on
[2:48:04] here. So maybe it's something they could
[2:48:06] do together or be involved with
[2:48:09] simultaneously.
[2:48:11] And so I think this is a good thing to
[2:48:13] consider and I hope you do so. Thank
[2:48:15] you.
[2:48:17] very much. Anyone else?
[2:48:21] Bring this item back to council for
[2:48:23] comments, questions. Councilwomano,
[2:48:27] um I just want to get clarification from
[2:48:30] council member Casey.
[2:48:32] Is your request for a budget committee
[2:48:34] only during the budget season during
[2:48:37] those couple months or could we
[2:48:39] incorporate this into the forensic I'm
[2:48:41] sorry, the financial oversight audit
[2:48:43] committee? Maybe we can call it a budget
[2:48:45] oversight and audit committee. I do. Um,
[2:48:48] and additionally, I do like the idea of
[2:48:50] having one representative from each
[2:48:52] district.
[2:48:54] >> Yeah,
[2:48:56] it's a good question. And for
[2:48:57] clarification, it would be an ongoing
[2:48:59] thing. We're scheduled to have a review
[2:49:04] this September of where we are with the
[2:49:06] budget. So, that committee would be part
[2:49:09] of that review prior to
[2:49:14] coming out to the public.
[2:49:17] Somehow we need to work on that. Yeah,
[2:49:20] thank you for the clarification.
[2:49:22] >> You're welcome. And um so
[2:49:25] just for uh confirmation, could city
[2:49:28] staff combine your referral and my
[2:49:30] referral to bring back a staff report on
[2:49:34] what this committee would look like?
[2:49:37] >> Yes. Thank you.
[2:49:38] >> Thank you.
[2:49:44] Mr. Mayor, can I just make one
[2:49:45] clarification real quick? The um
[2:49:49] the quarterly audit that we have
[2:49:52] committed to do the first one will be
[2:49:54] for the month of July, August and
[2:49:56] September. But that report will not be
[2:49:59] made in September. We have to get
[2:50:01] through the month, reconcile the books.
[2:50:03] So that first report will be in October,
[2:50:06] but it will be for the months of July,
[2:50:08] August, and September. Councilwoman
[2:50:12] Vier,
[2:50:15] >> thank you. Um I think my question was
[2:50:17] pretty well answered by um Council
[2:50:19] Member Otto because it sound like it was
[2:50:21] similar. Um and it just sounds like the
[2:50:23] only difference was since it's a
[2:50:25] financial one, it was incorporating the
[2:50:27] budget and one from each district which
[2:50:30] I think are if you were okay with those
[2:50:32] reasonable adjustments to your
[2:50:33] recommendation, I would be supportive of
[2:50:35] that. But I don't think we necessarily
[2:50:36] need two groups overseeing the same
[2:50:39] thing unless it leads to that and then
[2:50:40] maybe we make that change at that point
[2:50:42] once we get the foundations of whatever
[2:50:45] we're doing here together. But if you're
[2:50:47] supportive of that, I'm supportive of
[2:50:48] that as well.
[2:50:53] » [clears throat and cough]
[2:50:54] >> City Manager, you know, in in regards to
[2:50:56] the quarterly review, you know, if this
[2:50:58] committee were to if you guys were to
[2:51:00] bring a staff report back, you would
[2:51:02] give us in detail exactly what this
[2:51:05] committee is out to do. They're going to
[2:51:08] be an advisory committee. They would be
[2:51:10] provided with the quarterly reviews.
[2:51:12] They they would provide that oversight
[2:51:15] throughout the entire year. And then
[2:51:18] what I was wanted to clarify is that
[2:51:20] before that advisory committee received
[2:51:23] the final budget which would be the
[2:51:25] budget that that we would present next f
[2:51:28] fiscal year that budget in particular
[2:51:31] would would have to go through the
[2:51:32] process of the city manager and all the
[2:51:34] departments before it was given to the
[2:51:36] advisory committee. Correct. Not the
[2:51:38] other way around.
[2:51:41] >> That is correct. My recommendation is
[2:51:43] staff have the discussion first,
[2:51:47] decide amongst ourselves what
[2:51:48] recommendations we want to make. We
[2:51:50] would then present that to this budget
[2:51:52] oversight committee, make sure that
[2:51:54] they're fully on board, see if they have
[2:51:56] any additional recommendations that
[2:51:58] perhaps we have not considered, but
[2:52:00] ultimately anything would still come
[2:52:02] back to the city council for final
[2:52:04] approval.
[2:52:05] >> Okay. First to the staff, then to the
[2:52:08] committee, then to the council. So that
[2:52:10] so this would be established. You would
[2:52:12] bring this item back if we got consensus
[2:52:14] and outline what those jobs and tasks
[2:52:17] will be for this committee. Correct.
[2:52:20] >> Correct. And the appointment process
[2:52:22] much like your other committees. There
[2:52:24] would be established expectations for
[2:52:26] committee members. There would be a
[2:52:28] selection process. There would be a term
[2:52:31] and all of that would be brought back in
[2:52:32] a staff report before the committee is
[2:52:34] established.
[2:52:35] >> Okay. I like that idea. I'm on board
[2:52:38] with this. Any additional comments or
[2:52:40] questions,
[2:52:43] Vice Mayor?
[2:52:45] Apologize, Mr. Mayor. I thought I pushed
[2:52:46] my button. No, I'm just going to agree
[2:52:48] with uh pretty much everything everyone
[2:52:50] else has stated that uh item what is
[2:52:52] this 17 sounds a lot like item 12. So,
[2:52:55] combining them ultimately makes sense.
[2:52:57] Having each individual uh council person
[2:53:00] make a recommendation as to who they'd
[2:53:01] like to have their representative be,
[2:53:03] but still have that go through the
[2:53:04] process of council approval. uh making
[2:53:06] guidelines for expectations, meeting
[2:53:08] attendance, and how to replace those
[2:53:10] people should they uh no longer attend
[2:53:12] or move out of the district or longer
[2:53:14] live in the area. Uh so I definitely
[2:53:16] support combining those like uh council
[2:53:17] members and Vieira discussed and I
[2:53:19] support it.
[2:53:21] >> Could we possibly bring those both those
[2:53:23] staff reports back even if they're
[2:53:25] separate or the same and then we decide
[2:53:26] and we would have to motion at that time
[2:53:28] when this report is brought back so that
[2:53:31] way to avoid any confusion. And just to
[2:53:34] clarify, you're asking each council
[2:53:36] member to pick a individual from their
[2:53:38] district and the mayor would be in the
[2:53:40] city at large.
[2:53:42] >> What I would recommend is we take item
[2:53:45] 12 and item 17 if it's approved by you.
[2:53:49] We will bring one staff report back to
[2:53:52] the city council that incorporates both
[2:53:55] referral item 12 and referral item 17
[2:53:58] into one action that the council would
[2:54:00] take to establish the committee. the
[2:54:03] fact that one member from each district
[2:54:05] will serve on the committee as well as a
[2:54:07] fifth member that's chosen by the mayor.
[2:54:10] >> Yeah, sounds good. And then obviously
[2:54:12] when you bring that item back, you'll
[2:54:13] also ask us how we want to do the
[2:54:15] interview process, whether we want to do
[2:54:17] it in person or have we done it in the
[2:54:19] past. It looks like we're starting to do
[2:54:22] that, which is fine with me. That is
[2:54:23] correct. Okay, thank you. You're okay.
[2:54:26] >> Okay, sounds good. I'll go ahead and ask
[2:54:28] for consensus from left to right.
[2:54:32] Yes.
[2:54:35] Okay, Mr. Casey, I didn't see you, but
[2:54:37] you probably said yes, right? Okay,
[2:54:39] thank you. Moving on to item number 18.
[2:54:42] This is the reduce the speed limits by 5
[2:54:44] miles per hour, and this is requested by
[2:54:47] council member on May 13, 2026.
[2:54:52] » Thank you, Mayor. Um, I was so eager to
[2:54:55] get to this one earlier. So, the speed
[2:54:58] limits survey came back. Um there's
[2:55:01] speed limits that have been set or
[2:55:03] actually will remain the same, but there
[2:55:06] are streets that I want to lower the
[2:55:08] speed by 5 mph. My main uh goal is to
[2:55:12] lower the speed on Eastgate and Booth.
[2:55:15] Um and then I did incorporate Moffett
[2:55:18] Road. Um I've talked to staff a little
[2:55:20] bit about Moffett Road and we're going
[2:55:23] to look at the options. Um but
[2:55:25] specifically Eastgate and Booth do need
[2:55:27] to be done. Um, I've also done some
[2:55:29] research myself and I feel that there
[2:55:32] are ways for the city to allow these
[2:55:35] speed adjustments um, especially maybe
[2:55:39] at by our parks citywide. And I did send
[2:55:41] that information over to um, the city
[2:55:44] manager
[2:55:45] to I think yesterday or today um, in an
[2:55:48] email, but I I'd like to see this move
[2:55:51] forward and um, get those speeds uh,
[2:55:54] reduced. I don't know what the uh I know
[2:55:56] this probably not the time, but
[2:55:58] hopefully the police department um is
[2:56:00] also supportive of this. They're the
[2:56:02] ones that along with fire have to
[2:56:04] respond to some of these calls or some
[2:56:06] of these um give these speeding
[2:56:07] citations.
[2:56:09] So that is my referral for number 18.
[2:56:12] >> Thank you. Going now to the public. Any
[2:56:13] members of the public would like to make
[2:56:14] a comment on this item?
[2:56:25] they predecessors.
[2:56:28] Yeah,
[2:56:29] it's tough getting old. Uh I'm glad at
[2:56:32] least you're not raising the speed
[2:56:34] limits. All All these are main thorough
[2:56:36] affairs through those neighborhoods.
[2:56:40] And no matter what what speed you set
[2:56:42] them at, you're still going to get the
[2:56:44] speeders going through these.
[2:56:47] Uh when I'm going going through, I see
[2:56:50] most of them drive at a it it may be
[2:56:53] above a speed limit, but they're not
[2:56:56] actually
[2:56:58] speeding speeding.
[2:57:01] And I know when I got a lot of cars
[2:57:04] parked along the park or the schools, I
[2:57:08] probably even drive even slower because
[2:57:10] I worry about something jumping out
[2:57:13] between the cars.
[2:57:16] Uh
[2:57:20] yeah. Yeah. So
[2:57:23] I'm okay with uh what the speed limit is
[2:57:26] now or lowering it five speed five 5
[2:57:29] miles an hour. Thank you.
[2:57:33] >> Thank you very much. Anybody else would
[2:57:34] like to make a comment?
[2:57:41] » John Warren, city of Series. I want to
[2:57:45] say that this is a good idea. I would
[2:57:48] support [snorts] this. I think the city
[2:57:50] engineer has some leeway in lowering the
[2:57:54] speed limits by 5 miles an hour or
[2:57:56] raising them in in some instances um
[2:58:00] based upon the 85th percentile and the
[2:58:03] traffic surveys and so forth and so on.
[2:58:06] But I think all these um especially
[2:58:09] Moffer Road which I am on more than I am
[2:58:12] on the Eastgate side where um council
[2:58:16] person is. But um yes, I would be in
[2:58:19] favor that the traffic uh
[2:58:23] speed limits be reduced by 5 miles an
[2:58:26] hour and that should take care of the
[2:58:29] problem. Mike,
[2:58:32] >> thank you. Thank you. Next person,
[2:58:33] please.
[2:58:36] Okay, think about what it's going to
[2:58:38] cost to change all those signs. Again,
[2:58:42] money. You just keep nickel and dime us
[2:58:44] to death. If you have to change all the
[2:58:47] signs on all those streets, in all those
[2:58:49] areas by five miles,
[2:58:53] it's just going to cost more money.
[2:58:55] Please stop and consider how you're
[2:58:58] spending our money.
[2:59:02] » Thank you very much. Next person.
[2:59:06] Anybody on Zoom?
[2:59:08] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom.
[2:59:09] >> Bring this item back for comments and
[2:59:11] questions. Councilwoman Vieira.
[2:59:20] » Okay. Um, again, I don't know if speed
[2:59:23] limits necessarily change behavior. At
[2:59:25] least that's what I'm kind of hearing
[2:59:27] from the police department is even
[2:59:29] changing it doesn't necessarily mean
[2:59:30] someone's going to drive slower. My
[2:59:33] concerns, one is I thought this
[2:59:35] something was going to be allowed for
[2:59:37] all of us because I had specifically I
[2:59:39] had already emailed and asked about the
[2:59:41] streets in my district and I see I was
[2:59:44] told that that was going to be
[2:59:45] incorporated cuz I was but then I was
[2:59:47] also told if I was to bring dis the
[2:59:49] streets in front of the schools in my
[2:59:51] district that there was going to be a
[2:59:52] cost. So, I'm just kind of curious on
[2:59:55] what the costs are, why other council
[2:59:57] members were not given the same
[2:59:59] opportunity because I did email I did
[3:00:01] ask um immediately why I wasn't part of
[3:00:05] this because I had asked as well cuz I
[3:00:07] want to know what the cost. I believe
[3:00:08] Martinez had also brought it forward. If
[3:00:11] we all had asked for three streets, what
[3:00:13] are the costs? And I'm hearing now if
[3:00:15] anyone else asks, there are costs
[3:00:17] involved. And so I think that is key for
[3:00:20] me before I consider making this cuz
[3:00:22] unless we can find a way the police can
[3:00:24] enforce the changing speed limits. Um I
[3:00:27] don't know if it's going to change
[3:00:28] behavior and I think each district
[3:00:30] should be given the same opportunity as
[3:00:32] well as discover how we're going to pay
[3:00:34] for this cuz that's also key. And I
[3:00:36] believe at the council meeting when this
[3:00:38] was discussed I was told it was about
[3:00:39] $1,700 a sign. And when you look at four
[3:00:43] what three signs each street right here
[3:00:44] we're already at four signs. And if each
[3:00:47] one of us each have three
[3:00:48] recommendations, we're talking about a
[3:00:50] significant amount of money. And so
[3:00:51] that's my biggest concern right now. And
[3:00:53] I think that needs to be I'm not in
[3:00:56] favor at this point in time based on how
[3:00:58] it's being presented.
[3:01:01] >> Vice Mayor,
[3:01:03] >> thank you, Mr. Mayor. I kind of agree
[3:01:04] with what council member VR is saying.
[3:01:06] We can lower speed limits, but that
[3:01:07] doesn't necessarily stop bad drivers
[3:01:09] from driving dangerously. Uh I am
[3:01:12] concerned that this only seems to you
[3:01:14] know impact u one area of the city when
[3:01:17] there are other areas that have you know
[3:01:18] like my item coming up around Smeirna
[3:01:21] Park has streets that have speed limits
[3:01:22] that could be reduced to potentially
[3:01:24] reduce accidents. Um so just that alone
[3:01:27] with the fact that yes there would be
[3:01:29] signs that would need to be ordered. Uh
[3:01:30] there would be crews that need to
[3:01:32] replace them uh would be a no for this.
[3:01:36] >> Thank you. You know, I I would like to
[3:01:39] see if Bill TR could give us a little
[3:01:41] backstory. I know that you you actually
[3:01:43] brought us a report and gave us
[3:01:45] statistics on whether or not we decided
[3:01:48] to move forward with lowering um speed
[3:01:51] limits in certain areas. Could you
[3:01:53] please rephrase or just explain to us
[3:01:56] again with that process and what it took
[3:01:58] to get to the the findings that you
[3:02:00] found?
[3:02:01] >> So, we uh Thank you, mayor. We we we did
[3:02:04] come with an engineering and traffic
[3:02:06] survey um that that set the speed
[3:02:10] limits. It did not raise any speed
[3:02:11] limits at the time. Um I think it's
[3:02:15] important to note that if we if we want
[3:02:18] to look at different roads, we can do
[3:02:20] that. Um the the big thing is is that I
[3:02:25] will look at a cost. I'm not going to
[3:02:28] move forward without as a matter of fact
[3:02:31] if there is a cost that has to come back
[3:02:34] to council because that contract is
[3:02:36] already over the $25,000 which means I
[3:02:38] need to come back for an amendment in
[3:02:41] order to have that contract amended for
[3:02:44] an additional amount. Uh as far as the
[3:02:47] signs, uh yes, I've I've said it's about
[3:02:50] $1,500 to $2,000 per sign that we need
[3:02:54] to change. Um there could be some
[3:02:56] savings as we move signs around if you
[3:03:00] know if there's one road that's coming
[3:03:02] down to 35 and we're taking signs off of
[3:03:04] a 35 because it's lowering to 30 and we
[3:03:06] can use those signs. We haven't we
[3:03:09] haven't done a deep dive on all of that.
[3:03:11] I think it's important to know which
[3:03:13] roads everybody would want. Uh secondly,
[3:03:16] I think there's another portion to this.
[3:03:19] Um you know, we look at AB43. The AB43
[3:03:24] is actually what they consider a safety
[3:03:26] corridor bill um that was passed by the
[3:03:29] state legislature. It includes parks, uh
[3:03:32] schools where children are present,
[3:03:34] those types of things um that allow for
[3:03:37] us to lower speed limits by 5 m an hour
[3:03:40] due to it being considered a safety
[3:03:43] corridor. The second item is actually AB
[3:03:46] 382. AB382 will become a mandate in 2031
[3:03:51] and that will mandate the state has
[3:03:53] mandated that by 2031 all school zones
[3:03:56] will need to be down to 20 m an hour. Um
[3:04:00] there is a provision in there to bring
[3:04:01] them down to 15 m an hour. Um but we
[3:04:05] would need to look more into that
[3:04:06] provision if we wanted to bring those
[3:04:09] speed limits down to 15 m an hour. So
[3:04:13] there there there's actually a multitude
[3:04:15] of things that we could look at um as as
[3:04:19] we move through this process if that is
[3:04:21] the council's desire. Um but there are
[3:04:24] provisions uh to lower speed limits by 5
[3:04:28] miles an hour. Um and then it will be
[3:04:31] mandated in 2031 that all school speed
[3:04:35] limits come down to at least 20 m an
[3:04:37] hour. So that that's really what it is
[3:04:41] in a whole. Um, and if it's the
[3:04:43] council's desire for me to bring that
[3:04:44] back, I can uh bring a staff report
[3:04:48] back. Um, I would like to be in contact
[3:04:51] with each one of you to know which roads
[3:04:53] you guys would like me to look at in in
[3:04:55] your districts or within the city. Um,
[3:04:58] and and go from there if that is the
[3:05:00] desire of the council.
[3:05:03] >> Thank you, Milair and Vice Mayor.
[3:05:05] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just had a
[3:05:06] question, sir. So you you had an
[3:05:07] engineering report brought back where
[3:05:09] you know they went through the process
[3:05:10] of reviewing our roads and they said
[3:05:11] everything was fine but now you're
[3:05:13] telling us if we have specific streets
[3:05:14] that we're concerned about then to give
[3:05:16] you that list why have the initial
[3:05:18] engineering report in the first place
[3:05:19] then?
[3:05:20] >> So the initial engineering report uh
[3:05:23] from an engineering traffic study
[3:05:26] standpoint actually only looks at the
[3:05:29] 85th percentile in general. So they go
[3:05:32] um there was a lot of uh public comments
[3:05:35] for instance on social media about the
[3:05:37] cameras that were up around town. Um and
[3:05:41] they're they're recording speeds of
[3:05:42] vehicles that are going by um for the
[3:05:45] purpose of the study. And so in general
[3:05:49] when they do an an engineering traffic
[3:05:51] survey like this they look at the 85th
[3:05:54] percentile. Then there are certain uh
[3:05:57] parameters. The engineers also know that
[3:06:00] changing speed limits takes money. Um it
[3:06:04] takes crew money, it takes sign money.
[3:06:06] There's there's just money that is
[3:06:08] involved when they start to do that. So
[3:06:10] generally speaking, uh if that there is
[3:06:14] an ability to uh keep speed limits the
[3:06:17] same, that's what they that's what they
[3:06:19] try to do because they know the cost
[3:06:21] burden that that it puts on a city. Some
[3:06:24] of those may already be under uh maybe
[3:06:27] the the percentile on um one of the
[3:06:31] roads was showed the 85th percentile was
[3:06:34] at 40 m an hour but the speed limit was
[3:06:36] 35 m an hour. They will use engineering
[3:06:40] judgment at that point in time to
[3:06:42] determine hey can [clears throat] I
[3:06:43] apply AB43 to this as a safety corridor
[3:06:48] to keep that speed limit at 35 m an
[3:06:51] hour. So all of those judgments are made
[3:06:53] while we go through this. Um and and the
[3:06:56] engineers, they don't want to one create
[3:07:00] a cost burden for the city because it
[3:07:02] does get expensive. Uh and two, if they
[3:07:05] can keep speed limits the same, then
[3:07:07] that's what they will try to do under most circumstances. Sometimes
[3:07:11] that's not possible and speed limits do
[3:07:13] go up. And that's why I I kind of
[3:07:16] praised the public when when we
[3:07:18] presented this report that for the most
[3:07:20] part, everybody was good in driving. Um,
[3:07:23] and we were able to keep all of the
[3:07:25] speed limits within the city the the
[3:07:28] same as they were.
[3:07:29] >> Thank you. And with that engineer's
[3:07:31] report, it would make us or it would
[3:07:33] take away the liability. Nubia, if
[3:07:34] there's an accident, we had an
[3:07:36] engineering report done that showed that that street had a safe speed limit
[3:07:39] that there was nothing we could have
[3:07:40] done because ultimately it comes back to
[3:07:42] the driver and their negligence. I
[3:07:44] wouldn't say that it completely
[3:07:44] bulletproofs. Obviously, you want to be
[3:07:46] able to document everything that the
[3:07:48] city can do and steps to take to make it
[3:07:50] safe, but there's a lot of factors that
[3:07:52] would go into ultimate liability, but
[3:07:55] from uh documenting the the the steps
[3:07:59] and the procedures that would got to
[3:08:01] start there.
[3:08:01] >> Thank you. And Mike, you said that the
[3:08:03] school zones are going to be eventually
[3:08:04] reduced down to 15 m hour. Would that be
[3:08:06] a a safe school? I know a few years ago,
[3:08:09] Lieutenant Godfrey uh with worked with
[3:08:12] the school district to do safe paths to
[3:08:14] school. Would that be something that
[3:08:15] goes through the school district in the
[3:08:16] city or would that be something that
[3:08:17] only we would handle?
[3:08:19] >> So, uh the assembly bill actually
[3:08:21] mandates that cities lower the speed
[3:08:23] limit at in a school zone to 20 m an
[3:08:26] hour um starting in 2031. uh that cost
[3:08:30] will be burdened by the city to to
[3:08:32] reduce those or really to change those
[3:08:35] uh signs uh in school zones uh for for that provision within the law.
[3:08:42] >> Thank you, sir.
[3:08:44] >> Councilwoman Otero.
[3:08:46] Okay, Councilwoman Vieira.
[3:08:49] >> Um I think for me it sounds like we are
[3:08:52] going to be red removing most of these
[3:08:54] signs anyways under this new assembly
[3:08:56] bill. I don't remember which one you
[3:08:58] said it was. Um 382. So I think it's
[3:09:02] just a matter of working through those
[3:09:04] and working on financially because I
[3:09:06] don't think I'm okay at 1,500 to 2,000
[3:09:09] per sign for three streets that could
[3:09:12] potentially be $6 to $10,000 per street.
[3:09:15] And I don't think I'm have it in the
[3:09:17] budget currently. And if it's legally
[3:09:20] required under the current requirements
[3:09:22] under your engineering report, it's
[3:09:24] required by the traffic engineer. Um I
[3:09:26] think that's where we're at. and then we
[3:09:27] should save the money or start figuring
[3:09:29] out how we're going to allocate the new
[3:09:31] requirements because ultimately it's
[3:09:33] going to be reduced down by 2031 to 20
[3:09:36] anyways in most of these areas.
[3:09:40] >> Just just for a point of clarification,
[3:09:42] council member, um we we are not
[3:09:45] mandated to do it at this point in time.
[3:09:47] That mandate does not happen until 2031.
[3:09:50] It would be a council decision if they
[3:09:52] would uh prefer to implement that at an
[3:09:55] earlier date. whether that be this year,
[3:09:57] next year, or any year up to 2031. Um,
[3:10:01] that can be done, but it will be
[3:10:03] mandated in 2031. So,
[3:10:10] any additional comments? Okay. If
[3:10:13] there's no additional comments or
[3:10:14] questions, I'm looking for consensus.
[3:10:17] Vice Mayor, no. Councilwoman,
[3:10:20] no for me.
[3:10:25] Mr. Casey says yes.
[3:10:28] Thank you. Item number 19. This is a
[3:10:30] report on watering days and increases to three watering days per week. This
[3:10:35] was requested by Vice Mayor Martinez on
[3:10:38] June 22nd, 2026.
[3:10:41] >> Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, I'd like
[3:10:43] the uh request as just reviewing what it
[3:10:45] would look like to change it from two to
[3:10:47] three watering days.
[3:10:49] >> Okay. Going now to the public. Any
[3:10:52] members of the public would like to make
[3:10:53] a comment on this item?
[3:11:02] uh day predator series. Uh I already
[3:11:05] noticed there's a lot lot of people are
[3:11:08] already doing more than two days a week
[3:11:11] if not more than three. Uh but there's
[3:11:14] also I see a quite a few I that's
[3:11:17] surprising they don't complain about
[3:11:19] their water bills. I see when they're
[3:11:21] their front and most of the water is
[3:11:24] going down the gutter.
[3:11:27] And so
[3:11:29] basically I think at least once in a
[3:11:32] while I check my sprinklers to see if
[3:11:34] they're working halfway decent.
[3:11:36] Sometimes they're not. And people ought
[3:11:39] to get out there and look at what theirs
[3:11:41] are doing too that see where most their
[3:11:44] water's going.
[3:11:48] » Thank you. Anyone else would like to
[3:11:50] make a comment?
[3:11:55] » John Warren, city of series. Um, each
[3:11:58] month each residents allowed a certain
[3:12:02] number of gallons of water. Uh, in the
[3:12:05] spring, the summer, the fall, it
[3:12:09] changes. Sometimes it's 27,000 gallons a
[3:12:11] month as a maximum per residence and
[3:12:15] then u it changes down to 12,000 gallons
[3:12:18] per month. So if a person watches that,
[3:12:20] it doesn't make a darn bit of difference
[3:12:22] whether they're wearing five days a week
[3:12:25] or three days a week or two days a week
[3:12:28] as long as they don't go over their
[3:12:30] usage allowed. And that's what I think
[3:12:33] our water reports and things are based
[3:12:35] on is that allowed usage. Now, if a
[3:12:38] person doesn't monitor their usage,
[3:12:40] there's a problem there. I know at one
[3:12:42] time I talked to Jeremy and there was
[3:12:43] people in this community using 75,000
[3:12:46] gallons of water a month in the
[3:12:47] wintertime. It just ran out the door and
[3:12:50] down the street and they had a constant
[3:12:52] battle with those particular property
[3:12:54] owners,
[3:12:56] issuing them notices and fines and
[3:12:58] things like that. But I think for the
[3:12:59] normal person and I use my own usage. My
[3:13:02] usage last month was 17,000 gallons and
[3:13:06] we're getting into the warmer months and
[3:13:07] I haven't changed my sprinkler times at
[3:13:10] all. So anyway, I I' I've never used
[3:13:13] over the amount that's allowed and so
[3:13:17] whether I wither water two days a week
[3:13:19] or four days a week, I'm going to still
[3:13:21] use the same amount of water. I think
[3:13:24] that needs to be considered. Thank you.
[3:13:27] >> Thank you very much. Anybody else?
[3:13:31] Seeing none, anybody on Zoom?
[3:13:33] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom.
[3:13:35] >> Bring this item back for comments,
[3:13:36] questions, or consensus.
[3:13:40] Vice Mayor.
[3:13:43] Yes, for me.
[3:13:46] » Question. How long ago, Joshua, did you
[3:13:49] present this to council? Because I
[3:13:50] thought we just discussed this and we
[3:13:52] were going to exceed the water usage if
[3:13:55] we went to 3 days. Um it was in
[3:13:58] November. Um I believe November because
[3:14:01] um Sam was still on board. Um
[3:14:08] we w we would exceed the the water use
[3:14:11] efficiency
[3:14:14] objective if uh every resident were to
[3:14:18] um use all three days. Um just based on
[3:14:22] the quick calculations that we did. Um
[3:14:25] but just uh objectively speaking um I
[3:14:31] think there is some wiggle room. I I
[3:14:33] know I believe uh at the last when this
[3:14:35] was brought up I there was also talk
[3:14:37] about having it 3 days for the summer
[3:14:40] versus you know or having it change
[3:14:42] during the season having 3 days for the
[3:14:43] summer versus the the winter. So I think
[3:14:46] um we could provide some more
[3:14:47] information if that's what the council
[3:14:49] wants. Um, I know
[3:14:52] we have difficulty sometimes, uh, the water department has difficulty
[3:14:56] sometimes, um, using some water and
[3:15:00] water is being stored that, you know,
[3:15:02] we're not able to take our our full
[3:15:04] aotment from SRWA at some times. There's
[3:15:07] we have wells that are not running at
[3:15:09] sometimes. So, there is some um,
[3:15:12] [clears throat] use for for having the
[3:15:13] water being used um, without going over
[3:15:16] the water use efficiency that's set by
[3:15:18] the state.
[3:15:19] So with this again that we're just
[3:15:22] moving a consensus to research. If we
[3:15:25] approve this, we're looking at
[3:15:26] difficulties accessing water because we
[3:15:28] have limited water accessibility
[3:15:30] currently is what it sounds like you're
[3:15:32] telling me. Um as well as we have the
[3:15:35] possibility of exceeding our state
[3:15:37] required limitations, which those two
[3:15:41] alone make me concerned in moving
[3:15:43] forward. Although I like the idea, I
[3:15:45] don't necessarily feel jeopardizing our
[3:15:49] standing with the state water board and
[3:15:52] the inability to
[3:15:55] access water as well as drain our wells
[3:15:58] further down and getting more
[3:16:00] contaminants into it and sand which I'm
[3:16:02] hearing a lot about. Um I don't think
[3:16:04] I'm comfortable with that. So it I I
[3:16:06] guess without more information it's
[3:16:08] really hard to make a full
[3:16:09] >> okay
[3:16:10] >> form decision. Just point of
[3:16:11] clarification,
[3:16:13] the we've had difficulty getting all of
[3:16:16] the water that we have allotted to us
[3:16:18] from SRWA
[3:16:20] from our our surface water. Sometimes
[3:16:22] we're having difficulty getting it out
[3:16:24] into the system because it's not being
[3:16:26] used. So, we're having to ask SRWA to uh
[3:16:30] decrease our water intake then uh
[3:16:32] compared to what we've ordered. Um so
[3:16:36] there's you know some
[3:16:38] the case could be made that in some
[3:16:40] cases we are not getting the full
[3:16:42] benefit of
[3:16:44] that water that's allotted to us. Um
[3:16:47] that's just at different times. You know
[3:16:48] in the winter we've had difficulty you
[3:16:50] know turning over our reservoirs and
[3:16:52] making sure that the water is being used
[3:16:54] at some times. Um but it is a balance
[3:16:56] because we have to compare that with
[3:16:58] making sure that we stay under our water
[3:17:00] use objective. Um we changed on our
[3:17:02] monthly report. We changed uh the way
[3:17:05] that we were reporting. Um so this
[3:17:07] public works uh monthly report that goes
[3:17:09] to the council every every council um
[3:17:11] meeting.
[3:17:13] U it does show our current usage in
[3:17:15] comparison with our water use objective
[3:17:17] from the previous year. So we can kind
[3:17:19] of see where we're at um as we go. And
[3:17:21] it it is a live document so we can you
[3:17:25] know make changes as we see fit. But uh
[3:17:27] the the initial recommendation was not
[3:17:30] to go to 3 days because um we were near
[3:17:35] the the water use objective. We still
[3:17:37] had a couple million gallons of of
[3:17:39] leeway. Um but I I don't remember the exact number off the top of my head
[3:17:43] from when we gave that report in
[3:17:45] November.
[3:17:47] >> Okay. I'm okay with moving forward with
[3:17:49] the idea during the summer as long as
[3:17:51] we're not moving o or exceeding our
[3:17:53] state requirements. I think that's my
[3:17:55] biggest concern is I don't want to get
[3:17:57] fined or disciplined or any kind of
[3:18:00] penalties coming from the state. So if
[3:18:02] it comes to that point, I'm not
[3:18:04] wanting to move forward with this idea
[3:18:06] if it does put us or jeopardize us with
[3:18:09] the state. So that's kind of where I'm
[3:18:11] at. I don't know how you want to judge
[3:18:12] that because I don't understand
[3:18:14] >> staff can move forward with with you
[3:18:16] know looking at um th those changes just
[3:18:20] based off percentages increase by
[3:18:22] percentages during month the the
[3:18:23] summertime or do a comparison for the
[3:18:26] whole year. Uh I believe when the
[3:18:28] initial report came out it was kind of
[3:18:29] just like hey if if everybody did this
[3:18:32] you know let's multiply
[3:18:34] uh this you know two days by making it 3
[3:18:37] days and that projection put us above
[3:18:40] the the water use objective but um yeah
[3:18:42] we can we can come with a more detailed
[3:18:45] report.
[3:18:46] >> I'm interested in seeing that report.
[3:18:48] Thank you.
[3:18:49] >> Yeah that would be very beneficial for
[3:18:51] us to move forward. Council member
[3:18:53] Casey. Go ahead sir.
[3:18:58] To go back to Mr. Warren's point, does
[3:19:00] it really matter if we do two days, 3
[3:19:04] days, 4 days, 5 days? Because we're only
[3:19:06] allotted so many gallons anyway. We're
[3:19:09] not we're not it's not asking
[3:19:12] we're not asking for more gallons. We're
[3:19:14] just asking for the opportunity to water
[3:19:17] our grass and flowers without being
[3:19:21] fine, whether it's three days or four
[3:19:23] days. Yes,
[3:19:25] >> it doesn't matter really. We only are
[3:19:26] allotted so many gallons and then of
[3:19:29] course this is here this is no part of
[3:19:32] that but what the heck are we going to
[3:19:34] do when we build all these other houses
[3:19:37] where we're going to get the water you
[3:19:38] know?
[3:19:39] >> Yeah. Oh, thank you for your for your
[3:19:41] question.
[3:19:41] >> But isn't I mean isn't I mean the the
[3:19:44] simple qu I mean this is a simple
[3:19:45] question. So if we approve
[3:19:49] to go forward to study the three days a
[3:19:52] week, we're only allowed it so many
[3:19:55] gallons anyway and we're not asking to
[3:19:59] increase that a lotment.
[3:20:01] >> We're just saying now now don't worry
[3:20:04] about it if you want to work water your
[3:20:06] grass on Sunday.
[3:20:08] >> Yeah, I I understand. Uh thank you for
[3:20:10] your question. So the reason that it
[3:20:11] matters is because when drought
[3:20:13] conditions come there are steps that are
[3:20:15] mandated by the state. So you know the
[3:20:18] reason that we initially the city you
[3:20:20] know years back went to two days was
[3:20:22] because a mandate was put out by the
[3:20:24] state. There was a um an order by the
[3:20:26] governor to uh follow certain uh drought
[3:20:29] restrictions and part of those
[3:20:31] restrictions was decreasing your
[3:20:33] watering days by one day. So if if
[3:20:37] something like that were to come out
[3:20:38] again and we're at 2 days, we may have
[3:20:41] to go down to one day or we may be
[3:20:43] considered for that. So it's just there
[3:20:45] are things I understand that we all do
[3:20:47] have allotted amounts and as long you
[3:20:48] know there's people that go over the
[3:20:50] allotted amount with two days, right? So
[3:20:52] it we we uh address those cases with our fines and our fee structure. But um
[3:20:59] having the watering days uh increase
[3:21:02] back to three is or or whatever we
[3:21:06] increase it to it it does matter because
[3:21:08] when drought restrictions happen we have
[3:21:10] to take certain steps. Um yeah and then
[3:21:14] what was there was a second question.
[3:21:17] Oh, when we when we build new homes, uh,
[3:21:19] a lot of those developments come with
[3:21:21] installing or drilling new wells or um
[3:21:24] building new reservoirs. So,
[3:21:31] » all right. So, I think we already we've
[3:21:33] gone through the consensus, right?
[3:21:36] >> I think I have four yeses.
[3:21:39] >> Mr. Casey, Mr.
[3:21:41] >> He said yes.
[3:21:43] >> So, we have five yeses.
[3:21:45] >> Mr. Mr. Casey, are you Yes. Yeah, we're
[3:21:47] good. Thank you for the questions, Mr.
[3:21:49] Casey. Moving on to item number 20,
[3:21:52] which is safety around Suburban Park.
[3:21:54] This was requested by Vice Mayor
[3:21:55] Martinez.
[3:21:56] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We had some
[3:21:58] citizens in here uh what meeting was
[3:21:59] this? June 22nd, so just just last
[3:22:02] month. Uh describing how unsafe it is to
[3:22:04] walk across the street, uh especially
[3:22:06] when there's heavy baseball tournaments.
[3:22:08] Um and we do have two schools there at
[3:22:10] Samra Park, right? It's sandwiched in
[3:22:12] between two. So, I would like to see
[3:22:14] about maybe um updating the crosswalks,
[3:22:18] adding lights, maybe putting a safety
[3:22:20] signal that when someone is crossing, it
[3:22:21] alerts drivers that are coming uh just
[3:22:23] to improve the safety around the park,
[3:22:25] especially since it's such a heavily
[3:22:27] used park. It hasn't been very well
[3:22:28] maintained of recent, but it is still a
[3:22:30] used park. I'd like to see about getting
[3:22:32] those paths a little safer.
[3:22:34] >> Thank [clears throat] you very much. Is
[3:22:35] there any members of the public would
[3:22:36] like to make a comment on this item?
[3:22:46] Thank you. Um, there's also a criminal
[3:22:50] element that needs to be addressed with
[3:22:54] some of our park systems. Most recently,
[3:22:56] a family member of mine
[3:23:00] was uh relieved of her cell phone and
[3:23:03] driver's license and wallet and stuff at
[3:23:06] the at the park during broad daylight. I
[3:23:10] don't know if it was
[3:23:12] all that person's fault, but the young
[3:23:15] man that came over and talked to her
[3:23:17] that did know who she was was very
[3:23:19] interested in u in her belongings and uh
[3:23:24] when she got home she didn't have them.
[3:23:26] So there there's an element there of
[3:23:28] safety too in broad daylight uh on a
[3:23:31] Sunday afternoon at some park. And also
[3:23:34] I think on Facebook today um the party
[3:23:38] at that pavilion that
[3:23:42] she was sitting by left about 1,000
[3:23:46] pounds of trash. I mean the pictures
[3:23:48] that u the ladies that were working in
[3:23:51] the rose garden and weeding and stuff
[3:23:54] because city staff wasn't able to do
[3:23:56] that um took some pictures and posted
[3:24:00] them and it was just terrible. I
[3:24:03] remember Mike Klein did the same thing
[3:24:05] years ago after a Sunday event at the at
[3:24:10] Samra Park and it was just terrible. I
[3:24:12] mean, there's trash everywhere and and
[3:24:15] people would even put it in the trash
[3:24:17] cans and then the trash cans were
[3:24:19] overfilled in some cases and they just
[3:24:21] throw it on the ground rather than take
[3:24:23] it away with them. And that should be a
[3:24:25] requirement I think when these people
[3:24:27] rent or sign up to use a facility there.
[3:24:31] If they leave it in shabby case, they
[3:24:34] should be build for the cleanup. I mean,
[3:24:37] we should be, you know, collecting uh
[3:24:40] from them or have a deposit big enough
[3:24:42] that they will take it away or we just
[3:24:45] won't return the posit. We keep the the
[3:24:48] pictures and show them say, "Hey, this
[3:24:49] is how you left it and so uh we're going
[3:24:52] to have to pay someone to clean it up."
[3:24:54] That's what we should do. Thank you very
[3:24:56] much.
[3:24:57] >> Thank you very much. Is there anybody
[3:24:58] else?
[3:25:05] The trash at Suburba Park is it it's a
[3:25:08] difficult thing. A woman posted a whole
[3:25:12] bunch of pictures of the trash
[3:25:14] everywhere. People were having parties
[3:25:17] and leaving the trash in bags and they
[3:25:19] were attaching the bags to the garbage
[3:25:22] disposal things. But the garbage
[3:25:24] disposal things you have there are real
[3:25:27] pretty and they have these cute little
[3:25:28] tops on them and it's hard to put the
[3:25:30] trash in. If you just go back to plain
[3:25:33] oldfashioned garbage cans, I think you'd
[3:25:36] have a lot better luck. And then keep
[3:25:38] the homeless out of the garbage. That's
[3:25:41] the two things, the wrong garbage cans
[3:25:43] and the homeless. That's your problems.
[3:25:48] » Thank you. Is there anybody else?
[3:25:53] Seeing none. Anyone on Zoom?
[3:25:55] >> There are no hands raised on Zoom.
[3:25:57] >> Bringing this item back for consensus.
[3:26:00] Vice Mayor.
[3:26:02] Councilwoman.
[3:26:04] Yes. For me,
[3:26:07] I if I may, uh, Mayor, I to address uh,
[3:26:12] Councilman Martinez's uh, issue with
[3:26:15] safety around around Smeirna Park um, on
[3:26:18] the roadways. We actually do have two
[3:26:21] projects. One is an ATP, an active
[3:26:24] transportation project. Um the other one
[3:26:27] is uh a CMAC or HSIP project. Both
[3:26:31] grant-f funded projects that are
[3:26:32] actually going to be um repainting
[3:26:36] crosswalks, those types of things.
[3:26:38] Putting in uh a couple of speed tables.
[3:26:41] So those things are in progress. Uh they
[3:26:44] are they are currently being designed uh
[3:26:47] right now. Um, and so I I just wanted to
[3:26:50] at least let the council know that there
[3:26:52] is a project, a couple of projects that
[3:26:54] are going on on Moffett. One that both
[3:26:57] that will include some safety aspect of
[3:27:00] at least the Moffett portion of uh,
[3:27:03] Smeirna Park, but obviously there there
[3:27:06] are other portions to that that are not
[3:27:08] included in those projects. Um, and we'd
[3:27:10] be happy to address those also. But I
[3:27:12] did want to let the council know that
[3:27:13] there are uh two projects currently on
[3:27:15] Moffett that'll address some safety
[3:27:17] aspects uh with regard to the roadway at
[3:27:20] that point.
[3:27:22] >> Council member Vier, do you did you have
[3:27:24] a additional comment?
[3:27:26] >> Did you want to go first?
[3:27:29] >> That was part of my question was I
[3:27:30] thought there was something in the works
[3:27:32] already and I didn't know if police were
[3:27:34] also looking at the safe routes. I don't
[3:27:36] know if that was you were police that
[3:27:37] did the one um on Morgan Road and then
[3:27:39] you also have the one that's on Hackett
[3:27:41] and Central that you're currently
[3:27:43] working on as well and bringing
[3:27:44] sidewalks into my district. Um but
[3:27:46] that's all grant funded because that was
[3:27:48] going to be my concern is the cost um in
[3:27:51] doing these upgrades. What are we
[3:27:52] looking? And then I thought we also had
[3:27:54] cameras at that location that the police
[3:27:56] or dispatch monitor because um I don't
[3:28:00] know if that is maybe another aspect
[3:28:02] that could reduce some of the criminal
[3:28:05] aspects that were being discussed and
[3:28:07] maybe that might be another alternative
[3:28:09] um because ultimately safety is going to
[3:28:11] come down to police and the really
[3:28:14] regardless of what we do I I think
[3:28:16] ultimately it's going to come down to
[3:28:17] the police department.
[3:28:19] >> So there are cameras uh at Smyrna Park.
[3:28:22] However, in the area that uh this
[3:28:24] occurred, there was no uh camera
[3:28:26] coverage.
[3:28:30] Thank you, Max.
[3:28:32] >> No, thank you. Uh Council Member Vier
[3:28:34] asked about the grants.
[3:28:35] >> Okay. Thank you. Let's go ahead. I know
[3:28:38] that we were in the middle of consensus,
[3:28:39] right? It's okay. I believe I had made
[3:28:42] my consensus correct. So, are we going
[3:28:44] to council?
[3:28:45] >> I want to wait until I see what Belran
[3:28:47] has coming forward. I'm not interested
[3:28:48] in using general fund money and stuff
[3:28:50] that we could possibly use with grant
[3:28:52] money.
[3:28:53] >> I take that as a no. Um, council member
[3:28:56] Casey.
[3:28:58] >> Yes.
[3:28:59] >> Thank you. Appreciate that. Moving on to
[3:29:02] item number 21. This is a review of the
[3:29:04] 2021 CARES Act audit and RAD funding
[3:29:09] requested by council member Otero on the
[3:29:11] 22nd of June 2026.
[3:29:14] >> Thank you, mayor. Um so during the
[3:29:16] budget process I had mentioned some
[3:29:19] concerns that I had with the car's act
[3:29:21] funding and through my research um there
[3:29:24] was also some rad funding that the city
[3:29:26] had received. Um there was like a
[3:29:28] partnership with businesses during co.
[3:29:31] So for me I want to ensure that the
[3:29:33] funding during that time was reflected
[3:29:36] uh correctly in our budget and our staff
[3:29:38] reports. Um I know that the single year
[3:29:41] audit for 2021 was not completed timely.
[3:29:44] was completed in um 2023 and at that
[3:29:48] time there wasn't a audit done. It was
[3:29:52] stated in a letter that um basically the
[3:29:55] city would be exempt from it. Um but
[3:29:57] it's important to note that the city was
[3:30:00] a recip a subreient of the CARES
[3:30:02] funding. It came from the county and I
[3:30:04] believe it there's some that came from
[3:30:06] um the state or federal government. So
[3:30:09] there is some reporting that I believe
[3:30:11] should have been done because during
[3:30:12] that year um the car's act funding had
[3:30:15] to be spent by a certain time frame and
[3:30:18] the funding was over our expenditures
[3:30:20] were over 250,000 or 750,000.
[3:30:23] So I would like to go back um and
[3:30:26] evaluate that. I don't want us to run
[3:30:29] into an issue where we get called out by
[3:30:31] the state, you know, after they do their
[3:30:34] own audit and we were supposed to do
[3:30:35] one. Um, when it comes to the RAD
[3:30:38] funding, same thing. Um, that funding
[3:30:40] source was through the car's act. There
[3:30:42] was also some RAD funding that came from
[3:30:44] ARPA. Um, so I'd like to just, you know,
[3:30:47] track that funding and ensure that all
[3:30:49] of it has been documented correctly
[3:30:50] because I would hate for us to be
[3:30:52] audited um by the state or federal
[3:30:54] government.
[3:30:56] >> Thank you. Is there any members of the
[3:30:57] public that would like to make a comment
[3:30:58] on this item?
[3:31:00] Please step up to the podium.
[3:31:08] uh city of series wellman city of series
[3:31:11] for the record. So, I just want to take
[3:31:14] uh take the time to thank uh
[3:31:16] Councilwoman Otto for uh listening first
[3:31:19] of all uh when I spoke at I don't know
[3:31:23] was it the last city council meeting or
[3:31:25] one of the meetings um where I noticed
[3:31:27] that discrepancy
[3:31:28] uh yeah so according to like the
[3:31:31] financial documents online uh the city
[3:31:33] received in revenue from grants and
[3:31:35] contributions 16,51,734,000
[3:31:42] And of that like it's listed under the
[3:31:44] capital as um right up below it it's
[3:31:48] capital money is 2,485,927.
[3:31:54] So that definitely serve s surpasses the
[3:31:56] 750,000
[3:31:58] uh exemption um you know limit that the
[3:32:02] like if a city spends 750,000 in federal
[3:32:05] government by law or like they're
[3:32:07] supposed to do a uh single-year audit
[3:32:11] which wasn't done you know and it's just
[3:32:13] it doesn't make sense because three out
[3:32:16] of the five oh wait one wait one two
[3:32:20] most of the city council sitting on the
[3:32:22] dis right now
[3:32:25] had the obligation to do this and and
[3:32:28] catch this and this was not caught on
[3:32:30] time. So you guys are the like I said
[3:32:33] you guys are the check and balances and
[3:32:34] when stuff like this falls through the
[3:32:36] crack it's not acceptable.
[3:32:39] Okay.
[3:32:41] Um, so yeah, that this yeah, I do
[3:32:44] support this because you guys should
[3:32:46] have been doing this a long time ago and
[3:32:48] this was missed and so I did do a public
[3:32:52] records request and one of it was
[3:32:55] several, you know, and um some of it
[3:32:58] still has to get back to me by July
[3:33:00] 20th, you know, and I don't like
[3:33:02] waiting. Um so but number I the request
[3:33:06] number 11 as out of the 12 was a list of
[3:33:09] ARPA funds and CB uh CBDG
[3:33:13] uh funds received by the city of series
[3:33:16] um from fiscal year ending 2018 to
[3:33:19] present day 2026. Please include list of
[3:33:22] contract bid awardies as well as
[3:33:24] contracts made with the city of series
[3:33:26] for such funds and if city departments
[3:33:28] receive such funds an item itemized list
[3:33:31] of expedentials for each monies uh used
[3:33:34] by departments for each fiscal year from
[3:33:36] 2018 to 2026. Now, we've discussed the
[3:33:41] uh forensic financial audit, which I
[3:33:43] don't understand why you wouldn't you
[3:33:45] would vote no to do it because obviously
[3:33:48] uh something's off, you know, and if you
[3:33:51] guys are not going to listen, this will
[3:33:53] go to the civil grand jury for them to
[3:33:55] investigate because this government is
[3:33:58] inefficient, okay? And there's stuff is
[3:34:01] falling through the cracks, you know,
[3:34:02] there's a high turnover rate, you know,
[3:34:04] and that's not accidental.
[3:34:06] And I think we're we're we're the public
[3:34:09] is left in the dark and that's not
[3:34:11] acceptable. You know, you guys work for
[3:34:13] us and if if citizens present concerns,
[3:34:17] serious concerns, you guys should
[3:34:18] listen.
[3:34:20] And I'm talking to you, Rosalinda
[3:34:23] Vera. Okay? Because I've sat with you
[3:34:26] and you've dismissed these concerns and
[3:34:28] have failed to address them. I spoke
[3:34:31] with you and I had questions about
[3:34:34] measure L the quarterly reports
[3:34:38] and you were dismissive did miss
[3:34:40] dismissed my concerns. So I had I now
[3:34:43] approached council member Otero who
[3:34:44] actually takes the time to listen to my
[3:34:46] concerns and actually address them.
[3:34:48] Okay. for measure measure L quart
[3:34:51] quarterly audits. There's actually a
[3:34:52] civil grand jury report from Stanco that
[3:34:55] says the these need to be done and
[3:34:59] county government, you know, it slipped
[3:35:02] through the cracks and the reports where
[3:35:03] they needed to be done and here I am in
[3:35:05] 2026 and it's still missing. So yeah,
[3:35:08] this government is inefficient and it's
[3:35:10] not okay.
[3:35:13] So yeah, do your job please.
[3:35:15] >> Suzman, real quick, sir. Uh, do you
[3:35:17] receive the document that I provided to
[3:35:18] you on measure L?
[3:35:21] >> Yes, sir. But yeah, it's not still, you
[3:35:25] know, there's a lot missing.
[3:35:26] >> I'm sorry. Your time is up, but I just
[3:35:28] wanted to make sure if there's anything
[3:35:29] else that you need, just please reach
[3:35:31] out to me.
[3:35:32] >> I'm willing to help as as other council
[3:35:33] members can help you. I'm willing
[3:35:34] >> Yeah, I already had requested Measure L,
[3:35:36] like public records request before you
[3:35:38] gave me that packet. So, I appreciate
[3:35:40] you.
[3:35:40] >> No problem. Thank you very much.
[3:35:44] >> Is there anybody else that would like to
[3:35:45] make a comment?
[3:35:48] bringing this item back.
[3:35:52] » Consensus. Yes.
[3:35:54] >> Okay. I'm It's a no for me.
[3:35:57] >> It's a yes for me.
[3:36:01] >> Get your direction.
[3:36:02] >> Clarification. Council member Otto. Was
[3:36:04] that a yes or a no for you? Yes. And
[3:36:07] just and and also just for the record, I
[3:36:09] believe the city manager, you're kind of
[3:36:11] hidden there for a second, but you you
[3:36:13] there is a RAD funding document that was
[3:36:15] provided to the city council, correct?
[3:36:19] >> I believe the city recently received a
[3:36:21] report of RAD funding for the most
[3:36:24] recent year. Yes.
[3:36:25] >> Okay. I was just wondering just make
[3:36:26] sure the public knew that. Okay. Thank
[3:36:28] you. Moving on to item number 22, which
[3:36:32] is the last item.
[3:36:38] locate the resolution on general fund
[3:36:40] reserves percentage. And this was
[3:36:41] requested by myself. The reason why I
[3:36:44] made this request is I am requesting
[3:36:45] that the city council consider adopting
[3:36:47] a formal resolution establishing a
[3:36:49] general fund reserve policy. The reason
[3:36:52] for this referral is simple. If the city
[3:36:54] of Sirius is going to reference a
[3:36:56] reserve percentage, whether it's 18%,
[3:36:59] 20%, or another number, it should be
[3:37:01] clearly adopted by the council through a
[3:37:03] formal resolution. This gives the city a
[3:37:06] clear policy, removes confusion, and
[3:37:09] makes sure future budget decisions are
[3:37:11] based on adopted council direction, not
[3:37:13] just past discussions or
[3:37:15] recommendations.
[3:37:16] as a formal reserve policy would also
[3:37:18] straighten the city's financial
[3:37:20] stability. It would help protect
[3:37:21] essential services, public safety,
[3:37:23] staffing, and emergency response during
[3:37:25] economic downturns, disasters, or
[3:37:27] unexpected revenue losses. As a part of
[3:37:30] this referral, I would like the staff to
[3:37:31] bring back options for a target reserve
[3:37:33] level, including whether the city should
[3:37:36] remain at 18%.
[3:37:38] Or towards 20%. Now, I would also like
[3:37:40] to see a 5-year roadmap to excuse me, a
[3:37:43] road map to gradually rebuild reserves
[3:37:46] and a clear rules for when the city may
[3:37:48] temporarily fall below the adopted
[3:37:50] percentage along with the plan to
[3:37:52] restore those funds. The goal is
[3:37:54] accountability, transparency, and a
[3:37:57] long-term financial discipline for the
[3:37:58] city of Series.
[3:38:01] Is there any members of the public that
[3:38:03] would like to make a comment on this
[3:38:04] item?
[3:38:10] a pride of series at one time series was
[3:38:14] in black and actually the council raised
[3:38:17] the percentage and basically you're not
[3:38:20] supposed to just keep robbing that that
[3:38:24] the problem is brown and co came along
[3:38:29] and all the cities are are hurting
[3:38:33] and everybody all everybody's been
[3:38:35] trying trying to get back at back
[3:38:37] towards the black and it has been
[3:38:39] difficult.
[3:38:41] Everything's getting more expensive.
[3:38:44] People just don't have the funds to go
[3:38:45] to the restaurants and stuff stuff
[3:38:49] to, you know,
[3:38:52] basically that's where a lot of the
[3:38:54] money comes from. The Siri uh for your funds
[3:39:02] you rely
[3:39:06] you keep putting in stuff
[3:39:10] that doesn't really get a high turnover.
[3:39:13] I don't believe that. All these these
[3:39:16] food trucks and stuff that you want to
[3:39:18] bring in here,
[3:39:20] I don't I doubt if you can even prove
[3:39:23] that you're even getting getting a tax
[3:39:25] off of those things.
[3:39:29] I remember Alonszo's.
[3:39:32] There was a time that restaurant was
[3:39:34] full of people all the time.
[3:39:38] Then all the all these drive-thrus came
[3:39:41] in and took the business away and and
[3:39:47] now
[3:39:50] people getting away from the
[3:39:54] prices are getting so expensive.
[3:39:57] business are coming up with ways to do
[3:39:59] without without employees.
[3:40:03] Just because an employee can get now $20
[3:40:06] an hour uh flip hamburgers hamburgers
[3:40:11] doesn't mean he's going to be able to
[3:40:12] they're coming up with machines to do
[3:40:14] that.
[3:40:17] AI they're getting computers to do do
[3:40:20] take your order stuff. Most of the time
[3:40:23] they got little iPads at the tables and
[3:40:26] stuff to take it from the when people
[3:40:29] aren't working.
[3:40:32] The cities aren't going to get money.
[3:40:39] Thank you. Is there anybody else that
[3:40:40] would like to make comment?
[3:40:44] » Okay, I bring this item back for council
[3:40:45] for comments questions. Council member
[3:40:47] Otoro.
[3:40:48] >> Thank you, mayor. Um I'm obviously not
[3:40:51] the finance director and I'm sure she'll
[3:40:54] um she'll do a great job of finding some
[3:40:56] resolution for us. But it looks like
[3:40:59] historically um the reserve percentage was at 25%
[3:41:06] possibly that was prior to 2010 and then
[3:41:08] in 2014 it dropped to 20%. In June of
[3:41:12] 2015 um during a council study it had
[3:41:15] dropped to 18%. So, it's obviously
[3:41:18] reduced. Um, and I know I've I think
[3:41:21] I've heard um our finance director
[3:41:22] mention the government finance officer
[3:41:24] association. They give a recommendation
[3:41:27] as well when it comes to these um
[3:41:30] reserve percentages. So, I think it's
[3:41:32] important to evaluate what their
[3:41:34] recommendation is. Um and it looks like
[3:41:37] in 2014 2015 15 is when the city might
[3:41:40] have possibly set the policy in the
[3:41:42] budget discussion and study sessions
[3:41:44] during that time. So [clears throat]
[3:41:45] I would recommend that we look at um
[3:41:47] what that association recommends. Um
[3:41:50] it's important that we kind of have that
[3:41:53] guidance of um you know along with other
[3:41:56] cities in the state. I would be careful
[3:41:59] with creating a set percentage because
[3:42:03] obviously budgets fluctuate. So we don't
[3:42:05] want to say you know it's going to
[3:42:07] remain at 25% and we run into an issue
[3:42:10] where now it has to be lowered. Um those
[3:42:13] are my thoughts behind this uh referral.
[3:42:16] Thank you.
[3:42:16] >> I think you have a a point on we have to
[3:42:18] use a reference. I know I spoke to the
[3:42:20] city manager and you had also did some
[3:42:22] research and you had found that the
[3:42:25] during the budget discussions they had
[3:42:27] referenced 18% but there was never a
[3:42:29] formal resolution. Correct.
[3:42:31] >> Yes. Thank you mayor. Uh in the limited
[3:42:34] search that we've done so far, we've
[3:42:35] been unable to find an actual formal uh
[3:42:38] council adopted resolution or other
[3:42:40] document establishing a set percentage
[3:42:44] or number of reserve. We did find in a
[3:42:47] staff report, I believe it was in 2018,
[3:42:50] a reference to an 18%, but nothing
[3:42:54] formally adopted by council that we can
[3:42:56] find because as long as I've been here,
[3:42:58] the number has always been 18%, but
[3:43:00] nobody could ever figure out whether
[3:43:02] that was a resolution or if that was
[3:43:04] just the recommendation. I think that if
[3:43:06] we establish that recommendation but
[3:43:08] also provide a plan to bring our
[3:43:11] reserves back to 18% whatever number we
[3:43:14] choose I think that it would be
[3:43:16] beneficial. I think that Serena you're
[3:43:17] absolutely right. We do we do need to
[3:43:19] use a reference and if there's guidance
[3:43:21] and that that would really be great to
[3:43:23] use during this process. Councilwoman
[3:43:25] Vera
[3:43:27] >> thank you. Um I do think we need to have
[3:43:29] an established percentage at least a
[3:43:32] bare minimum and in the event there is a
[3:43:34] town and we also need a plan to get to
[3:43:38] if whether it's 18 or 20 or whatever is
[3:43:40] recommended I do like the recommendation
[3:43:43] based on what a lot of cities our size
[3:43:45] are doing um with our similar
[3:43:48] demographics and income levels and stuff
[3:43:50] cuz I definitely don't want to use you
[3:43:51] know a city down in the you know
[3:43:53] beachfront property down in LA cuz
[3:43:55] they're not very similar to where our
[3:43:57] demographics are, but I would like to
[3:43:59] have a a set number or percentage and
[3:44:02] then when the budget is discussed in the
[3:44:04] event that there is a a reason that they
[3:44:06] have to go into it, maybe they add that
[3:44:08] resolution to the budget and saying,
[3:44:10] "Hey, you know what? We have to have,
[3:44:11] you know, x amount, but because of this
[3:44:14] situation, this one year, we're going to
[3:44:16] do a motion or resolution to change it
[3:44:19] down to, you know, a number a little bit
[3:44:21] less." Um, but I do think we need to
[3:44:23] have a set number. So there's no
[3:44:25] questions whatsoever going forward on
[3:44:27] what the minimum is that we need to have
[3:44:29] and I would like to see what the numbers
[3:44:31] are for similar cities of sim similar
[3:44:34] demographics. So yes, it is yes for me.
[3:44:38] >> Any additional comments before I get
[3:44:39] consensus?
[3:44:41] Vice Mayor? Yes, Councilwoman. Yes for
[3:44:44] me.
[3:44:46] Okay, sounds good. Moving on to reports.
[3:44:51] I don't have a report, but Vice Mayor,
[3:44:53] can you take over for a quick second?
[3:44:54] I'm going to go use the restroom. Moving
[3:44:56] on to city council reports. Vice Mayor,
[3:44:58] >> Absolutely. Yes. I'll start and then
[3:44:59] I'll move along.
[3:45:00] >> Was that
[3:45:03] Oh, you Okay, just take it back. Um,
[3:45:05] Vice Mayor, can you please take over for
[3:45:07] additional referrals? I'm sorry that I
[3:45:08] skipped over that, Serena, but I'll be
[3:45:10] right back.
[3:45:10] >> Sorry. Thank you. I just um Vice Mayor,
[3:45:12] if you don't mind, I just want to make a
[3:45:13] comment. Um,
[3:45:15] >> the referral list has seemed to stack up
[3:45:16] and it sounds like city manager, you
[3:45:19] kind of brought all the referrals
[3:45:20] tonight. Are we now caught up with uh
[3:45:22] our referral list?
[3:45:25] >> So, if you recall, thank you for the
[3:45:26] question. If you recall at the last city
[3:45:28] council meeting, we brought about an
[3:45:30] equal number of referrals uh to that
[3:45:33] council meeting with these 11 referrals
[3:45:37] today. Um and those approximately 11
[3:45:40] last uh meeting, we are caught up.
[3:45:44] However, I received five additional
[3:45:47] referrals in person today. So, as of
[3:45:51] right now, there are five pending
[3:45:53] referrals that I just received today.
[3:45:55] >> Okay. I think as a council, we need to
[3:45:57] evaluate this referral process. I mean,
[3:45:59] I'll admit this uh going through all
[3:46:01] these referrals was pretty painful
[3:46:03] tonight. In my opinion, it's taken a
[3:46:05] long time. Um I don't know if there's a
[3:46:07] way where if we make a referral up here,
[3:46:09] maybe we just get consensus at that
[3:46:11] point. And then now your staff can
[3:46:13] decide if uh you know, or we can decide
[3:46:16] if a staff report is going to be
[3:46:17] presented. Um again I haven't researched
[3:46:20] much from other local cities but it's
[3:46:23] something uh worth exploring. So
[3:46:26] unfortunately yes I would like to make a
[3:46:28] referral to evaluate our referral
[3:46:30] process. Thank you.
[3:46:33] >> Thank you. Now we'll be moving forward
[3:46:34] to council member reports.
[3:46:37] >> Just just a quick point on on that item.
[3:46:40] Um we'll be bringing that referral back
[3:46:43] um at a later meeting. Just a quick
[3:46:45] note, we can't have the council make
[3:46:48] referrals from the dis and not have it
[3:46:51] agendaized and ask for consensus at that
[3:46:53] meeting because it's brown act issue. So
[3:46:56] that's that's why we have this
[3:46:57] multi-step process and we have generally
[3:47:00] advised uh council members that if you
[3:47:03] have a referral item, get it to staff or
[3:47:06] the city manager ahead of the agenda
[3:47:08] posting so that it can actually make its
[3:47:10] way on the agenda. So that way if it is
[3:47:12] on the agenda we can take consensus and
[3:47:14] save a step um as opposed to just taking
[3:47:17] it from the dis. But that's just maybe
[3:47:19] one thing to consider as part of the
[3:47:21] referral evaluation process.
[3:47:23] >> Thank you. Uh with that being said then
[3:47:25] I think we'll just scratch that for now
[3:47:27] and um I'll just do some more research.
[3:47:29] Thank you.
[3:47:31] >> So the mayor had no reports. I have two.
[3:47:34] Um, I'll let Council Member Vieier speak
[3:47:36] more on the last concert in the park
[3:47:38] tomorrow, but I did want to mention uh
[3:47:40] for that event that the firefighters
[3:47:42] will be out there tomorrow night.
[3:47:43] They'll be barbecuing uh and they wanted
[3:47:44] to let you guys know and let the public
[3:47:46] know that they'll be selling uh chips,
[3:47:48] sodas, and hamburgers for $5 a person.
[3:47:50] And uh if you want to stop by and
[3:47:52] support them, my second is is about uh
[3:47:55] the Facebook group that recently had to
[3:47:58] go about and clean the rose garden
[3:48:00] themselves. um like council member Rhyno
[3:48:02] and others that were here this evening
[3:48:03] had mentioned uh they took it upon
[3:48:06] themselves uh to come out and to clean the rose garden and to get it back
[3:48:10] to a more suitable uh than what it had
[3:48:12] been. Um I know that we had just
[3:48:14] recently cut our contracts for our park
[3:48:17] maintenance, but like we've heard all
[3:48:18] evening, I think council member would
[3:48:20] mention it, the the weeds and the
[3:48:21] growth, it's not just a few weeks old. A
[3:48:24] lot of parks have months worth of
[3:48:26] neglect. Um, and so, you know, we need
[3:48:29] to do better as as council, as leaders,
[3:48:31] as department heads, especially with us
[3:48:33] being under staff now and not having
[3:48:34] contracts to to find a way to get these
[3:48:36] parks cleaned, uh, and to take that
[3:48:38] responsibility away from the citizens
[3:48:39] since those parks are our job to
[3:48:41] maintain.
[3:48:48] » Councilwoman,
[3:48:52] » thank you. Um, thank you, Martinez, for
[3:48:55] bringing that up. Um, I have spoke with
[3:48:57] Joey a few times now about the adopt a
[3:49:00] park. Um, he's promised that he's going
[3:49:01] to make it much easier so we can go out
[3:49:04] there and just get it done so it's not
[3:49:07] just a group that's going out there. We
[3:49:09] can do it just as ourselves. You and I
[3:49:12] can go out there tomorrow and do what we
[3:49:13] need to do. Um, as well as local
[3:49:15] businesses and not have to submit the
[3:49:17] paperwork and permission slips and all
[3:49:19] these other things that are required in
[3:49:20] the current process. So, we've had these
[3:49:23] discussions. Um, you're putting him on
[3:49:25] the spot right now. So, I'm sorry, Joey.
[3:49:28] Um, there's also a few other things. Um,
[3:49:30] this, um, last week we started
[3:49:32] discussing the point in time count. It
[3:49:35] was reviewed. It is public now. Um,
[3:49:37] series didn't have significant changes.
[3:49:39] There were 15 that were identified,
[3:49:41] although I'm positive, and I can check
[3:49:44] with the code enforcement. I think
[3:49:46] there's more than 15 homeless in the
[3:49:47] town. But at least on the night of the
[3:49:50] day that we did the point in time count,
[3:49:51] that was what was found by the
[3:49:52] volunteers. Um, again, we still provide
[3:49:55] services that's done through the care
[3:49:57] program. They're handling the resources
[3:49:59] calls. Are are they still going through
[3:50:01] code enforcement chief or can they call
[3:50:03] care directly?
[3:50:05] >> Uh, as far as I know, it's still going
[3:50:07] through code enforcement.
[3:50:08] >> Perfect. So, you can call code
[3:50:09] enforcement to make those referrals um
[3:50:11] regarding those that are unhouse that
[3:50:13] need resources. Um, majority of the
[3:50:15] barriers from the point in town time
[3:50:17] count appeared to be transportation,
[3:50:19] unsure where to go or not qualifying for
[3:50:22] services. Um, Chief, were you going to
[3:50:25] touch on the national night out?
[3:50:27] Awesome. So, I won't touch that one
[3:50:28] then. Um, I am trying to coordinate
[3:50:30] something in my district and I'll let
[3:50:32] him go into details on that. And then,
[3:50:36] um, concerts in the park. The final
[3:50:37] concert is tomorrow. Leavonne will be
[3:50:39] presenting. She is always a blast. Um,
[3:50:42] so I look forward to having her here.
[3:50:44] She's another series local. So I love
[3:50:46] seeing these wonderful, strong, amazing
[3:50:48] women here closing out our series.
[3:50:51] Please come. Come early. I know we had a
[3:50:53] group this time. We had up to 500 people
[3:50:56] at the concerts. So come early. It's
[3:50:58] great to see the community involvement
[3:51:00] in this. Um, and that is all I have.
[3:51:04] I'll let Chief go into the National
[3:51:06] Night Out aspect of what we're doing.
[3:51:08] Councilwoman, I know this might be a
[3:51:10] little bit different than what we
[3:51:11] normally do as far as the council um
[3:51:13] reports, but you mentioned the bid count
[3:51:16] and um my question and I was with you
[3:51:18] that day when we're out there doing the
[3:51:20] count. The the 15 that you the number
[3:51:22] that you got 15 that was from the day
[3:51:24] that we counted. That's what was was
[3:51:26] given to Joey.
[3:51:28] >> No, the 15 from the point in time. Yes,
[3:51:30] that was what was handed to Joey and
[3:51:32] that went into the annual report that
[3:51:34] was submitted to Hut. The only the
[3:51:36] reason why I bring that up is because
[3:51:37] the pit count came out and the county
[3:51:39] put out documents but didn't reference
[3:51:42] any of the nine cities and didn't give
[3:51:44] us an example of what the counts were
[3:51:46] for the nine cities. And I know this is
[3:51:48] a concern. If if you have that, that
[3:51:51] would be great. The reason why I asked
[3:51:52] that is because I I think that this is a great um information for the cities to
[3:51:58] have. There's some cities that go out
[3:52:00] for grants and if we don't have that
[3:52:02] data then they won't be able to go out
[3:52:04] for those specific grants. So if you do
[3:52:06] have that specific number, I was going
[3:52:08] to email the county. I was going to
[3:52:09] email email our supervisor, but if you
[3:52:12] have that information offline, we'll get
[3:52:13] it. But I just wanted to bring that up.
[3:52:16] Mr. Casey, is there anything else?
[3:52:20] Councilwoman, do you think you have it?
[3:52:21] If not offline.
[3:52:29] Oh, you're right. Sister series had 15.
[3:52:32] I think in last year we had 20
[3:52:35] something. Okay. Thank you. I'll please
[3:52:36] forward that to me to my email. Uh with
[3:52:39] that being said, city manager, any
[3:52:41] reports?
[3:52:42] >> I have no report. Thank you.
[3:52:44] >> Okay. City attorney.
[3:52:47] Okay. And now we'll start off with our
[3:52:49] departments and we'll start off with the
[3:52:50] chief of police. I'm going to apologize
[3:52:53] up front. I know this is a late meeting
[3:52:54] and I have more reports than I have all
[3:52:56] year. So, I'll get started. Um, I'm
[3:53:00] going to touch on the tobacco
[3:53:01] enforcement update. I'd like to thank
[3:53:03] the mayor and the council for your guys'
[3:53:05] support on this. Since April of 2025,
[3:53:08] the series Police Department has worked
[3:53:10] closely with the California Department
[3:53:11] of Tax and Fee Administration uh to
[3:53:14] regulate the possession and sale of
[3:53:16] illegal tobacco products within the city
[3:53:18] of Series. In October of 2025, the city
[3:53:21] council approved a local ordinance
[3:53:22] restricting the sale of certain tobacco
[3:53:24] products within the city. Since the
[3:53:26] start of enforcement operations, the
[3:53:28] police department has conducted 84
[3:53:30] retail inspections, issued 29 citations,
[3:53:33] completed eight undercover purchase
[3:53:35] attempts, resulting in four violation of
[3:53:38] flavored tobacos, and during one
[3:53:40] inspection, some illegal weapons, brass
[3:53:42] knuckles were found. In addition to two
[3:53:45] smoke shops uh also received 30-day
[3:53:48] suspensions for repeated violations and
[3:53:51] of just late we have revoke the business
[3:53:54] license of one of the businesses because
[3:53:56] they continue to um uh get violations
[3:54:00] which result in the permanent closure of
[3:54:03] the business. When uh enforcement
[3:54:05] efforts began there were 12 smoke shops
[3:54:08] operating within the city of series.
[3:54:10] Today there is only six remaining. Five
[3:54:12] voluntary um voluntarily shut down and
[3:54:15] one was closed uh due to the repeated
[3:54:18] violations. Uh there has been a
[3:54:20] significant push from the marijuana in
[3:54:23] industry to regulate smoke shops. To
[3:54:25] date, however, we have not located any
[3:54:27] marijuana in those smoke shops uh during
[3:54:30] any of our inspections. Um overall uh
[3:54:34] the success is measured by what the
[3:54:37] school district told us is that is
[3:54:39] they're seeing in the schools a lower
[3:54:42] number of vapes meaning that the
[3:54:44] children are not getting access uh to
[3:54:46] this these tobacco products and I truly
[3:54:50] believe the ordinance has a lot to do
[3:54:52] with that. Any comments or questions
[3:54:54] before I move on?
[3:54:56] You said the school district had let us
[3:54:58] know that vaping has gone down in the
[3:55:00] schools and and that's been their
[3:55:02] thinking that ordinance. You know, I I
[3:55:04] think that this has been a long time
[3:55:06] coming. I know that with the tobacco
[3:55:08] grant and with the enforcement and all
[3:55:10] the great work that code enforcement law
[3:55:11] enforcement has done in our community,
[3:55:13] at the end of the day, we want to be
[3:55:14] supportive of businesses. But if
[3:55:15] businesses are not doing what they're
[3:55:17] supposed to be doing, such as selling
[3:55:18] illegal products, I think that, you
[3:55:20] know, they need to be held accountable.
[3:55:22] And I I'm glad that you guys did. On top
[3:55:24] of that, I know that there's been some
[3:55:25] reference to you said that you did not
[3:55:28] find any marijuana in any of the
[3:55:29] lookings during your inspection, but it
[3:55:31] was brought to our attention by other um
[3:55:35] I would say undercover uh operations,
[3:55:37] but the problem is that it needs to be
[3:55:39] found during the time of your
[3:55:41] inspection. Correct.
[3:55:43] >> Correct. Okay. So, I just want to make
[3:55:44] that clear. I I do want to praise you,
[3:55:46] Chief. At the end of the day, this city
[3:55:48] council and our policy is supportive of
[3:55:50] this ordinance, but is you as a chief
[3:55:53] and the leader by you implementing this
[3:55:55] and your officers on the ground finding
[3:55:58] these things and protecting our children
[3:55:59] is what the utmost importance and I take
[3:56:02] that personally. I do want to say thank
[3:56:04] you and please let everybody else know
[3:56:06] that I thank them as well.
[3:56:08] >> Thank you. And uh we do have the tobacco
[3:56:11] grant and we are going to uh renew that
[3:56:14] and I have to pass all that credit down
[3:56:16] to Lieutenant Greel and Sergeant Blount.
[3:56:18] actually wrote the
[3:56:19] grant. Didn't go through the grant
[3:56:21] writers. Uh they're doing an amazing
[3:56:23] job.
[3:56:24] Um 4th of July report. So this is from
[3:56:28] July 2nd to the 5th. Uh these are the
[3:56:31] statistics. We had uh 12 uniform
[3:56:34] officers working on the 4th. uh three
[3:56:36] 911 dispatchers, a drone operator, extra
[3:56:38] records clerk, and a community service
[3:56:40] officer. Um our stats for uh those days,
[3:56:44] we had 16 DUI arrests, 20 fireworks
[3:56:47] citations, 74 fireworks related calls,
[3:56:51] 28 uh submissions on the nail map, and
[3:56:55] 40 um calls came in on the 538 loud.
[3:56:59] Overall, the oper operation was very
[3:57:02] successful. The combination of uh the
[3:57:04] proactive enforcement, increased uh
[3:57:06] staffing, drone operations, uh community
[3:57:09] reporting tools allowed officers to
[3:57:11] quickly identify and respond to
[3:57:12] violations while maintaining um proper
[3:57:16] staffing on the streets. The 3rd, which
[3:57:18] is Friday, was not as active as I
[3:57:21] thought it was going to be. and the 4th
[3:57:23] of July. Although the fireworks were the
[3:57:25] same uh in the amount uh no critical
[3:57:28] incidents on the police end in series
[3:57:30] which um was really good. Any questions
[3:57:35] on that?
[3:57:37] >> Council member Otero.
[3:57:38] >> Thanks, Mayor. Um Chief, did you have
[3:57:41] any repeat offenders this year?
[3:57:45] >> I don't know yet. We're still kind of
[3:57:46] sorting through some of that.
[3:57:48] >> Thank you. Um, just thank you to your
[3:57:50] team again for all the enforcement for
[3:57:52] the 4th of July and then the continued
[3:57:54] enforcement on these smoke shops. I
[3:57:56] appreciate it.
[3:57:58] >> Thank you, Councilwoman Leo.
[3:58:00] >> I think that's pretty much what I wanted
[3:58:02] to say. I know I was able to talk to
[3:58:03] Sergeant when he was in here and thank
[3:58:04] him and his staff, but I do want to I
[3:58:07] appreciate especially I know we hear a
[3:58:09] lot of DUIs right now in 16. Um, I I saw
[3:58:14] the report when it came through and that
[3:58:16] takes a lot of time and a lot of work on
[3:58:18] top of all the other fireworks and
[3:58:20] everything you did and you're able to do
[3:58:21] this with 12 uniformed officers and I
[3:58:23] appreciate their work cuz it sound like
[3:58:25] they were going one call after another and um I appreciate their
[3:58:29] hard work and coming in and getting all
[3:58:31] of that done and keeping with Siri safe
[3:58:33] without any critical. I know last year
[3:58:35] we had a few responses and a few fire I
[3:58:38] think there was one major fire or kind
[3:58:40] of had a fire of a bush in my district.
[3:58:43] Um but we were sound like it was out
[3:58:45] pretty quickly and so I appreciate them
[3:58:47] responding and all the work that
[3:58:48] everyone put in that night. Thank you.
[3:58:50] Or the whole weekend rather.
[3:58:53] >> Thank you. Uh next one's quick. It's uh
[3:58:55] we had some questions about golf carts
[3:58:57] being used. I have some clarification
[3:58:59] for that. Uh you can't use golf carts uh
[3:59:02] within the city of series unless you're
[3:59:03] a mile within a golf course and it has
[3:59:05] to be approved by an ordinance. Uh now
[3:59:08] low-speed vehicles on the other hand,
[3:59:09] which look like golf carts, they have to
[3:59:11] have all the proper equipment uh that uh
[3:59:14] makes them a motor vehicle. They have to
[3:59:16] be registered. They have to be insured.
[3:59:18] You have to be a licensed driver. They
[3:59:20] can only operate on streets that are 35
[3:59:22] mph. That does not take a ordinance or a
[3:59:26] resolution. it's within their rights if
[3:59:29] they want to register them as a
[3:59:31] low-speed vehicle. And that's I I talked
[3:59:33] to our cso today. That is what they do
[3:59:35] in Houston. Um there's really no more
[3:59:39] debate on that. If somebody wants to get
[3:59:40] a low-speed vehicle, then um they're
[3:59:43] more than welcome to do that. Any
[3:59:45] questions on that one?
[3:59:49] Lazy Wheels update. It looks like Lazy
[3:59:51] Wheels was hit with a hurricane. I
[3:59:53] understand that it's going to get worse
[3:59:54] before it gets better. And that's
[3:59:56] exactly what happened. I am happy to
[3:59:58] report though that um they have almost
[4:00:02] completely gone through every trailer.
[4:00:04] They were dismantling it. Um although it
[4:00:06] was slow, they had to take all the
[4:00:07] recyclable materials out. They should
[4:00:09] have heavy equipment on site by
[4:00:11] Wednesday.
[4:00:13] Don't hold your breath, but that's what
[4:00:14] we were told. They did have a delay for
[4:00:16] a couple weeks. Um I am happy that they
[4:00:19] are moving on it. They are doing work on
[4:00:21] it. Um but hopefully uh Wednesday we'll
[4:00:25] have some heavy equipment to start
[4:00:27] cleaning up some of that mess.
[4:00:30] Uh last one is National Night Out. So
[4:00:32] National Night Out is coming up August
[4:00:34] 4th. Um we are changing it up this year
[4:00:38] after last year. I told the staff I
[4:00:40] wanted to go back to the original plan
[4:00:42] of getting out in the neighborhoods.
[4:00:43] That's what National Night is all about
[4:00:45] is connecting with the communities. I
[4:00:47] think it's very important. We haven't
[4:00:49] done it in a long time. there's going to
[4:00:51] be some hiccups and I'm all for any any
[4:00:54] uh input that the council or the public
[4:00:57] has before definitely afterwards if
[4:00:59] anybody has input on how we could do it
[4:01:01] better. I do feel like we were a little
[4:01:02] bit late getting this information out
[4:01:05] especially that we're changing things
[4:01:07] but anyone that wants to hold an event u
[4:01:10] please contact either Sergeant Blount or
[4:01:12] Lieutenant Godfrey and we will get you
[4:01:14] signed up. Uh
[4:01:17] my goal is to get us back out in the
[4:01:20] communities and getting the communities
[4:01:22] together in their areas of town uh which
[4:01:24] it was intended for. Um but I I think
[4:01:28] there might be a a few hiccups, but
[4:01:30] we'll get through it and definitely next
[4:01:31] year's is going to be uh even better.
[4:01:35] Last thing I'll leave you with um for um
[4:01:39] maybe some interaction with the
[4:01:41] community. I've dedicated an hour of my
[4:01:44] time uh every week on Tuesday from 8:00
[4:01:47] to 9:00 to have coffee with the chief.
[4:01:49] It is limited space, but anyone that has
[4:01:52] any questions whatsoever about anything
[4:01:54] that we do at the police department,
[4:01:56] whether it be budget or enforcement or
[4:01:57] you want to just complain for an hour,
[4:02:00] um please feel free to contact my
[4:02:01] executive assistant, uh Marcy Peterson.
[4:02:04] Email her, let her know. It'd be helpful
[4:02:06] if you tell me what you want to talk
[4:02:07] about so I can be prepared. If you just
[4:02:09] want to come have coffee and talk about
[4:02:11] the weather, that's fine, too. Um, but
[4:02:13] any citizen in series is welcome to do
[4:02:15] that. Um, and I will provide the coffee
[4:02:18] and sorry for the long report.
[4:02:21] >> That's great. Thank you. Anyone else?
[4:02:27] » That don't worry. Um, thank you, Mayor
[4:02:29] Council. Um, so I I want to give a a
[4:02:33] quick shout out to our water department.
[4:02:36] Um last night we were all out there, a
[4:02:38] couple of us from the engineering
[4:02:40] department and a few from the water
[4:02:42] department trying to figure out the
[4:02:44] shutdown on uh Richland Avenue. Uh it
[4:02:48] did take us essentially we started
[4:02:50] turning valves about 9:30. Um and I
[4:02:54] think most of us left somewhere around
[4:02:56] 3:45 4:00 uh this morning. Uh it was a
[4:03:01] fun night if you want to put it that
[4:03:03] way, but we did manage to um figure out
[4:03:06] what we needed to do for the shutdown,
[4:03:08] which we've been trying to figure out.
[4:03:10] Um we actually found two valves that
[4:03:13] were uh bad. And so we will be replacing
[4:03:16] those with the with the Hatch Road main
[4:03:19] project, so that way we can do uh
[4:03:21] shutdowns on the main as as needed. Um
[4:03:24] so that it all went well. uh water was
[4:03:27] back on by about 4:00 4:30 um you know
[4:03:32] to to everybody. So that was that was a
[4:03:35] good thing also. Um another thing uh
[4:03:38] back in September of last year you guys
[4:03:41] authorized the engineering department to
[4:03:43] file grants uh and and apply for grants.
[4:03:47] Uh we applied for uh 23
[4:03:52] million I believe in grants. Um, we
[4:03:55] ended up getting 18.5 million. Um, we
[4:03:59] the only the only city that got more
[4:04:01] grant funding than us was the city of
[4:04:03] Modesto. Um, and that was only by three
[4:04:06] points. Had we gotten three more points
[4:04:08] on our Hatch Road project, we would have
[4:04:10] been the uh we would have gotten the
[4:04:12] most grant money out of any jurisdiction
[4:04:14] in the county. So, just a quick recap on
[4:04:17] that. We got $5 million for the design
[4:04:19] on service and Mitchell interchange. We
[4:04:22] got $5 million for the construction of
[4:04:24] Crows Landing from Whitmore to uh
[4:04:28] service. We got $2 million for the
[4:04:30] Hearnden and Eastgate bike lane project.
[4:04:33] We got $2 million for the Walnut Avenue
[4:04:35] sidewalks project. Got $2 million for
[4:04:38] Mororrow Village phase 4 and $2 million
[4:04:41] for Mororrow Village phase 5. And we did
[4:04:44] end up getting 420,000
[4:04:47] uh for the Hatch Road design uh to widen
[4:04:50] Hatch Road from essentially Mitchell all
[4:04:53] the way out to Faith Home. So um all of
[4:04:56] those grants were written by staff
[4:04:58] within the engineering department. It is
[4:05:00] a huge undertaking for us to do that.
[4:05:04] Um, and you could tell by, you know,
[4:05:08] getting most of our projects funded that
[4:05:10] the staff did an absolute amazing job,
[4:05:13] uh, getting these grants in, um, and
[4:05:16] eventually being awarded all of this
[4:05:19] money. Um, so, lots of construction to
[4:05:23] come. Uh, and we will, uh, keep plugging
[4:05:25] away, but thank you.
[4:05:27] >> I have a quick question for you, sir.
[4:05:28] You say we received $5 million for the
[4:05:30] design of the service road interchange.
[4:05:32] >> Yes, sir. So, how how far along are we
[4:05:35] with the design? I know that you had
[4:05:37] mentioned in a staff report that went to
[4:05:39] the city manager that went to us in
[4:05:41] reference to that we are 80% complete,
[4:05:43] but you also mentioned something about
[4:05:44] CALR reviewing some of our documents.
[4:05:47] Can you please expand on that?
[4:05:49] >> So, we're we're about 80% complete on
[4:05:52] the crow's landing design um for the
[4:05:55] roadway and lift station on service in
[4:05:58] Mitchell. Um we are still we've we've
[4:06:01] gotten a lot of approvals from from
[4:06:03] CALR. Um the biggest one that taking the
[4:06:06] longest time is the revised traffic
[4:06:09] study that we have to do uh for the
[4:06:12] on-ramps, off-ramps, bridges, all of
[4:06:14] that area right there. Um so we we're
[4:06:18] not as far along on service in Mitchell.
[4:06:21] However, this will greatly help us in
[4:06:24] reducing the amount of funding that we
[4:06:26] have to use because obviously we get to
[4:06:28] use an additional $5 million of grant
[4:06:30] funding instead of using our own Measure
[4:06:32] L money for uh for that design. So, it
[4:06:36] is progressing well. We're happy with
[4:06:38] what that with the decisions that
[4:06:40] Calrans has made thus far on uh some
[4:06:43] revalidation of reports, but uh the
[4:06:46] overall project is is progressing and
[4:06:48] progressing well. Now I think I know the
[4:06:50] answer to this next question. What would
[4:06:52] it take to make that project move
[4:06:54] faster?
[4:06:56] Um I I think that our consultant is
[4:07:00] pushing as hard as possible. Um you know
[4:07:04] once we get into CALR, you know, they
[4:07:08] have their review periods, those types
[4:07:10] of things. Um and we we work very well
[4:07:14] with CALR. Our project manager at the
[4:07:16] state level has been great to work with.
[4:07:19] um anytime they've we've requested
[4:07:21] meetings, they are on top of it. Um so I can't say I mean it is the state. It
[4:07:28] does move slower than than I would like.
[4:07:31] Um but I they they've been pretty
[4:07:34] efficient for for us here in the city.
[4:07:36] >> Okay. I'm going to refrain from giving
[4:07:38] any type of direction city manager, but
[4:07:40] as you can tell, that's something I'm
[4:07:42] interested in seeing. Um, next report.
[4:07:49] » Um, good evening, mayor and council
[4:07:52] members. Um, on Tuesday of last week,
[4:07:54] the city manager sent an email to you
[4:07:56] guys regarding a letter that went out to
[4:07:58] the public. Um, I just wanted to touch
[4:08:00] base on that letter, give a little bit
[4:08:02] of information, and uh, provide an
[4:08:04] opportunity for any questions if you
[4:08:05] have them. Um he uh our city manager
[4:08:10] outlined very well the the main topics
[4:08:13] of the letter, but I just wanted to
[4:08:14] clarify for any of the residents because
[4:08:16] I'm still getting calls right now about
[4:08:18] um the letter. Uh basically
[4:08:21] uh the 2024
[4:08:23] um guideline from the EPA was to uh get
[4:08:27] a service line inventory. So they want
[4:08:30] us to verify the the material of the of
[4:08:33] the pipe that is not only going from the
[4:08:36] city main to the meter but from the
[4:08:38] meter to the home of every resident in
[4:08:40] the city. Um the reason it's a 2024
[4:08:43] regulation but we did it in 2026 is
[4:08:46] because we were not previously required
[4:08:47] to do it because we were under the
[4:08:49] 50,000 um mark. And then in 2025,
[4:08:54] the the uh the DWR decided that since we
[4:08:57] were so close to 50,000 population, they
[4:09:00] were going to start considering us
[4:09:01] 50,000 population and we had to meet all
[4:09:03] those requirements. So we had to do it
[4:09:05] in a relatively short amount of time. We did an initial inventory with um 120
[4:09:10] water um who used uh county data to use
[4:09:16] the the building date of a lot of the
[4:09:19] homes um and any other information that
[4:09:22] they can pull from from various sources
[4:09:24] to use uh to eliminate some homes from
[4:09:28] being uh part of the the survey that has
[4:09:30] to be verified. But it did leave us with
[4:09:33] about I believe uh roughly about 5,000
[4:09:36] homes that are unverified. So um our
[4:09:39] staff did in 2025
[4:09:42] and 2026 go through um a few hundred
[4:09:45] homes and verify the the service lines
[4:09:47] manually. They went out, they opened up
[4:09:50] the the boxes, they checked both sides.
[4:09:53] Um so staff did that but until we get
[4:09:56] all the other 5,000 or systematically um
[4:10:00] eliminate some of those homes which you
[4:10:02] know uh starting the process of doing
[4:10:04] now if we can look at developments that
[4:10:06] were put in after a certain year we can
[4:10:08] eliminate all those developments. So
[4:10:09] there's a lot of ways that we can um uh
[4:10:12] continue to update that inventory until
[4:10:14] we get that inventory complete for the
[4:10:16] entire city. Um this letter will go out
[4:10:18] annually. Um, as the city manager stated
[4:10:21] in his uh letter, we haven't violated
[4:10:24] any lead or copper sampling. We we don't
[4:10:27] have we're in compliance with the EPA
[4:10:29] for all of our sampling, all of our
[4:10:31] water constituents. Um, we're in
[4:10:33] compliance with uh all the state
[4:10:35] regulated um sampling. It has nothing to
[4:10:38] do with whether there's uh lead or
[4:10:40] copper in your in the residents um
[4:10:43] water. Uh we do sampling for that and
[4:10:46] we've stayed up to date with that um in
[4:10:47] the past years. So, this is really just
[4:10:49] about physically verifying the type of
[4:10:53] um pipe that is going from their meter
[4:10:56] to their home. Um, and that's going to
[4:10:58] be an ongoing work that goes on for, you
[4:11:00] know, probably the the next few years.
[4:11:02] Um, and we're going to continue to to
[4:11:05] eliminate, you know, whatever sections
[4:11:07] we can using different data that we can
[4:11:09] pull in. Um, yeah. Again, so I just
[4:11:11] wanted to touch on uh letting people
[4:11:13] know that the water's safe to drink.
[4:11:15] There's no there's no kind of um notice
[4:11:17] or anything. I mean, there's no kind of
[4:11:19] a a regulation on that. And um I was
[4:11:22] getting a lot of calls with people just
[4:11:24] concerned about the the letter and that
[4:11:26] it was hard to for them to read and
[4:11:28] understand. Um we can't change this.
[4:11:31] is an EPA template. All we're able
[4:11:33] to change is our city name and our
[4:11:36] specific um data. So what our specific
[4:11:39] results are on our sampling um you know
[4:11:42] and and any specific information to the
[4:11:44] city of series other than that it has to
[4:11:46] say stay the same as what they um they
[4:11:48] provide us with. So I just wanted to
[4:11:50] give you guys that information and any
[4:11:52] of the public that are wondering which
[4:11:54] I'm I'm still returning calls right now
[4:11:55] and just you know uh letting everybody
[4:11:58] know that uh what the what the exact
[4:12:00] issue is. The the next steps for us is
[4:12:02] going to be um sending out a survey
[4:12:05] after getting that approved by um city
[4:12:08] manager, sending out a survey that
[4:12:09] people can if they do know their own,
[4:12:11] they can just let us know what the what
[4:12:14] the service line material is. Um or if
[4:12:17] they know that, you know, it's been
[4:12:18] replaced that they can let us know in
[4:12:20] that in that area. And then uh we have
[4:12:22] different options as far as using staff.
[4:12:25] Um, we have uh, yeah, we have different
[4:12:28] options for for finishing out the the
[4:12:30] rest of the inventory. So, I just wanted
[4:12:32] to make that clear to you guys. Thank
[4:12:34] you very much. Mr. Chavez.
[4:12:38] Okay. Thank you very much. And with that
[4:12:41] being said, we will now go into close
[4:12:42] session for conference regarding public
[4:12:44] employee appointment, California
[4:12:45] government code 549571.
[4:12:48] Title is city manager a conference with
[4:12:50] legal counsel for existing litigation
[4:12:52] California government code 54956.9
[4:12:55] name of case is Ashley
[4:12:59] uh Renuo
[4:13:01] city of seriesir versus city of
[4:13:03] seriesiral superior court case number
[4:13:06] CV25
[4:13:07] 009856
[4:13:10] and lastly a conference with legal
[4:13:11] council for anticipated litigation
[4:13:13] California government code 54956.9D2
[4:13:17] two for a one potential case. Is there
[4:13:20] anyone in the public like to make a
[4:13:22] comment on the close session items? And
[4:13:24] seeing none, and we'll come back after
[4:13:26] close session and I will report out.
[4:13:28] Thank you very much everyone and have a
[4:13:30] good evening and God bless.
[5:42:46] Welcome back everyone. By a 401
[5:42:49] abstension vote, the city council has
[5:42:52] approved a settlement agreement with the
[5:42:54] petitioners in the matter and has
[5:42:55] authorized the city manager to execute
[5:42:57] the agreement. Pursuant to the terms of
[5:42:59] the agreement, the petitioners will
[5:43:01] dismiss the case against the city of
[5:43:02] city city of seriesir and will refund
[5:43:05] petitioner their cup application. Each
[5:43:08] party shall incur its own attorney fees.
[5:43:10] The agreement shall be final upon
[5:43:12] execution of the parties. On the other
[5:43:14] two items, direction has been provided
[5:43:16] to staff. Thank you.