[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:15] All
[0:58] right, good evening.
[1:03] Going to call the order, our regular city council meeting, and we are going to start with an indication by our police lending on forward.
[1:20] That is pray.
[1:24] Well, almighty God, who for a salvation has granted this life.
[1:28] We gather here this evening, giving thanks for the grace of your mercy, which you have bestowed upon us.
[1:36] We thank you for the blessing us tonight in seeking your voice and your direction to complete the business set before us as a good stewards for the health, the welfare and the safety of our community.
[1:49] We pray that you will guide each council member as they ponder and discuss the business at hand,
[1:58] and that you will unite them in one this of mind and heart to fulfill their duties
[2:04] with the betterment of every citizen of Chico trusting in their care for us.
[2:11] We also ask for your blessing upon all the members of our community who are present here tonight and desire to speak and present their ideas and concerns.
[2:23] We pray that through all your labor that our city will be fortified in strengthened as a witness of the goodness of your grace and as a witness of the goodness of the people whom we call neighbors.
[2:38] In your name, dear Father, we thank you for being present with us tonight to fulfill your divine will in all things.
[2:49] Right.
[2:50] We can stand for pledge of allegiance.
[2:55] Salute.
[2:56] And pledge.
[3:14] Roll call.
[3:14] Madam Clerk.
[3:15] Can you call a roll please?
[3:18] Council member Goldstein.
[3:20] Council member Holly.
[3:22] Council member O'Brien.
[3:23] Here.
[3:24] Council member Van overbeck.
[3:27] Council member Winslow.
[3:28] Yeah.
[3:29] Vice Mayor Bennett.
[3:30] Here.
[3:30] Mayor Reynolds.
[3:32] Speaker card announcement.
[3:34] Anyone wishing to address the council on any matters listed on the agenda should first fill out a speaker card found at the back of the chambers.
[3:40] Once completed, turn your cards into the city clerk and the speakers are taken in the order received.
[3:45] Once the first speaker begins, no additional cards will be accepted.
[3:48] Persons demonstrating a rude boisterous speaking on matters outside the jurisdiction of the city council,
[3:54] or engaging in otherwise disruptive behavior will be called to order.
[3:57] It's said to conduct continues.
[3:58] I may call a recess requesting removal of such persons
[4:01] from the council chambers during the meeting
[4:03] or take other appropriate actions if needed.
[4:07] Can we have our city attorney, Mr. Jones?
[4:09] Please give our close session report.
[4:11] Yes, happy to do that.
[4:12] Madam Mayor, members of the council.
[4:14] So in close session, the city council
[4:16] held the conference with its Labor negotiator, Laura Eisen,
[4:19] who provided an update to the city council.
[4:22] Council and turn gave direction to Miss Eisen, relative to several of the employee organizations that were discussed.
[4:31] Great, thank you.
[4:33] So the clerk announcement regarding our new technology.
[4:36] Thank you, Mayor and Council.
[4:38] So you will notice that you have some little buttons in front of you, request to speak.
[4:44] And if you wish to speak on an item, just go ahead and push the top.
[4:48] and it will pop up and populate the mayor's strong. She has a little screen over there.
[4:54] She will take them in the order received. That's how they come in. When she selects you to call you,
[5:00] your Mike will automatically go on. And so that will be good.
[5:05] Just as a reminder, if you get past up and you've already spoken once,
[5:10] the reason is is in parliamentary procedure. You're supposed to speak only one time until all
[5:15] members that had an opportunity to speak.
[5:17] You can speak again.
[5:20] So if you are also in the middle of an item,
[5:25] and you've pushed the request to speak button,
[5:29] and you've heard your colleagues speaking,
[5:31] they have decided that you're not gonna,
[5:33] you don't know longer need to speak,
[5:35] you can press the button on the bottom part,
[5:37] and it will remove you from the queue.
[5:40] So I just wanna thank you for your patience tonight.
[5:44] And I think it'll be super easy to use.
[5:46] I also want to let you know that last meeting
[5:49] our streaming video did not have sound,
[5:52] although we were able to upload that,
[5:54] but we did have it playing live on Channel 11.
[5:58] So we met the criteria of the Brown Act.
[6:01] And so we think that the King's have been worked out
[6:03] if by chance you get any text messages
[6:05] that the streaming isn't working, just text me, let me know,
[6:08] and we'll work with our vendor again.
[6:11] They will be monitoring it, both grannicus
[6:13] and our consultant.
[6:15] So thank you.
[6:17] All right.
[6:18] Well, I just want to give a quick thank you.
[6:19] I know you guys worked long and hard while we were off at the end of December in the beginning of January to get this going and it's a great upgrade.
[6:26] I think everybody will build a here better and we can actually push our buttons now and don't have to like be done or our microphone.
[6:32] So thank you.
[6:33] Madam clerk for getting the thing upgrade to us.
[6:36] Everybody will appreciate it.
[6:37] Consent agenda, all matters listed on the consent agenda are considered routine in nature and then where can be enacted with one motion
[6:44] Are there any vote no votes item is be removed or counsel disqualifications on consent?
[6:52] No, all right. Do we have speakers on the consent? We do not. All right, consider a motion.
[6:57] We'll do a proof.
[7:00] Second.
[7:07] That was a mission in a second.
[7:09] Council member Goldstein.
[7:12] Council Member Holly, Council Member O'Brien, Council Member Van over back.
[7:18] Council Member Winslow.
[7:20] Yes.
[7:20] Yes.
[7:20] Mayor Reynolds.
[7:23] Carrie Sevin Z.
[7:24] All right.
[7:24] Public comment.
[7:25] Members of the public may address the council at this time on any matter not already listed on the agenda and are within the jurisdiction authority.
[7:32] The council cannot take action at this meeting on their quest made under this section of the agenda.
[7:36] How many speakers do we have?
[7:38] Sorry. We have five. All right. Three minutes each. Okay, and I will call the first two speakers. And if you can go ahead and line up in that middle aisle and be ready to to go our first two speakers are Catherine Riley followed by Sam Barber.
[8:02] Okay.
[8:03] Hi, Catherine here.
[8:05] I'm a type two diabetic means a couple of times a day. I got to take something sharp and jab it into my finger to my finger.
[8:11] believe it's so much fun, but it's better than debt, so I'm grateful. Okay? So I go
[8:16] down to my doctor's office with this nice, big container of sharps and I say,
[8:21] can I drop these off here and at this little clinic, plant just says, oh, they charge
[8:26] us so much to pick up the sharps. Could you take them to your pharmacy? I see sure. So I take
[8:32] them down to CVS and CVS says, we don't take them. Go to the police department. So I go to
[8:37] police department and they say, we don't take them, go to CVS. So I explain, I'm in a loop
[8:43] and this nice lady behind the desk at the police department. She prints me off a whole
[8:48] big list of places that might take sharks and I spend the next two weeks and about four
[8:54] solid hours calling every single one of them. One of the things I found that even places
[8:59] were listed on the waves that are taking sharks do not take sharks. So I called and I called
[9:05] and I call, and I found three places in View County.
[9:09] Maybe there are more, maybe, but now this information is good
[9:12] as of the second of January, 2026,
[9:16] so it's about as current as I could make it, okay?
[9:21] So, I was getting pretty frustrated.
[9:24] I found three places you can take them out to airport.
[9:26] If you have a car, if you can wait, if you can do well with that.
[9:29] There's a place called the Harm Reduction Center on South 18th,
[9:33] that has a little box for people,
[9:35] But I'm sure they don't anticipate
[9:37] all of Chico dropping their shop
[9:39] so they're doing their best just to keep needles
[9:41] and things like that off of public byways and parks.
[9:46] And the other place is the ecology,
[9:48] which has a drop box in Orville.
[9:51] Those were all I could find.
[9:52] Now if you can see, this is going to get pretty difficult
[9:56] for some people to actually do.
[9:58] So I did a little bit of quick number crunching
[10:01] and it looks like conservatively,
[10:04] There's 103,000 people in the city of Chico,
[10:07] one out of nine in California is estimated to be diabetic.
[10:13] That makes 11,444 individuals in Chico who are diabetic.
[10:19] And let's say we just all test twice a day.
[10:22] Okay? Okay.
[10:23] So that's 22,888 sharps that need to be disposed of per day,
[10:29] per month, that's 690,000.
[10:33] And in a year, that's 8,280,000 sharks that need to be disposed of.
[10:39] Now, this is not even counseling those of us who have to inject people who inject
[10:44] for other reasons, little doctor's offices who cannot afford any more to send them away.
[10:52] It's a, it's a horrendous number.
[10:54] Now, people are going to start because I was ready to, but I couldn't let myself just throwing them away.
[11:00] We're going to have over 8 million sharks, plus everybody who inject, plus everybody, plus animal.
[11:08] All right.
[11:09] That's your time.
[11:10] Thank you so much for coming.
[11:13] Thank you.
[11:14] Customity do something about this because it is in public health issue.
[11:18] And that is what I think you are here for.
[11:21] Thank you.
[11:22] Thank
[11:24] you.
[11:24] Okay.
[11:25] Sam Barber, followed by Bill Monroe.
[11:28] Hello.
[11:29] I'm here to express some concerns and disappointment and the council's
[11:32] ability to hold our police force accountable. Michael Williams is an ex-police chief who is a
[11:38] sexual predator. He was someone who took advantage of his position of power to manipulate and
[11:42] coerce women and to having sex with him. He told the woman he suffered from trauma after he shot
[11:47] dozen and Phillips, even though on the official police report he was reported to not have fired any
[11:51] shots. So after we let him go, we gifted him $37,000, three months pay, so he would drop an appeal
[11:59] of his termination. We may have also paid nearly $290,000 that salary benefits pension to him
[12:05] for 14 months when he was doing no police work and being investigated for a serial sexual
[12:10] misconduct. But the city apparently said it was prohibited by law to confirm this or not.
[12:16] I'm frankly disgusted at the idea that it would be illegal to tell citizens who pay for the police
[12:21] if their tax dollars were paying for a sexual predator salary while so many struggle to keep
[12:26] database that needs map. Michael Vincent was recently punished for receiving oral sex and uniform
[12:33] on numerous occasions and his SUV and a church parking lot. I want to know if the council,
[12:38] particularly the over a public and majority, really think two weeks of unpaid leave is genuinely
[12:43] an appropriate punishment for a police officer conducting themselves in this manner. Representative
[12:48] Van Overbig just a few meetings ago alluded to firing a property manager for misleading a potential
[12:53] Lieutenant, our current mayor is a business owner and has employees, and to any of the other
[12:58] council members with employees, if you had an employee who had oral sex on the job numerous
[13:02] times, but told you, oops, my bad, and you caught them, would they still have a job?
[13:09] Or would you just let them take two weeks off and continue employing them?
[13:13] The city clearly needs independent oversight of the police as they don't seem capable of holding
[13:17] themselves accountable for what seems to be a chronic issue in this department.
[13:21] My representative, Bryce Goldstein, recently made a motion to have some form of independent
[13:25] oversight committee for the police installed and every Republican voted against it.
[13:32] Conveniently enough, every one of you were also endorsed by the PD.
[13:36] The Council voted against it.
[13:37] Representative O'Brien, an ex-police chief stated we already have an oversight committee.
[13:42] So they haven't met in years.
[13:43] I'm here to tell you you're doing a bad job in failing us.
[13:46] And so is the absent police oversight committee.
[13:48] I think Billy Aldridge should be fired a resign in shame for failing to hold the behavior
[13:53] accountable. Two weeks of unpaid time is ludicrous. Four weeks isn't enough either.
[13:58] And Michael Vincent also needs to be fired for a sexual misconduct on the job.
[14:02] It is insane to me that the so-called peacekeepers of our community who want an average
[14:06] to make double or more an annual salary compared to an average worker who have a very real
[14:11] power over regular people are allowed to act in such a disgusting way with nothing but a slap
[14:17] on the wrist. The taxpayers should not have to pay to avoid an appeal on a sexual
[14:22] predator's termination, but you come directly from the police pension fund. We cannot
[14:26] trust the police department to investigate themselves and to really help them to come.
[14:30] Thank you.
[14:30] All right. Thank you.
[14:33] So, it's Bill Monroe, followed by Lynn overholzer.
[14:39] Thank you. Hello, Council. I would did a what? He said, but also in I am a public health
[14:46] retired. The sharp issue that the women brought up is very real and I would I would also kind of
[14:53] encourage something to happen along those lines but I don't really think it's a it's a purview of
[14:59] Cheekers.
[15:00] City council, it's more of a county public health department issue. And so I would encourage sure to reach out to Tammy Ritter or any of the other supervisors about that, and they have meetings similar to this where they have a public forum that you can present that.
[15:20] It's a real issue, I did H-H-H-B prevention and I have applied this prevention and Sharps is something to be aware of.
[15:29] I came up with just kind of in general to express a concern that stuff that you all know already that salesmen are going to sell and they'll promise you the sky.
[15:46] Please, from people are coming to sell you hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of product, get expert opinion on those.
[15:55] Thank you.
[15:56] Thank you, Lynn, overholzer, followed by Sharon Fritz.
[16:13] Well, you, I've been here many times in the last few months, so you guys probably know my topic, and that's the alternative site.
[16:18] But actually tonight, I'm here on a little more positive note, and it's to say thank you to all of you.
[16:25] You voted unanimously, two times in a row, and address the issue for meetings to try and improve the safety around the site there, and I'm, I can speak for all my neighbors, and I think I can speak for a little business owners in the school there, because I know some of them have problems too.
[16:46] There's a noticeable difference with the,
[16:50] wasn't so much the people inside, of course,
[16:52] that has gotten less.
[16:54] It was more the people that were just all around there.
[16:57] And that is much less.
[16:59] The foot traffic is much less.
[17:00] It's safer to drive down that street now.
[17:03] I still probably won't drive down it at night
[17:05] because I thought I was going to hit somebody.
[17:07] There are always crossing the road.
[17:08] And there's no street lights.
[17:10] But much less of that.
[17:13] And then I was really happy to see, I think today the enforcement that I strongly requested that you do around the site, I think it was done today.
[17:23] About two hours ago, I drove by there. Lots of people in bikes all over the corners and I didn't know what was going on.
[17:30] And then I noticed some of the big tents were gone. And I think that's really, really going to help too.
[17:36] And I just want to say thank you very much for doing what you said you were going to do and for doing your best to make it safer for all of us around there because I know you know your hands are tied in some respect
[17:49] I was so excited because now I can write on the bike path out towards go has it again, which I haven't been able to safely do for a couple of years
[17:56] I tried it about a year ago when I got a little better there, but then there was a tent out there in a scary dog
[18:02] So then I came back down co-hassen and that was scary too.
[18:05] So I'm really excited to be able to write down that bike path again, towards the airport
[18:09] and pass there, which is where I used to write a big loop there.
[18:16] And I don't mean to kind of bring down my, my positive feelings here, but I thought,
[18:22] oh, since I'm here anyway, I fifty seconds left, and along this same note,
[18:26] you guys know that back in August, the first incident was Mikey was found on our street
[18:30] who had shot someone in the head and when the police came to catch him at four days we found
[18:36] out he was out there on the loose. Last Sunday on January 11th, there were two police SUVs
[18:43] in the middle of my road and a couple going down eating in one on Burnup and eating. And none
[18:49] of us know what that was about. And I called the non-emergency number to try and find out
[18:54] if someone you know on the loose around here again has happened a couple times and we didn't
[18:57] do I need to feel unsafe and I was told that I couldn't be told what it was because there
[19:03] wasn't an official call in. I said if I go to the police station, can someone tell me and I
[19:07] was told no. So I just wanted to say I don't think that's very good policy. We shouldn't know
[19:12] what's happening on our street. Anyway, thank you. Thank you. Our last speaker is Sharon
[19:30] If you could pull the microphone down, I worked, collecting trash with pals, and Thursday
[19:38] before last, I met a lady out camping behind SMS produce who said that she had been trying
[19:46] to get into the palette shelter. She'd been the house where she was living in was foreclosed
[19:52] on or whatever. I don't know. They said the owner lost his lease and I don't understand that
[19:59] but apparently eight people I wasn't taking notes were put out on the street. She was 62
[20:08] years old and she was trying to get into the pallet shelter but when you call you get an
[20:15] answering machine, they ask you for your name, your address, and your phone number.
[20:22] She lost her phone. She has, she's living in a tent. Her address, best at address, is
[20:28] safe space. She has a friend who is living in a car. She has a phone, but she can't keep it
[20:33] charged. The car was recently, there was a note on it. But anyway, these ladies, the
[20:40] one is 70 years old, the owner is 62 years old. They've been trying to get into the
[20:43] children for weeks. And they can't get in. There's always some kind of roadblock. And I spent
[20:51] last Friday driving her name's Theresa around. We went to the renewal center, they said try it.
[21:00] You know, she can't have, she's got dogs. But anyway, I just don't understand why it is that it's so hard
[21:07] for a 70 year old woman and a 62 year old woman who have a dog, who are trying to get into the
[21:13] children to get into the palette shelter, right? It takes them so long. And I was talking
[21:18] to Charles with the food and the other day he was out in the front of the car center and
[21:22] there were people camping out there, some ladies who looked to me to be at least in their 40s,
[21:28] not older. And they said, they had been down to the palette shelter and could not get in.
[21:33] And I just, I don't understand this. I don't know why that is that you can't go to the
[21:38] all the children say. I'm desperate. I need a place to stay. Why you have to be? What needs to be
[21:44] evaluated? That's all. Thank you. Thank you.
[21:51] All right, and that's our last speaker, correct?
[21:53] Okay, thank you. I'm item 5.1, I interviewed an appointment to the Law of vacancy on the Arts Commission.
[22:00] Ms. Pressson, our city, work and elections official. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Reynolds and Council.
[22:07] We have an unscheduled vacant on our arts commission that is one of the commissions that I support personally and we did
[22:18] And there's three years remaining on that term, so we did the required by state law posting and then we also conducted a quick recruitment
[22:30] lots of applications and it makes me happy to say that we have
[22:36] eight applicants and for one position but we will make sure that we keep these
[22:41] applications whoever is not selected they will actually be kept and then when
[22:48] we get ready to do our recruitment at the end of the share it's 2026 already
[22:51] we'll be doing it again and we'll reach out to them to see if they'd still like
[22:56] to apply and we'll have new pieces open at that time. I will tell you that I know
[23:02] of the seven applicants that or the eight,
[23:07] that three of them indicated that they couldn't make it.
[23:10] And again, according to APNP-101,
[23:13] the council has said that if you can't make the interview,
[23:16] that's not a reason not to make that appointment.
[23:18] So they do not have to be here in person tonight
[23:21] in order to be appointed.
[23:23] And I do want to let you know that this vacancy occurred
[23:27] and it was Vice Mayor Bennett's nominee.
[23:31] And so, after hearing from everybody, if the Council would be so gracious, loud,
[23:37] Dale, excuse me, Council, vice mayor Bennett, sorry, to make his nomination and then I would require a confirmation vote.
[23:49] So, if you're okay, I'll go ahead and call the applicants.
[23:52] Yep, I have our applicants and then speakers, if we have any, as well.
[23:56] Okay, Reannon, Ashford, followed by Benjamin Boyer.
[24:09] Valerie Cicinera's.
[24:12] I count
[24:20] some members. My name is Valeria.
[24:23] I apply for the vacancy.
[24:26] I'm not originally from Chico,
[24:29] but the arts community and she goes had a huge impact
[24:32] in the last five years that I've been here.
[24:37] It's impacted my life as I'm originally from San Luis Piscpo.
[24:41] I'm a young person here,
[24:43] So I have spent the last few years really learning how to find my community and find a sense
[24:51] of belonging here in Chico.
[24:53] And the Arts community welcomed me with open arms, and I wanted to take this opportunity
[25:00] to kind of just find a more impactful role within the Arts community, and I have a motivation
[25:07] to connect with people and with others and connect through the things that I really enjoyed
[25:15] doing. I'm a creative person. I graduated from Chico State with in graphic design and I've been
[25:22] able to really make my way by just working with people, Lucy Armacados, someone who I've really
[25:29] enjoyed working with. I've worked for the University, Dana Moore, who's had a huge impact and just
[25:36] improving the improv community here in Chico that's particularly had a huge impact for me and
[25:41] and the people I've been able to meet. And I really wanted to do that within this role I wanted
[25:48] to kind of also bring that sense of belonging within the role and the community for people who
[25:53] look like me and people who don't look like me. So that's really my motivation for wanting to
[25:59] to be in this position and to take on the role
[26:02] as to continue to do that work that I find so important.
[26:07] And be that bridge.
[26:09] So thank you so much, and thank you.
[26:11] Have a good night.
[26:13] Thank you Natalie Norton.
[26:25] Good evening, council members, mayor.
[26:28] My name is Natalie Norton,
[26:30] and I'm a Chico resident, a parent,
[26:33] and a cultural programs professional.
[26:35] And I'm here because I believe the arts play a vital role
[26:38] and how communities understand themselves, preserve their history,
[26:42] and create shared spaces for connection.
[26:45] My relationship to the arts began early
[26:47] as a young person, art classes, music,
[26:50] and time spent in museums helped me,
[26:53] not only learn about myself,
[26:54] but about the communities around me
[26:56] and the broader human experience.
[26:58] Through the arts, I found confidence and connection,
[27:01] friendships, shared language,
[27:03] and a way to understand perspectives beyond my own.
[27:06] Music in particular gave me a powerful form of expression.
[27:10] It was a place where I could both engage deeply and step back and reflect.
[27:15] It's a space that helped me process the world and grow into myself.
[27:19] That foundation continued during my time as a CSU Chico student.
[27:24] I studied public history and developed a deep respect for history, place, and culture,
[27:29] and the responsibility institutions carry in telling these stories thoughtfully.
[27:34] While at Chico, I volunteered with the Chico History Museum where I worked alongside civic-minded volunteers and community partners.
[27:42] Professionally, I've spent my career designing arts and cultural programming that brings people together around shared moment and shared stories.
[27:50] I began in public programming at the D. Young Museum, working on both large and cold city-wide cultural events, and smaller artist-led collaborations as well.
[27:59] It was my first real exposure to how programming can serve broad audiences, welcoming people
[28:06] whether they arrive intentionally or simply encounter something meaningful by chance.
[28:12] I later worked at the Walt Disney Family Museum where I saw how strong mission, operation,
[28:16] excellence, and public engagement can work together.
[28:19] And at the Pasadena Museum of History, I helped develop community-rooted programs that
[28:23] connected local history to present-day identity, and at the natural history museum of Los Angeles
[28:29] I saw how institutions in a diverse city can thoughtfully incorporate many voices into exhibitions and programs so people from all walks of life can see themselves reflected in that narrative.
[28:41] But through all of this is a personal influence, my grandmother, who volunteered with the Fine Arts Museums for San Francisco for more than 40 years.
[28:51] She believed the arts are not a luxury, but a public good, and that access and stewardship matter just as much as excellence.
[28:59] That belief continues to shape how a approach service and leadership.
[29:03] Care deeply about Chico, our artists, our history, our community, and our shared future.
[29:09] It would be honored to help steward the city's cultural life with intention, collaboration, and a deep appreciation for the role the arts play in strengthening community identity and connection.
[29:19] thank you so much. Thank you Kevin Shavidi.
[29:28] I don't see that he is here. So those are
[29:32] the applicants that were able to make tonight's meeting. The reason I'm asking for the
[29:38] Council consideration of going ahead and not only doing the interviews but the
[29:41] appointment is that I have a very, very active arts commission and they work really
[29:47] really hard and having that vacancy filled right away especially when we're getting
[29:52] ready to have a strategic planning meeting,
[29:54] would be pivotal to have that person on board.
[29:58] And so I would ask the council.
[30:00] Councilor Vice Mayor Bennett to, if you're ready for the nomination or if you had any questions about the process.
[30:08] Okay, then I will stop talking.
[30:14] So, first of all, I want to thank all eight individuals that apply for the position.
[30:21] Your resumes were very, very compelling as far as your ability to do the job, to be of service to our community, to be of service to the Arts Commission.
[30:32] And so I want to thank all eight, although some people aren't here, because it takes
[30:38] a lot of courage.
[30:41] It takes a lot of commitment to actually be on a commission, city of Chico.
[30:47] Now, especially when to thank Mrs. Nero, if I pronounce that correctly, for showing up, and
[30:53] Ms. Norton, for showing up.
[30:56] I appreciate that very much, take time out of your busy schedule, and make your presentation
[31:03] my recommendation to the City Council this evening is going to be to a point or actually
[31:11] contact Mr. Benjamin from a tray. He's on an architect with the beauty county to
[31:17] fill the position, the rest of the nation of the individual, to fill that position and be appointed
[31:25] to the Arts Commission.
[31:32] Do we have any speakers? Other than, no, we just want to make sure
[31:35] just before we, okay, so is that a motion to a point, Mr.
[31:40] Well I'll go ahead, I just will say that I think it's a good
[31:43] the process set up that where we have a nomination for one of the
[31:47] vacancy there, wasn't that long ago that it was controversial just to have
[31:50] some nominations approved and there was one that I actually didn't ever have
[31:53] approved and even when I had a vacancy just a year ago because my
[31:56] climate action commissioner was elected to the city council, I didn't just get
[31:59] to nominate, but I think this is a better process, I'm going to make a
[32:01] to accept the nomination of Vice Mayor Bennett.
[32:04] Thank you.
[32:07] I'll second that motion.
[32:13] Okay, so that's a motion by Councilmember Winsos, seconded by Councilmember Goldstein,
[32:18] to confirm the appointment of Benjamin Matray to fill the unfilled or unscheduled vacancy
[32:24] of three years at three-year term for the Arts Commission.
[32:29] Thank you.
[32:31] Councilmember Goldstein?
[32:34] Councilmember Holly?
[32:35] Councilmember O'Brien?
[32:36] Yes.
[32:37] Council Member Van Overbeck Council Member Winslow. Yes. Nice Mayor Bennett. Yes, and I want to thank the
[32:44] are my fellow council members for supporting my nomination. And then Mayor Reynolds. I carry 7 0 and I will keep all the
[32:54] applications on file and contact everyone probably this early fall. All right, thank you so much. I don't
[33:02] I'm putting too in consideration to give staff direction to include the gallery cancer screening
[33:06] tests for public works to own in employees through the 25 to 27 budget season.
[33:12] We have Assistant City Manager, Eric Guffson.
[33:15] Thank you, Mayor Reynolds, Vice Mayor Bennett, Council members, honored to speak to you tonight.
[33:20] This item is being brought back from the June 3rd, 2025 meeting where Council moved to include
[33:25] police officers in this program in the Caniel testing Council member,
[33:29] They're Holly's friendly amendment that was also accepted in past, that we bring it back six
[33:35] months from then to discuss, including public works, operation, and maintenance employees.
[33:41] Public works on him, employees routinely perform work that exposes him to a variety of
[33:45] known and suspected charsiniogens as part of their assigned duties.
[33:50] These are duties such as asphalt maintenance and application, crack ceiling, applying
[33:55] from a plastic materials for street markings, painting, graffiti removal with chemicals,
[34:01] operation of diesel power, trucks and equipment, and clean up with homeless encampments.
[34:06] National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Nioch, and the Occupational Safety
[34:11] and Health Administration, OSHA, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer,
[34:16] recognize that many of these substances and byproducts associated with these activities,
[34:21] such as asphalt, in bittamine fumes, diesel exhaust paints, solvents, and combustion-related
[34:26] particulars are carcinogenic.
[34:29] Homeless and chemical impactivity has also exposed employees to unknown chemical mixtures
[34:33] hazardous waste, and contaminated breeze to breeze.
[34:37] Excuse me, further increasing occupational health risk.
[34:41] Cancer is associated with occupational exposure often developed after extended latency periods,
[34:47] making early detection a critical component of the employee health protection.
[34:53] The gallery early detection blood test screens for signals associated with more than 50 types of cancer.
[35:00] Early identification for any cancer can allow for earlier intervention.
[35:04] Improve treatment outcomes and reduce long-term health and disability benefits.
[35:09] Unfortunately, Public Works on M has a current young, very young senior maintenance worker that's battling colon cancer now.
[35:16] and well below the age of the recommended colonoscopy and so an early detection scenario would
[35:23] hopefully caught that and maybe given him a jump start on his treatment that he's currently
[35:26] going through now.
[35:29] Providing the gallery test for public works on him employees is also an equity employee wellness
[35:34] consideration.
[35:36] Currently, the city offers the test to public safety employees.
[35:40] So it'd be great to also include our public works folks as well.
[35:44] providing it to own employees, acknowledges that they too are faced with these occupational hazards
[35:48] and this action supports a consistent and preventative approach to employee health and work
[35:53] for workforce well-being. Therefore, I recommend City Council approving including all public
[35:59] work's own employees and the gallery cancer screening test. Note that we have 103 employees
[36:05] so that could be up to $66,000 so I'm recommending maybe a three year interval. We do it every
[36:11] three years and for us to include it in the upcoming fiscal year 2627 budget development, which
[36:17] we're embarking on now. That concludes my presentation. I can answer any questions.
[36:23] All right.
[36:26] Students, the RIMA DIRGES, put your push or thing and I will go ahead and
[36:31] Mr. Bennett. Vice Mayor Bennett.
[36:35] Technology. It's fascinating. So, I can say this because I'm an
[36:42] older citizen that there's a saying that you live long enough, you're going to get cancer.
[36:48] And as I age, in matureness, one other person that probably would agree with me, I think
[36:55] anything we can do to help people discover or find out that they have a problem, so they can
[37:03] seek treatment early in the key with cancer as you need to take on treatment as early as
[37:10] possible. So I'm going to obviously support this. I think it's great that we're recognizing
[37:17] on employees as people that we really value. Thank you.
[37:27] I'm probably saved some comments off to hear from some from the public because I think
[37:31] some people have read into this and maybe found similar things that I did in doing research.
[37:36] There's a lot of legitimate skepticism about this test. There's a reason why it's not
[37:41] approved by the FDA or any other public institution to my knowledge for for use, but I was
[37:48] wondering because I have seen some stuff about them having like a pro bus marketing team and I'm
[37:52] not sure exactly how this landed in front of the council in the first place in the fire department
[37:56] police brought forward last year and then it was then extended by council member request to the police
[38:00] since an hour on like a third tier of like a second tier of like a me two agreement kind of with it.
[38:06] I'm wondering if anybody in staff has talked to representatives from the company at any point in time
[38:11] Like, were there anybody contacted or did you contact like representatives from the company to ask questions about it?
[38:17] I have not nor have I been contacted by gallery representatives. Again, this is just kind of benchmarking what we're currently doing for public safety employees. And the thought was, you know,
[38:29] There's not a big national push for public works to specific employees that have much higher rates than cancer,
[38:38] but there's a lot of agreement that the carcinogens that they're subject to during their normal work activities are,
[38:46] you know, present a much higher risk for cancer.
[38:48] So in our position from staff is it's equitable and I think that if there's anything we could do to help try to identify this early on,
[38:55] would help and keep our folks working versus having to go through something like this.
[38:59] Well, I want to add that the fire department, Deputy Chief Zinco, is the one who did
[39:06] have those conversations with gallery.
[39:10] Yeah, we've just kind of piggybacked on what the public safety partners in public safety
[39:14] of the research they've already done.
[39:16] Councillor interjecting.
[39:18] Councillor interjecting.
[39:18] Well, thank you, Mayor.
[39:20] So, yeah, there is some controversy because this is new and cutting edge technology.
[39:24] I get that. And no, we don't have a full body of testing and studies that maybe we would like,
[39:32] but remember, this is minimally invasive and it provides early detection. And I have read a positive
[39:38] study on the merits of this type of testing and you're mentioning older members of council or younger
[39:47] member. It really doesn't matter, but from the younger perspective, I think they would see if we could
[39:52] turn about the clock to our 20s that we thought we were invincible and we were not going to
[39:57] go through a battery of test to determine if we were at risk of certain cancers.
[40:02] That's the danger of some of these percentages.
[40:06] I think it's up to us as employers to take care of our employees.
[40:12] This is really a very small investment in their health and if we catch one case of some
[40:20] have a cancer early, whether it's a firefighter, a police officer, a public works employee.
[40:26] You say the thousands, you're just looking at it from a fiscal standpoint.
[40:30] I look at it from a moral standpoint that we owe them this, this is not over the top
[40:36] as far as the cost.
[40:38] I think it's a good investment and certainly we'll hear from our public because I respect
[40:42] the posing opinions, but I think the cost of this, the fact it's mentally invasive, and
[40:48] No, it's not designed to replace other testing, right?
[40:52] That's not the purpose of this.
[40:54] It's to supplement.
[40:55] And I think it's a good supplement,
[40:56] and a good way for us to take care of those employees.
[41:03] We're working, Council member, Rano, we're back.
[41:06] Thank you.
[41:09] So I have a question in a statement.
[41:12] So Mr. Gus, my understanding and the staff reports,
[41:15] there's no specific research relating to public works.
[41:19] People, because what you guys do,
[41:20] there's so many different jobs, and that would indicate that there's a higher rate of cancer
[41:26] than the rest of the population.
[41:29] Is that right?
[41:30] Yeah, I mean, the cancer incident rates for public works have not been quantified through
[41:36] large national cohort studies that I'm just looking at my notes here.
[41:39] The presence of these exposures establishes a credible and recognized occupational cancer
[41:45] risk over the course of long term employment by the individuals.
[41:49] However, similar studies are coming out showing that public works and construction type workers are often
[41:56] experiencing elevated cancer risks due to their occupational exposures to these continued exposures
[42:01] to these carcinogens. Okay, so I want to have to think a comment about the science.
[42:06] So there's a woman whose name is Jennifer Duadne who won the Nobel Prize for discovering
[42:10] technological CRISPR, which enables people or scientists to actually alter genes and some of
[42:20] its stuff is used for therapeutics and some of it is used for agricultural purposes and it's
[42:27] revolutionary thing.
[42:28] So the people who founded gallery are part of this sort of group of people that have spun
[42:35] out of this whole CRISPR thing.
[42:38] And so what the way it works is that every form of cancer has a unique genetic signature.
[42:45] And so they have the ability to detect these things.
[42:49] And it's new so it's going to get better year over year.
[42:53] Councilman Winslow brought up to point about FDA approval.
[42:56] FDA approval for this kind of thing takes anywhere from seven to 10 years.
[43:00] And the technology isn't that old.
[43:02] So the fact that it doesn't have FDA approval doesn't mean it's not valid.
[43:05] But, I mean, I know people personally very well that are in this field of research who
[43:12] believe this is very, very good technology and to counsel and all Brian's point, we can
[43:20] say one life, I mean, it's absolutely worth it and it financially makes sense because the
[43:28] cost, you know, somebody gets cancer, the cost can be hundreds of thousands of dollars.
[43:33] So, I think, you know, my age, you, as Dale pointed out, thank you, Dale for pointing out my stage of life, but you see things that can happen, you've seen them happen.
[43:48] And so, if we can keep one person from, you know, catch it early and say one person from that early death, 100% behind it.
[43:59] I appreciate that and I'm certainly am sensitive to the costs as well and that's why we're, you know, putting out there. Maybe it's every three years for public works own employees.
[44:08] The recommendation is for us to build it into the upcoming budget that will be proposed in May and hopefully approved in June.
[44:16] So, you know, at that point too, maybe there's some updating we could do to this or some requirements, the long term.
[44:22] maybe there's some thresholds of you have to be here.
[44:26] You have to work for the city full time for a number of years
[44:28] before you're eligible for the test,
[44:30] maybe it's every few years, that type of thing.
[44:32] So I think it's, you know, we have the ability to update that
[44:34] as we go along to, because I am certainly sensitive to the cost.
[44:38] But we just, the recommendation and night is just to include it in this upcoming budget
[44:41] to at least get initial screen done and then go.
[44:45] I've just had a quick clarification.
[44:47] When you said, so this amount for three years or to do it annually for three years.
[44:53] Now, I'm asking for us to include at this initial test in the upcoming 2016-27 budget, and if off.
[45:00] All 103 public works on him employees participate. It could be an upwards of $66,000. I don't think
[45:06] all will participate. I think we've experienced maybe a 75% participation rate that will likely
[45:12] be the case with our own employees too, so it's going to be less than that. I'm recommending
[45:16] we do it now and plug it into this upcoming budget but then from there after every three years.
[45:22] And that was the other clarification just for public sake. We were making this available to them.
[45:29] It's
[45:29] You know has have available to them. So okay. Thank you. Do we have any
[45:37] see anybody else wanting to speak?
[45:39] So do we have any speakers? We do we have two okay three minutes each. All right. Thank you all of you both up.
[45:45] I'm Laurie Monroe followed by Jason Anderson.
[45:52] I counsel. Thank you for letting me speak.
[45:55] First of all, I want to refer you to Dr. Sanders email that he said to you with an article about this test.
[46:03] The next thing I want to say, I think it's great that the City of Columbia City of
[46:08] Tico has a preventive health program.
[46:11] I'd be interested in hearing more about the other things in that program that you have in place.
[46:17] And I don't have any prop.
[46:18] I think it's wonderful that you're showing interest in employees.
[46:22] I do however have a problem with this particular test as part of your
[46:27] any health program. Precisely because it's not FDA approved, it may be standard of care in the
[46:34] decade, and that's fine in the insurance that the city of Chico purchases for its employees
[46:42] would cover the test. As it is, all full-time city employees get insurance or have access to
[46:53] insurance and they can access the preventive health measures and cancer detection measures
[47:01] that everybody in the community gets and that seems like at this point that's adequate for us
[47:10] and for them. And I'm not singling out, please, or firemen or public works. I think it's fine to do it
[47:20] for to do preventive health measures for any of those and all of your city employees but I don't like this test and the reason I don't like it is that it's not approved and it's not well tested and studies have shown that it actually
[47:41] identify as a concern for cancer, causing thousands of dollars of testing, painful future
[47:47] testing for people that wouldn't have had it otherwise.
[47:50] So that's the downside of this kind of thing.
[47:59] Also, I would like to remind you that you often talk about how happy you are to defer
[48:04] to experts on certain things, but as far as I can tell, no experts have been consulted
[48:10] on this particular test, there are pathologist physicians, there are cancer specialist physicians,
[48:21] there are preventing health physicians. I'm sure that Chico has those specialists who live
[48:27] with who are citizens of this town and would be happy to give you their opinion and I ask that
[48:32] you seek that information. Thank you. Thank you. Our last speaker is Jason Anderson.
[48:37] Thank
[48:44] you, as a representative of the employees of Operation Maintenance, I definitely speak on behalf of everybody.
[48:53] I express the appreciation for the sentiment behind this, you know, thank you very much.
[49:00] And obviously, we're not the expense behind it is large, and we're going through negotiations now,
[49:10] and we know that fiscal responsibility is a massive, massive burden placed upon this council and its leadership.
[49:18] When you look at, you know, how to ask all, you would look at it and smell it,
[49:24] And you would think that that was the definition of a carcinogen.
[49:28] It's the exposure to that day and in day out, heated at 450 degrees, standing next to
[49:33] it, breathing it in.
[49:36] I would suspect most people here wouldn't enjoy a single day of that much less decades of
[49:43] a career.
[49:45] Thermoplasics no better, you can smell it, and it remains on you for days and days.
[49:51] Again, I didn't take what Councillor Winslow said is necessarily a problem with the cost
[50:00] is necessarily a problem with potentially the test and so on behalf of all the employees,
[50:07] we would like to be included in any sort of future test unit change if this test is
[50:13] We, it's, we're honored that we can be included in something that is so often reserved for public safety as, you know, the fire department, rightly so, has a sort of a workers calm blanket approval of all cancers as work related, going speaking with our employee who has been diagnosed with cancer unfortunately as, you know, young guy, young kids.
[50:43] We seem to have the opposite problem.
[50:45] We have almost blanket deniability.
[50:47] And I think that has to do with law
[50:49] with we do have a broad range of jobs.
[50:52] And so there's never been sort of an organized class
[50:54] action lawsuit and like the Fire Department put it through.
[50:57] Not our Fire Department, but IFF is an international organization.
[51:02] Should that ever happen, the research would come out
[51:04] come to light and you would see that this is a dangerous job.
[51:10] Much not only cancer sneaking up on you,
[51:12] but obviously we're concerned every single day
[51:14] with dodging cars and needles and whatnot.
[51:19] Like I asked everybody on my side,
[51:23] we didn't want anybody orange fatigue,
[51:25] but they do care very much about this.
[51:26] I asked them to stay home, watch from home,
[51:30] but for the 100 and over 100 members,
[51:33] and they do care deeply about this,
[51:36] about care, excuse me, care deeply about this,
[51:38] and the sentiment is much appreciated.
[51:40] so thank you very much. Thank you. Use our last speaker.
[51:47] All right. Future or further discussion
[51:50] by council.
[51:53] Council member. Yes. So I was I was a couple hours into reading recent medical
[51:59] research articles on this grail test and and I began to ask myself a couple questions. Council
[52:06] of Vancouver, I can mention that some like medical professionals have been supportive of this.
[52:09] I wish they would have written in, because I haven't seen any, nobody local that has said
[52:13] anything that's suggested this is like well tested or is more as promising as it looks
[52:19] I suppose.
[52:21] So, one of the questions I ask myself, is this a test that's overhyped in sales campaign by
[52:25] multi-billion dollar, Silicon Valley biotech company?
[52:28] I haven't seen any studies that are really supported that weren't funded by Grail, and this
[52:32] is prior to their acquisition by the original parent company Illumina.
[52:36] And, you know, so I was going through some articles.
[52:39] I'll just give you a couple of names of the reasons.
[52:42] The unholy grail of cancer screening, or is it just about the Benjamin's question mark?
[52:47] The most recent I found February 25 is called the implosion of grails gallary cancer screening test.
[52:54] In this one mentioned, there was a large scale study done in partnership with the UK National Health Service.
[53:01] And it was going to scale up, they're going to do, they had like, random sample on one side
[53:05] people not getting it and trying to see how how valid these results were, they discontinued
[53:08] after the initial results, did not continue to scale it initially, anticipated just, just this is
[53:13] a research testing they were doing on a large amount of population.
[53:17] Grail hasn't published those results, but they say they will by the end of the year.
[53:21] And I also found there's a class section lawsuit by stockholders in the company who, they
[53:26] alleged that the company made a series of materially false and misleading statements and emissions
[53:32] concerning the acquisition of Grail. This is the Lumina and Grail's gallery test.
[53:37] And they also say that the real world experience has shown that gallery has caused substantial harm to patients.
[53:44] So I was reading on this and the other question I asked myself is why am I, as a simple city council member, reviewing medical research articles for decision in a public meeting.
[53:52] And at this point, I was thinking more where I'd come from as public policy, and I thought
[53:57] how we do labor negotiations close session, where I actually do in that right now, as
[54:00] we typically are,
[54:04] and I got to wonder, why did somebody come up with the rule that labor
[54:07] negotiations done in close session, and I think this agenda items could be used in a political
[54:12] science class answer that question, because the employees in our fire department made a really
[54:15] strong case that they were exposed to carcinogens, and it's worth investing in some
[54:19] of technology to try to prevent some of that.
[54:22] But now we're in around two of the city council member sponsored me
[54:24] two case, because the firefighters get it.
[54:27] It's like, well, the police want it.
[54:28] This is somewhat similar with the blanket
[54:29] in presumption of the cancer is related to work.
[54:35] Stuff that probably happened, and you mentioned a lawsuit,
[54:37] I actually don't know the history of that,
[54:38] but I assume it was legislation that was done in open session
[54:40] with lobbying client poly groups.
[54:42] And it's hard to say no to these sort of things,
[54:44] because we do want to protect our employees.
[54:46] We do care.
[54:46] We don't want to give something, especially when it
[54:48] related to health to one group of employees, not give it to another, especially when they're exposed to it.
[54:52] And in this case, are really more than another employee group that's getting the same coverage.
[54:58] So that's why we insist on providing adequate health coverage.
[55:00] We tried to, you know, through the insurance companies, we could form like a subcommittee of ourselves
[55:03] and we could review every kind of new experimental health technology that's brought forward.
[55:06] Inside whether we want to cover it or not, at that point we would be insurance company, but we're not.
[55:10] We hired an insurance company.
[55:12] And so, it's complicated, like a lot of decisions we make, it's about health and safety.
[55:18] And these are concerns that are so deeply legitimate, like, it should be a priority.
[55:23] I mean, how could anything be more important than health and safety?
[55:26] But I think when we think about it, we start to act from like the irrational part of our brain.
[55:30] But we're managing the government that's supposed to serve everybody in the city and every department is running thin.
[55:35] And all over the community, we have these persistently unsatisfied needs.
[55:38] So I really think that on these sort of things, we should act out of the rational part of our brains.
[55:42] So the idea that I had, because I don't feel like a proper judge of whether this technology should be our investment,
[55:49] is that we have an HR department who I think is better in touch to do the research than I am,
[55:55] sitting on my desk reviewing medical research articles.
[55:57] And I think that we should punt this topic to HR for their assessment on all of the
[56:03] of screenings, this will be experimental for gallery, cancel screenings, and we should have it
[56:07] come back to us in labor negotiations in close session where we typically talk about employee
[56:11] compensation issues. That is the motion I'd like to make is that we talk about the cancer
[56:18] screenings as part of labor negotiations, and we ask for more of a recommendation from HR
[56:23] and consultation with some experts. I'll second that motion.
[56:27] I'll make a subsequent motion.
[56:35] I'm going to take the motions, but we do
[56:36] have a few speakers that want to go, but we'll go ahead and get the motion.
[56:40] Go ahead and cast a number on Brian.
[56:42] So my motion will be to include the gallery cancer screening test for public works,
[56:47] full and end of employees, through the fiscal 2627 budget development process.
[56:54] I brought this up for the addition of our police officers, I support and support of that.
[57:00] I support it for our public works and employees as well.
[57:04] It's about exposure and risk.
[57:07] That's where the risk is in these three groups.
[57:10] That's why I support this.
[57:12] All right, so I can put that motion.
[57:17] Councillor Holy.
[57:20] As I was the council member to make the friendly amendment
[57:23] in our summer meeting, I'd like to explain publicly
[57:27] why my opinion on this has evolved significantly
[57:30] since that time.
[57:31] I originally had looked at it through a lens of seeing a pattern of certain departments have
[57:38] favoritism when it came to funding among other benefits, and I thought it was important
[57:44] to see equity among all departments, and I still hold that as a value.
[57:50] But I do have to say originally having that benefit for our fire staff has a lot more context
[57:59] to do is legal liability when California state mandate of cancer presumption for certain
[58:05] staff members creates that legal liability.
[58:12] So, although I'm not so compelled by questions of the validity of certain health tests
[58:19] that's not in my purview to consider.
[58:21] I really, really resonate with Council Member Winslow's argument of these are decisions
[58:29] best made by HR. They're best made for a closed session. Labor negotiations. That's the
[58:36] more appropriate place for it to be held. So I just want to say that's why my opinion on this
[58:43] item has evolved a little bit because I believe that I was looking through it from the incorrect
[58:50] lens in our summer meeting.
[58:56] You're going over it?
[58:59] Yeah, we have a
[59:00] And a substitute motion, should we be voting instead of making our opinions know?
[59:07] Yeah, the motions came while people had already pushed their buttons to speak, and that's why I said I'll go ahead and take the motions, but we're going to let everybody speak once.
[59:16] Okay, so before we respond to Council Member Winsel's comments, so the only, this is a blood test, the take blood.
[59:24] The only harm that can come from these is false positives.
[59:30] And so one of the issues with this is there are quite a few false positives.
[59:36] So you'll get an indication that says maybe you have CLL, which is form of leukemia.
[59:42] And all it does is raise a flag and say to your oncologist, take check for this.
[59:48] And so it's not designed to be a definitive diagnosis.
[59:51] So the main argument against this is that it causes people anxiety because they're told they have something.
[1:00:00] A series of diseases, in fact, they don't. Well, every other diagnostic test for cancer has a similar
[1:00:06] problem not to this extent. As far as lawsuits by investors, I spent 30 years in Silicon Valley
[1:00:15] and I can tell you that there are very few companies that don't have multiple outstanding lawsuits
[1:00:23] from disgruntled investors, and it's just a fact of life that doesn't mean it doesn't mean
[1:00:30] there's a problem with the technology.
[1:00:35] Can somebody go to see?
[1:00:37] Thank you, Mayor Reynolds.
[1:00:40] Yeah, I think in general, we need to support our employees and support their health, and I
[1:00:45] want equity between employee groups, and that makes this hard.
[1:00:48] I really think we should have discussed all of these with HR in close session, like we do
[1:00:54] every other employee benefit because discussing something on the diet like this opens up the
[1:01:00] opportunity for politicization of just wanting to keep our employees safe and I'm bummed
[1:01:08] to be in a position like that because we have to really prioritize things like are we going
[1:01:14] to spend money on something that's perhaps less proven to be helpful than other benefits
[1:01:20] that we could be providing, and I think I would really like to be better informed, somebody brought up the need for health professionals.
[1:01:28] I'm not a health professional. I don't believe that I have, that it should be my purview to decide something like this without all of the information.
[1:01:39] And so I'm having trouble with this one and I think that I would like to have more information
[1:01:46] and have it brought back to us in closed session like we would other employee benefits.
[1:01:55] So I'm just going to make one quick comment before we go back to Council Member Winslow.
[1:02:01] I would assume it's not in the motion, but could this be stated to be gallery or other
[1:02:09] cancer test if some other reputable company that HR finds comes along, can we choose at any
[1:02:18] time to change? Or maybe we offer to you, if they're the same price, you can go to this company
[1:02:23] or you can go to this company. Is there any reason that couldn't be added to the motion if there's
[1:02:28] another agency that allows us? I don't know if that's a question. I can help you with, I mean,
[1:02:34] this patentable technology, so there's not, there isn't anybody else in my knowledge that does
[1:02:39] thing like this at this time. There are some who are selling that they are, just we'll say.
[1:02:45] Okay, but that was a question for maybe Ryan or staff.
[1:02:52] Yes, I mean, I think you can't, it is dynamic, right? You're making a decision now, but I think
[1:02:56] as it, if council's direction changes, it can, it can evolve with that.
[1:03:02] So we could allow this for tonight, and if HR comes to us and brings us something that is a different
[1:03:08] option better different later down the road we can change you'd probably want the motion to reflect that
[1:03:14] But yes, you could you could even do it as a one-time
[1:03:20] Do this is the one-time and then bring it again back in a year or two or two or three or to which is what I think the recommendation was anyways
[1:03:28] To do it well actually the
[1:03:30] Subtune motion. I made was through the fiscal year 2627 budget development process
[1:03:36] That was the subtune motion
[1:03:38] All right. That was the staff direction, right? That's funding it for three years.
[1:03:45] That was a suggested interval. I think in, I think in fire, we do it every two years.
[1:03:52] So the thought was, go to three year interval. Yeah. Okay. But again, you could, and it sounds like the motion is, you're approving ones.
[1:04:01] But I will also say, I think the benefit of this is to establish baseline, so then you can continue on to review that baseline for any abnormality that may need further analysis.
[1:04:14] So I want to be careful how we navigate that.
[1:04:18] Doesn't mean that we can't come back and redo the whole thing, but maybe my suggestion is to skip the motion as is that I made for 2627 and then we can look beyond that later.
[1:04:31] Okay, Council Member Guenza?
[1:04:34] Yes.
[1:04:34] I have just two quick responses to some things.
[1:04:37] One of them is political.
[1:04:38] If it was just about the exposure to carcinogens,
[1:04:41] we would have given this to the public works employees in the first place.
[1:04:43] We wouldn't have waited for this to come back around and have some new recommendation on it.
[1:04:48] The other is medical.
[1:04:49] Not only are there false positives, but even the studies that grail funded themselves.
[1:04:53] They show a high rate of false negatives, which they've also shown.
[1:04:56] In the long run, people tend to get less of the more serious and more documented cancer tests.
[1:05:00] as a result of that. And so the concern that's brought up in the medical community is that this actually
[1:05:05] leads to people not realizing that they have cancer for longer period of time. So, it's
[1:05:10] Council member Holly. This is just procedural.
[1:05:16] I missed heard council member O'Brien make a substitute
[1:05:20] motion as a friendly amendment. So it would just be helpful for the clerk to maybe repeat both
[1:05:26] motions before we take a vote on the substitute motion.
[1:05:31] All right.
[1:05:31] Madam Clerk.
[1:05:32] Okay, so the substitute will let me go back to the first
[1:05:35] motion, which was to actually move the, it was Council Member
[1:05:42] Winseless, seconded by Goldstein, to move the
[1:05:46] Cancer Testing, Discussion, Ending Negotiations and
[1:05:49] Heavy Jar, either to participate in that.
[1:05:52] And then there was a substitute motion by Council Member
[1:05:55] Brian, seconded by Council Member Van, over back to include in the 2026-27 budget,
[1:06:08] the allocated
[1:06:09] amount to begin the testing and what staff had recommended was a three-year interval
[1:06:19] and we
[1:06:20] would take the substitute motion first. Is everyone ready to vote on that one? Okay. Yes.
[1:06:26] Council member Goldstein?
[1:06:30] No.
[1:06:33] Council member Holly?
[1:06:34] Council member O'Brien?
[1:06:35] Yes.
[1:06:36] Council member Van over back?
[1:06:37] Yes.
[1:06:38] Council member Winslow?
[1:06:40] No.
[1:06:42] Vice Mayor Bennett?
[1:06:43] Yes.
[1:06:43] Mayor Reynolds?
[1:06:44] Aye.
[1:06:45] carries 4-3.
[1:06:47] And so there's no need to go back to the first one.
[1:06:49] All right.
[1:06:50] 5.3 Confirmation and Public Works Director Operations and Maintenance.
[1:06:54] Mark Swanson, City Manager.
[1:06:56] Thank you, Mayor and Council.
[1:06:57] Section 605 of the City Charter states that the appointment of department heads is subject to
[1:07:03] confirmation by the City Council in order to meet this requirement, Council is being presented
[1:07:07] with the Employment Agreement for the Public Works Director of Operations and Maintenance.
[1:07:13] And as required by the Government Code, I will state for the record that I am proposing to enter
[1:07:18] into an Employment Agreement with Skyler Lipsky as Public Works Director Operations and Maintenance
[1:07:24] with an annual salary of $169,000 and with that recommend council confirmation of the appointment.
[1:07:34] All right. Thank you for a wonderful report. How many speakers do we have?
[1:07:40] Of any. Oh, Skyler, nobody loves you.
[1:07:44] Or everybody loves you, so I don't want to come up with them. All right.
[1:07:48] Like a motion to approve. I'll second that.
[1:07:53] I've always found Skyler super good to work with since being in the director role in the deputy director role in all of my interactions has been helpful on anything and I brought up so I'll say I'm happy to support the motion.
[1:08:07] Council member Goldstein.
[1:08:09] Yes.
[1:08:10] Council member Holly.
[1:08:11] Congratulations and yes.
[1:08:13] Council member O'Brien.
[1:08:14] Very proud.
[1:08:15] Yes.
[1:08:16] Council member Van Everbeck.
[1:08:17] I spent some time with Skyler today and I'm very impressed and so I am enthusiastically
[1:08:24] yes.
[1:08:25] Council Member Winslow.
[1:08:26] I was actually happy to have been sitting in the office with Skyler whenever there
[1:08:30] was announcement that he got the job and then so they came Melissa came and switched out the name on the door.
[1:08:36] That's cool.
[1:08:37] Yes.
[1:08:39] Vice Mayor Bennett.
[1:08:41] Congratulations.
[1:08:43] Mayor Reynolds.
[1:08:45] Thank you.
[1:08:46] So we get to do a 70 revote and I get to announce that, so passes.
[1:08:53] All right, we have nothing posted after the agenda, reports of communications, the following
[1:08:57] reports of communications are, for councils of information, who actually can be taken under this
[1:09:03] section unless the council agrees to bring it in on future agenda, city managers report.
[1:09:10] All right, city.
[1:09:16] If we have questions for, we can take it.
[1:09:23] I would love to hear presentation.
[1:09:24] All right.
[1:09:25] Not to put you on.
[1:09:25] Code enforcement penalties update.
[1:09:28] It was for information only, but we have our wonderful
[1:09:30] amazing Mr. Dirkon here.
[1:09:32] Getting full information update.
[1:09:34] Mayor, council members.
[1:09:37] Last year, council requested we revisit our new
[1:09:41] since a statement process.
[1:09:43] So I'm here to kind of reiterate that we have had success
[1:09:47] with this process and there are going to be
[1:09:49] some minor changes coming up that Syvica has worked out
[1:09:52] just some language cleanup and also moving the violation
[1:09:57] amount to $500 a day after 40 days in violation.
[1:10:02] But again, pretty minor changes other than that,
[1:10:05] we've seen success with this and I don't have any
[1:10:07] further recommendations.
[1:10:09] But I'm happy to answer any questions.
[1:10:10] Council have questions for Mr. Good.
[1:10:13] Yeah, how much fines have gone out?
[1:10:16] This is a result of this.
[1:10:16] You gave me some kind of number.
[1:10:18] But I was speaking about a different matter.
[1:10:21] But this.
[1:10:22] Probably around 9,000.
[1:10:26] Not to one person.
[1:10:30] Specifically those two that I listed.
[1:10:32] Thank you.
[1:10:36] All right.
[1:10:36] Thank you.
[1:10:37] Thank you for giving.
[1:10:39] Can somebody go to see?
[1:10:40] No, I just had encouraged you to present on this.
[1:10:42] So I said thanks.
[1:10:43] I appreciate it. Thank you for letting us know that something that we made an advancement
[1:10:47] on is working well. Happy to hear you. The tools that you need to do for your job. Very
[1:10:52] well, thank you.
[1:10:54] For information. Council Member Quest, pursuant to APNP-1010, Council Member may verbally request
[1:10:59] an item to ask at a future meeting after seeing whether I would be in a majority vote of Council
[1:11:04] is needed in order for staff to ask. Do you have any Council Member request? No. All right,
[1:11:11] we will adjourn to close session on Tuesday for a third at 5 p.m. or 530 followed by our
[1:11:17] regular council meeting at 6 p.m. here at 421. May. Good night.