[5:24] All right, everybody ready? We'll call the meeting to order. City clerk, can you please do the roll call?

[5:32] Mary Olson here. Mayor Pro Tembishop, council members, loa, here.

[5:37] That in court, here in Alicon. We have a quorum.

[5:40] I make a motion to excuse us in Bishop.

[5:44] On favor, say aye, aye, anyone opposed? That passage unanimously.

[5:49] We're going to do the pledge allegiance followed by a brief moment of silence, if everybody

[5:54] who's able, please stand, place your right hand over your heart, and begin.

[6:00] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America as to the Republic for

[6:06] which it stands, one nation, under God, in the middle of the city, and just for all.

[6:21] Thank you.

[6:26] Okay, City Clerk, could you please play the public code of conduct?

[6:40] Okay.

[6:50] Do it live.

[6:55] Ladies and gentlemen, may I please have your attention?

[6:59] The meeting of the Palmdale City Council is now in order.

[7:02] A code of conduct will now be read.

[7:05] And we request that you comply with it to ensure the efficient administration of the meeting.

[7:11] Members of the public, it is your right to participate in today's City Council meeting.

[7:15] And the Council encourages such participation.

[7:19] However, the right of the public to address the Council must be balanced with the need

[7:25] to ensure that public comment does not interfere with the orderly course of the Council's

[7:30] business.

[7:32] All are reminded to abide by the following rules.

[7:36] Speakers must see speaking immediately when their time has ended.

[7:40] Public comment on agenda items must relate to the subject matter of that item.

[7:47] General public comment is limited to subjects within the jurisdiction of the Council.

[7:52] Public comment does not include the right to engage in a dialogue with Council members or staff.

[7:59] Please remain respectful of the form and refrain from uttering, writing, or displaying,

[8:05] propane, personal, threatening, derogatory, demeaning, or other abusive statements towards

[8:11] the council. Any member thereof staff or any other person. Members of the audience should

[8:18] be respectful of the views expressed by speakers, staff, and council members and may not

[8:23] excessively clap, cheer, whistle, or otherwise disrupt the orderly conduct of the meeting.

[8:29] Any person engaging in conduct that disrupts the meeting is subject to being removed from

[8:34] council meeting. Finally, if you witness conduct or behavior by the other members of the public

[8:41] that disrupts your ability to remain engaged or participate in this meeting, please notify

[8:46] city staff. Thank you for your cooperation.

[8:50] Okay, thank you. We will now show the Q-Critter video.

[9:31] Okay. Can we acknowledge the observances

[9:35] for the month of August.

[9:37] The city of Palmdale would like to acknowledge

[9:39] a falling observances.

[9:41] National traffic awareness month, national wellness month,

[9:45] national farmers market week, the second to the ape,

[9:49] national night out, senior citizens day, the 21st,

[9:54] and women's equality day, the 26th.

[9:57] Thank you.

[9:58] Great. Thank you.

[10:00] Okay, non-agenda public comment. Now is the time for public participation for items not listed on the agenda.

[10:07] We have Eugene Hernandez.

[10:41] And then, she assigned the worker, named James, to call me up, and James, the city worker, said,

[10:50] I called up your management, and they dispute the decision of the problem, and I'm going

[10:55] to pull in your case.

[10:57] So, very disappointed with the city staffness of Ndus, and they shouldn't be treating me,

[11:04] the tax payer like this, and refusing services, it should be fine for them.

[11:10] Not to do it.

[11:11] So now we still don't have the light up, and we have a lot of bad people who live in

[11:17] Nagorno, Pavilion, so I could just imagine what's going to happen next.

[11:21] Thank you.

[11:24] We have SESA Vega.

[11:30] Thank you, Council.

[11:31] Council, 13 years ago, my mother and I met with a sheriff's deputy in the city council chambers

[11:37] to discuss the resolution and support of immigration reform.

[11:40] It was the first time in my life that I had ever

[11:43] presented to city government, and it was the first time in my life,

[11:46] someone told me why they personally oppose the legal immigration,

[11:49] but it was also the first time someone showed me that they didn't

[11:52] necessarily hate me personally.

[11:54] I remember every single word of the conversation

[11:55] and it still doesn't need to be today.

[11:58] This is why I was shocked when on July 26,

[12:01] having a panic attack at Colin Ambulance.

[12:03] From my neighborhood, I was followed by a group of people

[12:06] in a vehicle using loudspeaker shouting at me,

[12:09] calling me an illegal alien well,

[12:10] and the ambulance cutting the ambulance off

[12:12] and pumping the boulevard on the way

[12:13] to Pondo Regional Medical Center.

[12:15] Inside the medical center, three people waited

[12:17] and shouted at me again, calling me an illegal alien.

[12:22] Last thing, as I started convulsing,

[12:24] as I started writing in pain,

[12:26] and only stopped when I lost consciousness.

[12:28] This is now subject to a federal DOJ complaint.

[12:31] This is subject to a federal DHS complaint,

[12:33] because these people, whether or not it's true,

[12:35] to be ICE agents and your community.

[12:38] These are the same people who I've mentioned last meeting.

[12:41] We're driving around my neighborhood using loudspeakers

[12:43] to say that neighborhoods surrounded,

[12:45] saying that they're going to shoot illegal aliens in my neighborhood.

[12:49] When I came out as an undocumented migrant,

[12:52] when I wasn't documented in the younger,

[12:54] I knew I would face challenges that I would be threatened by people.

[12:57] Instead, I found the total opposite in Palmdale.

[12:59] A welcoming community that gave me a chance

[13:01] to build a career in a reputation working alongside

[13:03] some of the most hard-working people in America who commute an hour every day for safe neighborhoods.

[13:10] I implore the council for the sake of the quality of life in my neighborhood.

[13:14] To take a look at public safety issues just down the street on Q7 and 3rd Street East.

[13:18] We cannot control from this day as what Washington does with national immigration politics.

[13:22] I am the most pet and court saying that.

[13:24] But we can do something about the quality of life and safety in our community.

[13:27] And I implore the council to do so. Thank you very much.

[13:31] We have Kevin Chankeman.

[13:35] Good evening.

[13:37] So according to the Declaration of Colin Burns, one of your city attorneys, in the case

[13:43] Allercon versus City of Palmdale, the total amount billed by Harper and Burns as of July

[13:48] 8th was 115,000, 16 dollars.

[13:52] On July 22nd, the Los Angeles Superior Court ordered council member Allercon for attorneys

[13:58] fees and costs, attorneys fees in the amount of 186,563 dollars and costs in the amount of

[14:05] $1,800, $1,800 and $1.52 for a total of 303,390 dollars and 52 cents. And for what?

[14:15] So that y'all could keep city attorney invoices from being scrutinized by councilmember

[14:21] hour-cone to make sure that you're not getting ripped off by your city attorney. Your legal

[14:26] advice has been trash. It's just the latest example. In the case of Thorstenson versus City of Palmdale,

[14:34] y'all paid $900,000 to settle a case that comes out to more than $10,000 per day that Mr. Thorstenson

[14:42] worked for the City of Palmdale.

[14:46] And his case was about Keith Kang making two jokes about his age.

[14:51] You're settling the cases that you should win, and you're fighting the cases that are unwinnable.

[14:58] Even the atlars may or thing though.

[15:00] We can disagree about policy whether there should or shouldn't be an at large mayor in the city of Palmdale, but the fact is, is the way that you are going about it is unlawful, you will be sued, you will lose, and you will be end up paying these people's money in attorney's fees.

[15:16] For what?

[15:20] Now, Council Member Betten Court, we go back away as this is the same thing.

[15:26] And remember, the first time I spoke with you in 2021, 2022, I said,

[15:29] the one regret that I had was not coming to the council and say,

[15:33] you're getting your legal advice that you're getting is trash.

[15:36] Well, today, your legal advice that you're getting is trash.

[15:43] No, farthest speaker cards on this section.

[15:45] Excuse me, may I?

[15:46] Yes.

[15:50] Rich guy, you go from the Palm Bill Freedom Coalition.

[15:54] I wanted to say that I'm glad to hear I spoke with Mayor Olsen the other day and I spoke

[15:59] with Sal and Alex just before the meeting and I'm understand that our ordinance proposal

[16:06] about getting town hall meetings mandatory for each of the council districts is being studied

[16:14] to see how it can be done legally and whatever.

[16:17] I'm very happy that that's the case.

[16:19] I do want to point out that I'm a little surprised it's taken this long.

[16:23] We brought this to your attention two years ago.

[16:25] And why this, whatever needs to be studied, hasn't been studied and found out already

[16:31] is a little bit of a mystery to me.

[16:35] But I'm glad to see it's moving forward.

[16:37] The other thing that we've talked to you about before is the need for a code of conduct for

[16:41] the city council,

[16:44] because you put one in place the last time we brought this up, but it's

[16:48] absolutely no teeth and every one of you knows it. So, I find it a little hard to listen

[16:55] at the beginning of each meeting to the code of conduct for the people who are supposed

[16:59] to be in charge, but the folks who are representing us don't have any such thing. It's a

[17:05] little bit backwards, guys, and there's a lot of that lately. This is what I keep talking to

[17:10] you guys about. You don't seem to understand that being represented as first of all, some of

[17:14] folks back here, you call them leaders. They're not leaders. They're your representatives.

[17:20] You need a leader. That's on you. Personally, I don't need a leader. I need representatives

[17:23] on any representatives that will listen to me and the rest of the community. There are people

[17:27] here who disagree with pretty much everything I have to say politically, but you know what?

[17:32] I'm glad they're here because they're part of the process. They have a voice. They're supposed

[17:36] to have a voice in any way. So the problem is that voice doesn't mean anything if it's not

[17:41] And we speak to you under the rules of the Brown Act.

[17:44] We don't know if you're hearing us.

[17:45] We don't know if you've turned to us out completely.

[17:48] We don't know.

[17:50] We need to have these town hall meetings so we can have a meaningful discussion.

[17:54] Please get to it as soon as possible.

[17:56] Anyone else?

[18:05] Good evening.

[18:06] In about two months at our amphitheater at Marie Corpard,

[18:11] there's going to be an event that celebrates

[18:14] and express this concern for breast cancer.

[18:20] There will be people, women, mainly women.

[18:24] They are that are fighting the cancer.

[18:27] There will be those of us that are fortunate enough to be survivors.

[18:33] And a little group that we don't give enough credit to called caregivers.

[18:40] My caregiver, my sister, from actually day one, has been by my side.

[18:47] Twenty-two years, she is still going to Dr. Visits and making sure that everything is all right with my health.

[18:56] Twenty-two years, she's been my caregiver.

[18:59] We don't give enough credit to those that step up to be the sideist.

[19:05] I know it's a ways off and it's not yellow October 24th and I will be here again closer to remind everybody

[19:12] to come by or maybe support a friend and to encourage any women and some of you guys to

[19:21] to get things your breast check because they're not as big but you got the little ones there

[19:27] that need to be checked also because you can give breast cancer.

[19:31] And on a happy or no, because I'm a mom, my son that I spoke to you about his arrived yesterday and will be with me for three weeks, a former course on lifeguard, my son, Mikey, is here with me tonight with the council meeting.

[19:49] So thank you very much.

[19:51] Hey, Marsha, get your scooter ready.

[19:53] I know it. It's okay.

[20:00] Hi, you guys. How are you doing today? Nice to see you guys all. I am here as my name is Rebecca and I'm here as a curator and advisory member of the AV Community Art Gallery. I'm here again to ask you guys to please help us fund the AV Community Art Gallery. We are a non, we are not a non-profit. We are solely donation-based, volunteer-based, and we are a safe haven for the Art Gallery.

[20:30] out here in Palmdale and actually the all the small one because we've got people from

[20:36] little rock coming to our gallery we've got people from Lancaster turning in their art

[20:41] it's a untapped resource because you're allowed to turn in your work for free and we service

[20:48] everybody we service kids adults elderly disabled and anybody in between I'm here and I'm going to

[21:00] I hope to hear from you guys soon.

[21:04] Thank you.

[21:05] Anyone else wish to speak?

[21:08] Roger?

[21:09] Can I come along and do not have any?

[21:11] OK, thank you.

[21:12] I think we could follow a question.

[21:14] So with regard to the town hall ordinance

[21:17] that was referenced in public comment,

[21:20] can I get clarity on where we stand?

[21:22] Because as I recall, we voted as a council

[21:26] to have that come back as a resolution, not that we study it.

[21:30] So can I get clarity on what's going on?

[21:50] OK, now I believe something.

[21:53] So I believe at the last meeting, it was directed

[21:57] to come back as a resolution.

[21:59] It didn't make this agenda.

[22:01] But we are having a second meeting in August.

[22:04] And I think the intent was for it to come back at that time.

[22:07] OK, as long as it's coming back as a resolution,

[22:09] not that we're exploring.

[22:10] No, we're not.

[22:11] We're not definitely.

[22:12] I just want to make sure it gets back.

[22:13] Yes, it is.

[22:14] OK, thank you.

[22:17] Yeah, that's not how I understood it.

[22:18] I thought that we were looking at what the guidelines were from the city to be able to conduct these and then when that comes back we will have a discussion.

[22:27] I thought we went through sort of a lengthy discussion about the legal implications of an ordinance as opposed to a resolution because the proposed ordinance by that was submitted to the council included penalties for not conducting town hall meetings to the council members.

[22:44] And we were concerned about, you know, implementation of those penalties, and then the frequency of what was being requested.

[22:51] I think it was every three months or so, the ordinance called for each council member mandated us to have town halls in our respective council districts every three months.

[23:02] And if not, we were going to be penalized under an ordinance.

[23:06] We had a discussion about making it a resolution, encouraging and supporting those council members who want to host town halls, but not making it mandatory and not making it punitive.

[23:20] Yeah, that's the way I understood it. They were going to do the analysis and all the do's and don'ts and how we are going to effectively allow for town halls, but remember the concern that it shouldn't be a mandate.

[23:30] So could we go back and look because I don't remember it.

[23:34] Yes, we need to have a brainstorming session with people because like I've had two different kinds, one with all the directors there and then one without them.

[23:44] One that the city helps sponsor, one that I had to do completely on my own.

[23:48] So we have to decide what we all want and how it's going to be done and scheduled and whether directors are coming.

[23:57] because it takes a long time for the directors to prepare to bring all their stuff to these meetings.

[24:01] So maybe we can have a brainstorming session or maybe at our council retreat next time we can talk about this.

[24:08] It would be easy if you ever just have town hall meetings and we wouldn't have to do this.

[24:10] But I mean I've had two.

[24:13] I know that they probably want more.

[24:16] Yeah, so we're also supportive of it.

[24:18] I had the first one and I think part of our discussion was also that there needs to be equitable parameters for what the city council

[24:25] supports. I know when I had my town hall, I was restricted prohibited from any city staff being

[24:32] there, prohibited from using a city facility. My flyers were stolen from the back of the city

[24:36] council room, and I was not allowed to have any staff support at all, which was completely

[24:46] in my office that I experienced as you were. You had yours at the Palmdale Playhouse,

[24:51] you had every director present, and they were all within, I think, the same year time frame,

[24:55] It was not a, I think you raised the concern whether or not it was a note.

[25:08] Okay,

[25:11] no one else wishes to speak? All right, we're going to close non-agenda public comment.

[25:20] Is there anything on the consent calendar that we're going to pull? Well, just before I allow public comment, we can pull for council session a minute. Is there anything we're taking off?

[25:30] No, nothing at this time.

[25:32] Five, six.

[25:34] Should it be the pleasure of the council?

[25:35] We can pull five, six.

[25:36] We're moving five, six.

[25:37] We'll bring that back to the next meeting.

[25:38] Thank you.

[25:41] Okay.

[25:42] Public comment for consent calendar.

[25:44] If anybody wishes to speak on items on the consent calendar,

[25:48] now is the time to do so.

[25:51] Do you have any de-in her nervous?

[25:57] I'd like to thank Eric for reducing her speaking time

[26:00] for three minutes to two minutes.

[26:02] And also thank you for taking us of YouTube.

[26:05] These meetings are not covered by YouTube anymore.

[26:09] And I'd like to say that I support the teamsters

[26:14] that are still in strife for the three years

[26:16] and they're still fighting.

[26:19] And also that I believe that we, you know,

[26:24] you should adopt a code of contact

[26:26] because your contact is awful.

[26:29] Thank you.

[26:30] Great.

[26:30] We'll look into that next.

[26:34] Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on the consent calendar?

[26:39] Come on, Roger.

[26:41] All right, we're closing it.

[26:44] Council, is there any items you wish to pull for discussion?

[26:48] I think we all do.

[26:51] Yes, five, three.

[26:53] Five, six.

[26:55] Take that out completely.

[26:57] Oh, five, five, five.

[26:58] Five, five, eight, and five, nine.

[27:01] Is there a motion to approve the remainder of the second?

[27:06] Okay.

[27:07] We've got a first and a second on paper.

[27:09] Say aye.

[27:10] Anyone opposed?

[27:11] That passes unanimously.

[27:13] Can we get a staff report on five three please?

[27:21] Good evening, Mayor and council.

[27:23] Nardi Lopez, Assistant City Manager.

[27:25] We are bringing forward today a request to approve.

[27:29] second amendments to agreements with Avent, Advanced Avent, Guard Inc., and Townsend Public Affairs

[27:36] for Comprehensive Rent Related Services, and also to extend, to exercise the second option

[27:46] to extend both agreements through December 20, 27, which would be completing the full term

[27:52] of the three-year term for the agreements.

[27:57] Can you highlight what we're getting?

[28:01] Yes, I would love to.

[28:04] So contracting grant services provides staff

[28:09] with the ability and the capacity to be able

[28:14] to submit grants for our various projects.

[28:21] In-house, it would be a challenge to be able to keep up

[28:25] the amount of grants available and the amount of time that it requires to prepare the grants

[28:32] and do the research and align our projects with the grants that are most competitive.

[28:38] So having this services allows us to be able to have the grant writers provide that support.

[28:46] I can say that with the services of these two grant writers, thus far we've had 31.3

[28:55] million dollars funded in awards, and we have an additional 136.5 million that are pending.

[29:08] We've submitted grants and we are waiting response on those as well to see if we were awarded.

[29:14] Just a 31 million between both contracts?

[29:16] 31.3 million.

[29:23] Yes, so I, my briefing, I requested sort of an outline of, you've highlighted the sort of the large number, the universe of 31 million and some other larger number of what we're still out there in prospects, but I asked for what specifically each contractor has delivered, never received it, and I still don't see, I'm not hearing specifically which grants or received and that's important information.

[29:53] so that we can sort of discern whether or not we should, in fact, extend these agreements.

[30:00] I can share that information. For, I will speak to TPA, which is now in some public affairs. They

[30:12] have thus far helped us. We have some that are funded and some that are pending award. So TPA,

[30:23] I have a total of $3.3 million, and I can specify which awards those are.

[30:38] We have a 2425, that's the FSP Intercity Passinger Rail Grant Program, and these are the

[30:47] pending ones.

[30:48] That is for $65 million,

[30:53] I'm sorry, I will, that was AGI, that's advanced.

[30:59] Okay, I'm, I'm going to use the ready. So let's start over back.

[31:02] I will speak about the pending ones at this moment, which is how I have my list here.

[31:07] Okay, so for what they've actually delivered.

[31:10] Okay, we have the hazard mitigation grant program.

[31:14] That is a GI that's $165,000 and that will help us update our hazard mitigation plan.

[31:25] We have 2425 FSP Intercity passenger rail grant program and that is for 65,600.

[31:34] We have, so are the, you said Townsend was the FSB?

[31:39] No, no, I am giving you advance.

[31:42] These are all, well, I'm reading office all, I have, yes.

[31:51] Then for them as well, I have 25, 26, and that's a fiscal year.

[31:56] Real-world crossing elimination grant program, which is 68,

[32:01] 1,160,000.

[32:04] Those are very large grants.

[32:06] and required a lot of analysis and gathering of information to submit.

[32:13] Those are AGI

[32:19] and pending for Townsend Public Affairs.

[32:25] Right now we have the SS4A, which is the Safe Streets,

[32:30] 2026 implementation grant program and that's 2,315,000,

[32:47] that's good, okay. I can go now to the ones that are awarded.

[32:51] Okay, so how about guard there were three towns and there's one?

[32:55] There's a smaller one that's the lowest community bucket list program because we do assist in small ones that some of the departments needs, that's 250,000 for TPA.

[33:05] And then we have a 59,106 dollar one, which is for FY25, Edward Bird Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, which we were just notified yesterday, that is no longer pending, we actually awarded it.

[33:23] I'm getting a little confused again, but anyway, if you could go on to the, what was it was?

[33:27] Sure.

[33:28] For awards, we have, we have the Measure A acquisition only grant, which was for our Barrel Springs

[33:36] Acquisition Project that was awarded in 2025 January, and that was for $2 million that it was TPA.

[33:46] We have the build grant, which was previously the race grant.

[33:49] That one is for the Rancho Vista Great Separation Project, that was January 2025 and that was $23 million.

[33:59] We have another SS4A, that's also TPA, that's for Project on 20th Street East Corridor Improvement Project, and that was $5 million, $382,000.

[34:14] We have another cycle of the SS4A. This one is most recent in 2026. That is for the active transportation plan was supplemental reports and that was in January of 2026 and that was $400,000.

[34:30] we have the, and these are TPA. We have the 2026-27 sustainable transportation planning grant.

[34:40] That is for the Palmdale Masterbike Plan. That was in May of 2026 and that was 283,000 dollars.

[34:48] And there is an item on the consent calendar that the Council just approved for a resolution on that one.

[34:57] And I've mentioned the one.

[35:00] Questions that are pending? I've mentioned those. And that's the list that I have at this moment.

[35:08] I guess I just, it would be much easier if it was provided in writing as an attachment to the staff report.

[35:15] For the general public, it would be easier to digest and understand the value of these contracts.

[35:20] And then when I ask for it and I'm told that I'm going to get it, but then never get it, it's troubling.

[35:26] And this is not an indictment on you, Nardy.

[35:29] It's Ms. Lufthas, it's just that this has been constant for three and a half years.

[35:33] Since day one of me being elected, I've asked continually asked for information and been denied that information.

[35:39] And it's pertinent and relevant to what I do here as an elected representative.

[35:43] And I think now Council members are starting to see that the stuff that I want is not because I want to, you know,

[35:53] maximizing the value of our taxpayer dollars here, so that we can tell the residents, our

[36:00] hardware residents that are paying the highest sales tax in the state of California, that

[36:04] their money is being put to good use. So, it would be helpful if at some point you could

[36:09] just get us a list of all of what you sort of ran through. That would be helpful. Thank you.

[36:15] Yes. And I will say that that could be on me because I was not at your briefing and I understood

[36:22] to share the information, not that it was needed before, so apologies for that, but I will

[36:31] share it with the Council tomorrow.

[36:33] Any other questions?

[36:35] Who to approve?

[36:37] Okay.

[36:37] We've got a motion in the second.

[36:39] I'll favor say aye.

[36:40] Anyone opposed?

[36:41] That passes unanimously.

[36:43] I believe that takes us to 5.5, can we get a staff report?

[37:01] Lee Taur is publicÖ.

[37:04] Sorry.

[37:05] Lee Taur is public report instructor, good evening, Mayor.

[37:08] City Council members, the cited before you, is for your consideration to adopt a resolution.

[37:14] Number C-C-2-026-046 authorizing execution of a restricted grant agreement with Cal

[37:22] Trans and for the Palmdale master by plan.

[37:28] A city applied for sustainable transportation planning grant back in November, 2025, to develop a master bike plan.

[37:36] A Palmdale was awarded $283,000 with a required local match from the city in the amount of $36,666.

[37:46] The master bike plan would provide a comprehensive study, expand, and improve the current network.

[37:52] The Bic Master Plan will also support the General Plan goals for safety, access and mobility.

[38:00] Local measure our funds will be used for the city's local match.

[38:05] Once the agreement has been approved and executed staff will release an RFQ to develop the Master Plan.

[38:11] This will establish the Bic Design Standard Guidelines for the city.

[38:15] Create a GIS user-friendly map.

[38:18] The map will show existing and proposed bike lanes, routes, schools and parts, bus stops and gaps through the network and also identify projects for bike improvements in future.

[38:29] And in order to complete the master plan, see we'll host the public outreach and community engagement meetings to obtain input from the community.

[38:41] Public outreach is an important part of the bike master plan.

[38:44] The Selected Consultant will be responsible for preparing the public outreach engagement plan.

[38:52] We'll identify key stakeholders, we'll provide notification to propose meetings to be sent through

[38:59] our social media accounts and other outlets, create online project web page to include

[39:06] fax sheets and project updates, and lastly to host pop-up events and online surveys

[39:11] to collect additional input.

[39:14] That concludes my presentation.

[39:15] Do you want to ask any questions you may have?

[39:22] Thank you so much for your report.

[39:23] I pulled this item because it was on the consent calendar, but master plans for any jurisdiction and even

[39:28] espality are really important.

[39:30] And they really need to involve public participation and public input.

[39:34] And so thank you for putting this PowerPoint together to outline to the general public what

[39:39] and how they can offer over the course of the process of the development of the master plan if they're

[39:44] interested in following the process and contributing, they can reach out directly to you over

[39:51] the course of the next, whatever year or so, however long you plan to develop this plan.

[39:58] But in any case, I just wanted to make sure that...

[40:00] The public knew that there is an opportunity to participate in these discussions if they so desire.

[40:06] So thank you. Happy to move that item.

[40:09] All the second.

[40:10] Okay, we've got a motion in the second.

[40:12] All the favor say aye.

[40:13] Aye.

[40:13] Anyone opposed?

[40:14] That passes unanimously.

[40:17] 5.8.

[40:18] I believe that's still you.

[40:21] Next slide, then, is for your consideration to approve an agreement.

[40:26] A-971-8 with Dash Construction Company for Fencing Replacement for not to see the amount

[40:35] of $177,962.

[40:40] We advertised this bid back in April, 2026.

[40:46] We had five vendors submitted Bids Dash was the lowest responsible bidder.

[40:52] The work itself will include or replacement of approximately 1,400 linear feet of fencing

[41:00] concrete most trips at 4 L&D locations will be using landscape assessment district funds to pay for this effort.

[41:10] Thanks for that.

[41:11] This is also for public information.

[41:13] This was on the consent calendar, but it affects my district and a couple other council districts.

[41:17] But we often hear from our commenters and our residents that, you know, there's blight in our community.

[41:24] The lot of these red-iron fences have graffiti, they're corroded, they're dangerous, they're just ugly and old.

[41:30] But I want to assure the listening public that we are investing in these projects and that we're going to deliver on them.

[41:39] So that's it. Thank you. Happy to move it.

[41:43] Okay, we've got a motion in the second, I'll favor say aye.

[41:47] Any more votes?

[41:48] Passive unanimously, by 0.9.

[41:49] That's completely.

[41:51] Next item is for consideration to approve a requisition.

[41:55] Number two, seven, zero.

[41:56] One, one, zero.

[41:57] With AA oils incorporated, DVA California fuels,

[42:01] Lubricants and fuel, four fuel and Lubricants

[42:04] for not to exceed a amount of 525,000.

[42:08] This bid went out back in July 23, 2026,

[42:18] we received four vendors using the lowest bidder was safety clean system, but they submitted a non-responsive bid, we went to the second low bidder, which was California fuels in lubricants.

[42:34] We'll be using fleet maintenance, internal service funds to pay for this services.

[42:40] So, thank you for this one.

[42:42] I'm going to need a little help understanding exactly what we're doing here.

[42:46] So, it's for motor oil, lubricants, diesel, and unlettered fuel.

[42:51] The bitter that you're proposing that we award the contract to,

[42:54] their bid price was slightly under $60,000, right?

[43:03] Yes.

[43:05] Sorry, sir, for the page.

[43:06] Ma'am, sorry, I'm Adam Dyer, I'm the fleet superintendent, how are you?

[43:09] How wonderful for you.

[43:12] So, the way fuel is bid is based on a rack price,

[43:17] so because fuel prices are unpredictable,

[43:20] really the only thing you can bid on is the amount of markup for the fuel.

[43:25] So, AAA oil was the lowest bidder at a 23 cents a gallon markup,

[43:29] and the $59,700 is the estimated amount of fuel for the whole year with the 23 cents

[43:39] of gallon markup. So that's basically the markup over rack fuel price. You said that you're

[43:45] saying a rack not. So rack fuel is like it's the average amount average cost for like

[43:54] distribution fuel. So if we would have our own tanker truck and driver we could go to the

[43:59] distribution center purchased a fuel for rack price got it. I was thrown. I thought you were

[44:04] saying we're a pan the I rack price. Rack, I got it. So it takes a top 10 to show.

[44:09] Like it's time to be buying oil. They're going. It's definitely not a good time to be buying oil.

[44:15] But it's a necessary. So okay. So you said $60,000 for one year, right? That's the markup.

[44:20] That's the markup. I guess maybe that's what's missing in this report because I'm not clear. So it's a contract.

[44:25] Well, when you're contract with two options to extend for one year, so total potential of three years of 60,000 times three, that's 180,000, but yet the requisition is at 525,000, so I need clarity on the difference.

[44:41] the market. So we approximately use, say, just for the conversation, because it's an average

[44:48] about 60,000 gallons of fuel, right? So the price of the fuel itself varies based on price,

[44:56] crude oil, whatever.

[45:00] So what our vendor bid on is the mark-up over that price. So they charge us 24 cents a gallon to go to the distribution center, essentially pick the fuel up and deliver it to our holding tanks and the maintenance yard.

[45:16] The contract is not attached to our staff report. So does it allow?

[45:20] It's just a purchase order. Okay, so it's just a purchase order. So when we award, but there's got to be an agreement in place in order first. I mean, that's what we're awarding right?

[45:28] It's just a record position for the purchaser.

[45:31] It's just a delivery of goods.

[45:32] So then what is the one year with two options to extend?

[45:36] That's the purchaser.

[45:40] I don't understand how a purchaser has a one-year term

[45:44] and two-year, two-one-year options to extend.

[45:48] Right.

[45:48] It's a purchaser.

[45:50] Yeah.

[45:51] Every year we have to come back.

[45:54] Every year we have to come back and ask permission

[45:57] are approval from Council to redue the requisition of the year.

[46:01] But what would it be an option to extend?

[46:03] There would have to be an underlying agreement in order to extend that agreement.

[46:08] No?

[46:09] I mean, hello.

[46:10] Are we calling something an option to extend, which isn't an option to extend?

[46:15] Like, is this an agreement they will hold the price of the goods the same?

[46:20] Yes.

[46:20] So the agreement?

[46:22] Well, the purchase order is good for three years after the one year extensions, then we

[46:28] to go back out to bid again for the same for the product again. So it's not ongoing.

[46:35] I'm still unclear on what exactly we're doing. We're going out to bid.

[46:41] And we're, how do we lock them into the 24 cents markup without an agreement?

[46:52] Nobody knows. Well, if we don't have answer, can we just continue this item?

[46:56] We can approve it for one year and come back. We would read bid it for the next year.

[47:09] I'm sorry, can the echo's in this room, we hear every word of the conversations if we could just get through this, please?

[47:17] Good evening.

[47:19] So to address the question with regard to the solicitation, we went out to bid that would be good for three years that the purchase order is for a one year period and the team would have to come back before Council each year thereafter, but the RFP is the underlying document that would allow

[47:37] the city to hold those terms for the three years, whatever, was in that bid document.

[47:45] And therefore, we would not have to go out to bid again next year, and the following year,

[47:49] we would wait until the expiration of that three-year term to go back out to the market with an open solicitation.

[47:55] So, when people, this is how I understand it, when people respond to an RFP and they provide a bid proposal,

[48:00] that's essentially an offer to the city, we have to accept that offer in order to make a contractual arrangement

[48:06] in order to hold them accountable to whatever terms are set forth in their proposal.

[48:13] So there should be some sort of underlying agreement.

[48:16] This just isn't seen like it's, I'm just unclear on exactly what we're doing here.

[48:21] And when the bidder is the bid price is 60,000, and then you're saying that it's a potential

[48:27] it's one year, but then two one year options to extend, that's three years, that's 180,000.

[48:33] Then why is it the requisition request over half a million dollars?

[48:37] So my understanding based on what the team has shared is that that is the market price is what was bid on.

[48:44] However, the city still has to pay for the actual price of the fuel.

[48:47] So that 525 is comprised of both of those components.

[48:55] Okay, I guess I'm just unclear on how we lock them into that price without an agreement.

[49:00] If you're saying there is no agreement, how do we lock them in for three years to 24 cents?

[49:04] So for the purchase of commodities, we can proceed with a purchase order and not a standard contract.

[49:11] However, the purchase order does have all of the city standard terms and conditions.

[49:16] It has been approved to form by the city attorney's office.

[49:20] And our RFP, our solicitation documents, become a part of that agreement, essentially.

[49:27] So that is how we, the agreement is the purchase order.

[49:31] So that RFP is a legal document and that is what holds us to those, to those rates that we're

[49:38] bid on.

[49:38] Can I ask a question?

[49:40] If we're giving them the option of extending for two years, why don't we just write a purchase

[49:44] order contract for three years?

[49:47] That way we don't have to come back.

[49:49] Why are we only doing one year one?

[49:51] We clearly know we're going to extend it for two years.

[49:55] Because I think the price of the future.

[49:56] Or we could do the opposite.

[49:58] We could do it from one year because

[50:00] Ideally, we will get out of this war and the cost of a full fuel will go down and then we can enter, we can go out to bid again and get a lesser markup, lesser than 24 cents.

[50:13] But the way I'm understanding is what we're locking into is the excess charge of the 24 cents.

[50:19] The fuel we're going to pay for, whatever the current rate is. So the RFP is the document that locks in the markup.

[50:27] But the mark-up could fluctuate and could go downward in a year based on international, you know, issues.

[50:35] You are correct. If the mark-up were, our team does evaluate that and we would make that choice to go back out to bid at that point in time.

[50:43] We do have outs in each of our contracts and we have the ability to do that.

[50:46] I guess the question is if that mark-up price goes up, what legally binds them to give us at the rate that we're discussing now?

[50:56] the RFP that they bid on.

[50:58] But that legally, that's the only document.

[51:01] So making us pay that rate.

[51:03] How so?

[51:05] It's a legal document they bid on that.

[51:07] It is in their proposal.

[51:09] And that document becomes a part of the city's standard agreement,

[51:13] which is the purchase order.

[51:15] So that is a standard agreement.

[51:17] Just I'm unclear.

[51:18] There's got to be a governing document, an underlying document.

[51:21] Like, if we go to court to hold them to the terms,

[51:23] there's got to be an agreement signed by both parties.

[51:26] Is there a purchase order document that is different than this requisition that is in here?

[51:32] Yes, there is.

[51:33] The purchase order once the requisition is approved, we convert that in our system to the purchase order.

[51:39] I'm sorry, convert the requisition to the purchase order.

[51:42] On the purchase order, the back of that document contains all of the city's terms and conditions.

[51:49] And the copy of that is maintained at the city and the vendor is provided with a copy of that as well.

[51:54] So setting aside the legal document and the framework that we've got to work with here,

[52:01] I don't know why we would lock ourselves into a market break when right now we're at astronomical fuel rates.

[52:10] It seems to me that it would be who was to leave it open in the contract for a short time as possible.

[52:18] Because in six months, it may very well go down and why lock ourselves into a 24 cent markup when it could potentially go down to 20 or 15 or 10.

[52:29] We don't know if international relations are going to escalator de-escalate, ideally they will de-escalate and at that point fuel prices will go down.

[52:36] It just doesn't make sense to me for us to lock in a deal for potentially three years during the time when rates are the markup rate is the highest it's ever been.

[52:47] It's a one-year deal with the option for the extensions, right?

[52:50] So I see the benefit to that is if the markup goes higher,

[52:54] we exercise those extensions because we'll save money.

[53:00] But I just, I, my confusion is how we hold them to that.

[53:04] I could tell you that the last two contracts we've had,

[53:08] so the last six years the markup has been 25 cents for those six years.

[53:13] So this is actually two cents less than we've been paying for the last two

[53:17] You are a FB and two contracts.

[53:19] So we're not agreeing to a three-year term right now.

[53:21] We can't really negotiate that next year.

[53:24] Sure.

[53:25] So can you tell me, so it's $60,000 for the markup.

[53:29] Right.

[53:30] And then for the three years it would be you guys are asking for 525.

[53:34] 520,000.

[53:35] That's for one year.

[53:36] 525 for one year.

[53:37] Yes, ma'am.

[53:38] Okay.

[53:39] So I was thinking that was for the three years.

[53:41] So $60,000 markup.

[53:43] And then, is so you're estimating $460,000 or so the underlying costs?

[53:53] Yes, ma'am.

[53:54] So the price of fuel is the rack price, is the one that varies.

[53:57] So that varies with the price of crude oil.

[53:59] The markup is just essentially like the delivery fee.

[54:02] It's the middle man fee to deliver the fuel to our, to our cash.

[54:06] I understand.

[54:07] I'm just trying to get like what baseline that we have to work with

[54:11] and then build on top of.

[54:13] It's about 450 warnings around that per year, as the baseline.

[54:18] The association is a little bit higher than that, but yes.

[54:23] I didn't think that that was a high number right now.

[54:26] Our total fuel budget for the years about 700,000 total.

[54:32] Yeah.

[54:32] No, look.

[54:33] I understand it's a necessary.

[54:35] The effort was not clear on why there was such a big differential in the bit amount.

[54:42] It's totally get it, it's confusing the way it is, it's purchasing fuel is confusing, as it is, but trying to explain it is even harder.

[54:53] Okay.

[54:56] Any other questions?

[54:58] Please approve.

[54:59] Second.

[54:59] There we got them.

[55:00] motion, and a second, all in favor say aye, aye, anyone opposed, abstain, unanimously?

[55:06] Okay, item 6.1, public hearing, city clerk, let's open the public hearing, can you please read the title of the resolution.

[55:14] A resolution of the city council of the city of Palmdale, restating in its entirety, the city of Palmdale Master schedule of fees and penalties, and refilling all fire and actments inconsistent with this resolution.

[55:29] Okay, is there a staff report?

[55:34] Good evening, Mayor and Council.

[55:35] General Samson, deputy city manager.

[55:37] The item before you is to adopt a resolution,

[55:41] reciting the city's master schedule of fees and penalties,

[55:44] for fiscal year 2627.

[55:47] This is an item that the city reviews annually.

[55:50] We update our user fees to better align with the cost of providing services

[55:54] and to reduce general fund subsidies.

[55:58] What we have presented in our fee schedule this year is a 3.8% CPI increase for the majority

[56:06] of our fees.

[56:08] There are several fees within the schedule that have been addressed separately and there

[56:15] was a detailed review of certain development-related fees in our building and safety and

[56:20] our engineering divisions.

[56:21] And those were looked at in detail to better reflect the staff time and the costs that are associated with providing those specialized services.

[56:32] So development related fees, those are designed to recover the cost that the city spends for things like inspections plan reviews,

[56:42] things that are geared towards individuals and not the general population.

[56:47] So, the goal is to recover the amount of costs from those individuals who are receiving

[56:56] the benefit for those services rather than expanding that and having the general fund,

[57:05] or essentially the rest of the tax payers pay for those amounts.

[57:11] Within our schedule, the CPI increase is applied to the majority of fees, as I mentioned,

[57:17] And we also do have several areas where we have programs and a few way of our sponsorships,

[57:24] things of that nature, specifically our Parks and Recreation Department has some programs

[57:31] as far as sponsorships, a dry town, and some other areas.

[57:35] We do have representatives from those departments available if there are specific questions

[57:40] or I'd be answering any other questions.

[57:43] Okay, should we do public comment before we do council discussion?

[57:46] Can I just ask questions first and then they can?

[57:48] Okay.

[57:48] We'll do council discussion.

[57:49] No, it's not the same question.

[57:51] Questions and then we can discuss.

[57:53] Questions of the staff report.

[57:56] So, I think every year, so we have to do adopt these fees schedule every year.

[58:01] And every year, I've always the same concerns about potential subsidies for,

[58:06] and I mentioned this to you and our briefing potential subsidies for low income

[58:10] for seniors for veterans, and who is the other one?

[58:17] Maybe I'm forgetting one, but the seniors that are on fixed incomes, and I know specifically

[58:25] last year, I think we always the desire to implement some sort of subsidy or relief from

[58:32] these fees for veterans, because there is no existing program to help veterans out when they

[58:40] They're called to pay some of these fees.

[58:43] In our briefing, I asked if we had developed a program yet since last year.

[58:48] And I think your answer was no, is there a way that we can get some feedback from staff on how

[58:55] we could potentially move forward with a program specific to veterans, but also get enough

[59:01] date on subsidies for seniors and others on fixing comes.

[59:08] Of course.

[59:08] I can speak to the veteran, the veteran portion of that question.

[59:13] We do.

[59:14] We have heard the Council's request as far as a dedicated program for veterans while

[59:20] that program is underway.

[59:22] We are working with our communications team and developing a dedicated webpage for veterans

[59:29] to submit their requests for assistance, financial assistance.

[59:35] We do have funds allocated in our measure A.V. budget that are available to assist veterans.

[59:43] I will defer to our Parks and Recreation team who is here and can address the other subsidies and sponsorships that the city has available.

[1:00:00] Good evening, mayor, council, carriesmith, parks and recreation director.

[1:00:05] So I think I'll start with just a quick summary of the programs that we do have available within parks and recreation.

[1:00:13] For military, we do, within conjunction with America 250, we have our vet tick program for the permanent amphitheater where we're issuing free tickets for our concerts.

[1:00:23] Dry Town has a military price point as does the playhouse.

[1:00:29] At the senior center legacy commons everything inside that building is free.

[1:00:34] We did begin a pickleball program for seniors as well at the Recreation Center.

[1:00:38] That one is also free.

[1:00:40] Our LAPSWIM program for seniors is discounted as an example.

[1:00:45] A swim pass for 10 swims is about $2 per swim.

[1:00:49] We've got a discounted senior fee for for for dry town and for the playhouse

[1:00:54] I think those were the the two main like and I can get into the scholarship but beyond veteran and senior

[1:01:00] I want to answer your question. You absolutely did. Thank you very much for that. I think

[1:01:05] I think the reason why I bring it up every year is because our residents are so hard hit particularly

[1:01:10] in the aftermath of measure PD and the highest sales tax in the state.

[1:01:15] Of course, any financial burden that we can alleviate is helpful.

[1:01:20] Particularly when it's accessing city property,

[1:01:22] dry town and some of the recreational activities that we've got here.

[1:01:27] I mean, for them to have to commute anywhere,

[1:01:30] really is an additional financial burden.

[1:01:33] We really want to make our facilities available to the maximum extent possible

[1:01:38] at the lowest rates to our residents.

[1:01:42] So, thank you for that.

[1:01:43] Of course.

[1:01:44] Is there, Ms. Samson?

[1:01:46] Is there a calculation based on all the fees that we've

[1:01:51] for cooped last year, if you add that 3.8% increase,

[1:01:54] have you done that calculation of what the fiscal impact would be?

[1:01:59] I have not only because they vary so greatly,

[1:02:03] that 3.8% it really depends on the consumption

[1:02:09] And I will say the development related fees are calculated quite differently than some other fees.

[1:02:15] So that's not something that we have at our fingertips right now.

[1:02:19] And I know it was mentioned that some of those fees are offset by measure A, B, which is great.

[1:02:24] That should be the purpose of those taxes.

[1:02:27] So I guess the question is, on the next agenda item, we're looking at deferring a tax to help the residents be able to afford life.

[1:02:37] And then, on the other hand, we're increasing fees.

[1:02:41] Can't the money that we are already collected in AVNPD go to offset those fees?

[1:02:47] I think the intent behind the user fees is that these are directed towards the individuals or

[1:02:55] the developers who are using rather than having the general populations tax dollars go into the benefit

[1:03:04] for one individual or one business.

[1:03:07] That's the reason that we would raise these fees.

[1:03:11] And not just generally offset them.

[1:03:15] I guess that makes sense for non-pombed oil residents,

[1:03:18] but I think maybe it was our second year.

[1:03:23] We did a one year moratorium on an increase.

[1:03:26] Like we did not increase certain recreational fees,

[1:03:31] so use of the fields, for instance.

[1:03:33] I can't remember all of them that we listed,

[1:03:36] But I remember raising the issue and we all agreed to alleviate certain fees to have no increase

[1:03:44] on certain fees for that year.

[1:03:46] So I guess to your question, is that possible?

[1:03:49] It absolutely is.

[1:03:50] It's just we have to identify which specific fees we want to apply that to.

[1:03:55] Is this timely?

[1:03:58] Like, does this by any statute of what so ever need to be done now, or can we take a look at those

[1:04:04] to see what's going to benefit Palmdale residents versus.

[1:04:08] Ideally, this would hopefully be adopted this evening.

[1:04:12] As it does have a budgetary impact.

[1:04:16] However, it is at the Council's discretion.

[1:04:20] Yeah, I've got another question.

[1:04:22] What do you guys sort of think about?

[1:04:27] I've reviewed this in depth every year.

[1:04:31] I light the ones that are concerning.

[1:04:33] like there's water exercise I think we should probably alleviate that one that's largely

[1:04:37] seniors and my guess is most on fixed incomes if they're water exercise what we don't

[1:04:42] really I don't know that we need to charge them $50 in order to use our pools and participate

[1:04:47] in the water exercise program I would imagine that injured veterans probably utilize that as well

[1:04:52] so that might be one as an example but as I was going through it I found in business permits

[1:04:57] something that I had, it hadn't.

[1:05:00] Really jumped out at me before. But in the aftermath of the tragedy it in and out, it did this year. It did this weekend.

[1:05:10] So if we can go to ExhibitC Business Performance, page 7 of 32.

[1:05:19] So there are business permit fees. There are some that we, for policy reasons, for public interest reasons, we have exorbitant fees because I think we want to discourage that kind of establishment from

[1:05:31] from opening in the city of Palmdale,

[1:05:34] for instance, adult-oriented businesses,

[1:05:37] you know, no strip clubs, right?

[1:05:38] The $3,000 for a permit,

[1:05:41] massages, establishments,

[1:05:42] it's also the same price as essentially a strip club.

[1:05:46] But then gun dealers, the application for permit,

[1:05:50] it's $328.

[1:05:53] Now, when I went and looked at the parking wrecks fees,

[1:05:56] the cost to rent a gym, a park gym, for two hours, is more than that.

[1:06:03] That's concerning, in terms of policy priorities, and in terms of what we want for our city,

[1:06:12] I don't think we want more gunna, at least I don't, and I'd like to think that I speak on behalf of the residents that I represent on the east side.

[1:06:19] Do we want more liquor stores? No. Do we want strip clubs? No. Do we want dispensaries? No.

[1:06:24] Do we want more gun shops? No. Do we know how many gun shops we have here? I don't know how many we haven't.

[1:06:31] I don't know if you have an inventory. Is this kind of off the cuff?

[1:06:34] But there are stores that exist establishments where people can buy guns now.

[1:06:40] They're available. They're readily available now. People can access their second amendment rights as they please.

[1:06:50] But setting a gun permit fee at less than the cost to rent a gym for kids to be able to use a gym for two hours.

[1:07:03] I think is as little backwards and it defies logic quite frankly for me.

[1:07:09] So I don't know, I just want to put that out there.

[1:07:12] I would like to recommend that we look at that revisit that.

[1:07:15] increase that to the exact same cost as the adult oriented business and the massage

[1:07:21] businesses so that they are all at the maximum rates and it's more fitting with the entire

[1:07:28] schedule of fees.

[1:07:30] Mr. Law?

[1:07:31] Yeah.

[1:07:33] I think we're all concerned about increasing the fees across the board like this.

[1:07:37] It almost seems, I don't know, arbitrary.

[1:07:41] It's like this run across the board, almost 4%, at a time when S has been pointed out here repeatedly, not only tonight, but many other times.

[1:07:52] And it's out in the community, and we have the highest sales tax in the state of California, probably in the United States.

[1:08:00] And, you know, I mentioned yesterday to you and to staff, and I think it's already echoed by other people on this council,

[1:08:10] That, with the measures that we've had the support from the taxpayers and the voters of the city,

[1:08:18] measure AV and measure PD, that have helped us balance the budgets and makes us more

[1:08:24] fiscally sound as time goes on, that something needs to be carved out of those two taxes

[1:08:30] to return to the people who are paying those taxes here in Palmdale.

[1:08:35] The other thing is, we also want to encourage development.

[1:08:38] I mean, I think that's something that is a matter of public policy for the city that we encourage

[1:08:45] development, particularly if it's going to bring more jobs here.

[1:08:50] And so some of the fees that are being charged for anyone applying for whatever kind of permit

[1:08:58] is exceedingly.

[1:09:00] I almost want to say exorbitant.

[1:09:02] Maybe that's too strong of a word, but it is very expensive for developers to actually

[1:09:07] poll permits and bring development to our city. On top of some of the other impediments that

[1:09:14] we impose on proposed developers. But the sales tax is something that I think that you all

[1:09:20] should look at and see what we can do. So instead of raising fees, year after year,

[1:09:30] we do something

[1:09:31] to lessen the impact on not just our residents, but also on people who want to bring development

[1:09:37] to our city. Can we do that?

[1:09:42] We can take a look.

[1:09:44] I've not one last point to be made

[1:09:45] because it's an important one.

[1:09:48] So under housing,

[1:09:49] exhibit K, page 1832,

[1:09:52] the cost, the fee,

[1:09:54] to, for a mobile home,

[1:09:57] of rent increased application

[1:09:59] in a fee of peep.

[1:10:00] Appeals filing fee to appeal a rent increase for a mobile home resident is $3600. $3600. $3600. But yet, it's $300 to get a gun establishment permit.

[1:10:16] If you're living in a mobile home and you're appealing a rent increase, which typically are not so much, to charge a $3600 fee to appeal

[1:10:29] that rent increases just astronomical, and I think that at a minimum should be at least one

[1:10:35] of the change we make, but I'd like to say, and we'll hear from public comment on whether

[1:10:40] or not any of what the public feels, but the mobile home rent appeal fee, I think, should

[1:10:47] be a diminimous, and then we shouldn't increase the gun establishment kind of fee.

[1:10:54] Let's do the public comment now, is there anyone that wishes to speak on this item?

[1:10:59] We'll start with Mr. Shankman and then go to the cards.

[1:11:03] So, I actually just want to address that last point.

[1:11:05] I'm actually the chair of the Malibu Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Commission.

[1:11:10] And our appeal fee is exactly zero dollars.

[1:11:15] So, I agree with Council Member Alexander Com.

[1:11:20] Is there anyone else who wish to speak, Mr. Gaiga?

[1:11:24] I appreciate what Mr. Lowell was saying here.

[1:11:27] You know, I've been up here many, many times in the last several months, talking about how

[1:11:32] onerous the cost of everything here is.

[1:11:34] And we all know how it works and the cost of fuel is high, the cost of everything is high.

[1:11:40] When the tax is, you know, sales taxes are high, they're tax is very, they're cost of everything

[1:11:43] is high.

[1:11:44] So for the city to try and do anything that they can to alleviate that, for the residents,

[1:11:49] I just think that's kind of a no-brainer.

[1:11:52] I thank you for bringing that up.

[1:11:53] I wish the city staff would thought about that on their own, because we're not like an empty pocket here.

[1:12:00] It's how much is enough, I think we've already reached that point, so thank you for bringing it up.

[1:12:06] Anybody else, which to speak?

[1:12:12] Yeah, I want to take just 30 seconds because I had a intensive conversation with City Manager Sal about this.

[1:12:22] I don't know how much loud it could be

[1:12:25] then Councilwoman Larkone's voice.

[1:12:28] And, sir, we agree on something.

[1:12:32] I'm very glad.

[1:12:33] I'm very glad.

[1:12:34] I agree on something.

[1:12:36] And I did request.

[1:12:38] Think about this a little longer.

[1:12:40] Include Andrea and the process.

[1:12:43] Eric, you're up for reelection.

[1:12:45] Ms. Beninquord, you told me you want to run another four years.

[1:12:47] This is just not the right thing,

[1:12:49] because people are going to remember November.

[1:12:53] Anybody else want to speak?

[1:12:55] We have Eugene Hernandez.

[1:13:01] Anyone else?

[1:13:08] Jeremiah Fro?

[1:13:09] I live in District 3.

[1:13:11] Just some concerning things that I heard.

[1:13:14] Number one from Miss Alicon.

[1:13:16] I really don't appreciate the way that it feels like you're kind of assaulting the second amendment to be honest.

[1:13:21] I don't feel like you have adequate respect for the second amendment.

[1:13:25] Because it seems like you want to maybe price people out of being able to deal in the second amendment.

[1:13:30] And that's what it is when you're dealing guns,

[1:13:32] you're dealing in the second amendment.

[1:13:33] I don't think that should be something

[1:13:34] that should be priced out of.

[1:13:36] I think that's quite ridiculous, actually.

[1:13:38] I think you, Mr. Loa, for bringing up the fact

[1:13:40] that we want Palmdale to be a place that's

[1:13:42] friendly for businesses and friendly for development.

[1:13:45] And I think when you add this 4%,

[1:13:47] look, it might not sound a lot, but with about the next 2%

[1:13:49] of the out after that, and the next 5% of that,

[1:13:52] and then another 5%, we want some place to be friendly

[1:13:55] for businesses.

[1:13:56] So I think we're bringing that up.

[1:13:58] So I'm completely against any raise of this text,

[1:14:01] whatsoever, or these fees I should say.

[1:14:03] Thank you.

[1:14:07] Anyone else?

[1:14:07] We're closing the public comment on this section.

[1:14:12] Council discussion, anybody have anything else?

[1:14:14] They wish to say it in the matter.

[1:14:15] All I can tell you is that, as is presented today,

[1:14:18] I can't support this.

[1:14:20] It definitely needs to come back.

[1:14:22] It's just a matter of when.

[1:14:23] You want to freeze everything and discuss this in a year,

[1:14:27] or you want time to go through it.

[1:14:30] No, we always kick the, we gotta take care of business now.

[1:14:34] I mean, let's get it done.

[1:14:35] And if we can, if we can provide relief to our residents,

[1:14:37] let's get it done.

[1:14:38] And if we're having meetings once a month,

[1:14:41] we've got, that gives us what three weeks to work on it.

[1:14:44] I'm just saying.

[1:14:44] Oh, we're having a second meeting in August, OK, great.

[1:14:47] But I don't know that we're going to need a whole lot of fine tuning,

[1:14:51] but there are some, you know, big ticket items per se

[1:14:54] that we could just adjust in a week.

[1:14:57] And it's not going to take a whole lot

[1:14:58] effort.

[1:15:00] I'm happy to help. I'm always available to help and consider me a resource always. But I don't

[1:15:06] know, I don't, I could not support pushing this for a year. We don't have to put a time on it now.

[1:15:11] We can have those conversations and then bring it back to the agenda, right?

[1:15:15] I think we should schedule it for the next regularly scheduled agenda. I don't know it's really that complicated.

[1:15:22] Are you sure that's enough time? I don't see why not. Is there, I mean, are you guys going to participate?

[1:15:27] I'm happy to do it, but what I'd like to see is what the impact is going to be.

[1:15:36] I don't know whether in your prediction for the budget for 2627, you kind of included a 3.8% increase

[1:15:47] across the board on these fees. Did you do that? Because if you did, I don't recall that that was

[1:15:55] and item that was presented to Council.

[1:15:59] And I think it was a incorrect assumption to make that,

[1:16:02] because this is an issue that comes up every year.

[1:16:06] And every year, we've voiced the same concerns,

[1:16:09] particularly in light of the fact that the people

[1:16:12] of this city have voted for these tax increases.

[1:16:15] And what's the benefit that they're getting from that?

[1:16:18] And so I think that if you baked in a 3.8%

[1:16:23] across the board for service fees.

[1:16:27] That was not right.

[1:16:30] And so we need to make an adjustment there.

[1:16:34] And and figure some other way.

[1:16:36] I mean, I don't know what you would do.

[1:16:39] I know budgets are fiscally tight,

[1:16:42] but we can't keep imposing burdens on our people.

[1:16:45] We have to stop that.

[1:16:46] And we also have to encourage people to invest in Palmdale.

[1:16:49] I mean, but today I don't think this flies.

[1:16:54] Who would like to make the motion?

[1:16:56] I'll make the motion to table the item.

[1:16:58] Second.

[1:17:00] Intel.

[1:17:01] Can we do a date certain?

[1:17:02] So if you have a maybe two meetings from now?

[1:17:07] Okay.

[1:17:07] Thank you for some time.

[1:17:09] Okay.

[1:17:09] We'll table it until September.

[1:17:12] No, we don't.

[1:17:13] We need to do a vote on that.

[1:17:14] That's the motion.

[1:17:15] I'm going to bring the motion.

[1:17:16] Okay.

[1:17:16] It's all September.

[1:17:18] All in favor say aye.

[1:17:21] What's the word above?

[1:17:23] Passage unanimously.

[1:17:27] Our 7.1.

[1:17:30] We get the staff report, please.

[1:17:32] Oh, I'm sorry.

[1:17:33] Can you read the title of the resolution?

[1:17:35] A resolution of the City Council of the City of Palmdale to delay the phased implementation

[1:17:40] of the transactions and use tax increase,

[1:17:43] authorized by AB2443, and enacted by Measure PD.

[1:17:51] Good evening.

[1:17:53] This item presented before you this evening is a resolution to further delay the phase implementation of the remaining .5%

[1:18:02] measure PD sales tax that was approved in,

[1:18:11] sorry. The initial resolution was adopted

[1:18:14] back in December of 2024 and we had filed a phase implementation when we implemented

[1:18:21] measure PD. That implementation took into account the initial 0.75% that took effect

[1:18:30] that's already taken effect and the additional 0.5% was slated to take effect with 0.25%

[1:18:42] on January 1st of 2028 and 0.25 on January 1st of 2029.

[1:18:47] We are coming to you today with a recommendation to delay that for a period of seven years.

[1:18:53] We have worked closely with the CDTFA, the California Department of Tax and Feed Administration.

[1:19:02] On this solution and they are on board with what we have proposed here, we do and would

[1:19:09] have the ability also to reevaluate before that seven year period to determine if the city

[1:19:14] wishes to go forward and implement at that time or if we're still in a position that we'd

[1:19:19] to further delay. So what we have here is a proposal to adopt the resolution with 0.25 taking

[1:19:26] effect on January 1st of 2035 and the remaining 0.25% to take effect on January 1st of 2036.

[1:19:36] I'm available for any questions. I just want clarity. The staff report says I think it's incorrect.

[1:19:46] It says that under measure PD, at three-quarter increase tick effect, on April 1st, that we have, it was three-quarters percent on April 1st of 2025.

[1:19:58] If the full measure PD was one.

[1:20:00] And we deferred half. How is it? I believe it was the combination of the LA County measure A, along with measure

[1:20:10] PD's implementation at the same time, but it was three quarters per cent. Okay, but not all of that three quarters was

[1:20:16] measure PD, right? So in this matter, this item is measure PD. That was all measure PD, with three quarters per cent

[1:20:29] but I didn't know we implemented three quarters.

[1:20:34] Yeah, I guess what's to be anyway.

[1:20:37] Okay, I guess my question is, and this was an amended motion.

[1:20:43] This was brought back as an amended motion.

[1:20:45] My original motion was to fully repeal measure feeding.

[1:20:50] From the outset of it, since its inception, I've opposed it,

[1:20:53] because it is a tax and I think it was sold to the voters or something other than what it is.

[1:20:58] This leaves in place, which is saying that three-fourths increase as is, yes, it differs

[1:21:08] the remaining half until 2035 and 2036, but we're going to push it out that far.

[1:21:14] Why don't we just end it?

[1:21:17] Why do we do it here?

[1:21:20] Why hang on to it for nine years?

[1:21:22] It's my understanding that if we release it, then other entities have the opportunity to grab that tax.

[1:21:30] No.

[1:21:31] Like the county.

[1:21:33] If we were to repeal entirely, that would need to go back to the voters to repeal completely.

[1:21:38] What this council has, the ability to do is via resolution.

[1:21:43] This is what we've been informed by CDTFA, and that's why we brought this proposal forward.

[1:21:49] Via resolution, we have the ability to defer.

[1:21:53] I think that was the misconception with measure pity and the mantra was keep Palm Bill dollars

[1:21:59] here.

[1:22:00] But that's not what it did, it just increased the local sales tax to the maximum of the

[1:22:06] sand possible and then with the legislative raise of the cap, that's why how we ended

[1:22:12] here.

[1:22:14] It is what it is we call it a spade, it was a tax outright, there was no keeping Palm

[1:22:20] bill dollars here and we're keeping the county from, we are obligated to pay the county

[1:22:24] a chair. We can't just like hide and evade contributing to those county taxes.

[1:22:32] So I just, I also support this, if this is the only thing that the council will do, but

[1:22:38] I think that we should continue to consider, and I would hope that this council given everything

[1:22:43] that you guys have just said, we all understand that everybody is hurting. Why, if we have

[1:22:49] the power, last council meeting, everybody was going

[1:22:52] whole about putting on the ballot, the at large mayor,

[1:22:55] and everybody moved expeditiously to get it on the ballot.

[1:22:58] This is equally important to people, day-to-day lives.

[1:23:02] And this could mean the make-up break between somebody having

[1:23:04] a roof over their head or being homeless, living in a car,

[1:23:07] not being able to provide food for their children.

[1:23:09] I mean, this has real life ramifications.

[1:23:13] And if we have the power to put it on the ballot and put it

[1:23:16] to the voters whether or not they want to repeal it,

[1:23:18] So that now that they understand what it really is, give them the voice.

[1:23:23] Let them choose whether or not they want to leave it in place.

[1:23:26] So I'm going to renew my preference to have, move forward with the full repeal, and I'll

[1:23:34] just leave you guys with that.

[1:23:37] If I did no better, I'd think the Councilwoman in this Republic on.

[1:23:43] But I appreciate your comments.

[1:23:46] In any event,

[1:23:49] it is what it is and it is an important measure that was made so that the

[1:23:55] city of Pondilka control the monies that flow from those two tax measures but the people

[1:24:01] need to get something for it and that's what has to be always at the forefront of whatever

[1:24:08] budget we're proposing as the years go along here and I think that the people are intelligent

[1:24:14] and enough to understand that both of those measures would be made with the intent to keep the

[1:24:21] tax dollars here so that the county couldn't come in and grab that money. And they just

[1:24:26] did a work around, right? But this latest measure for hospitals and whatever this was, that all

[1:24:33] of a sudden passed at the last minute. It was failing. And then it passed. Interesting approach.

[1:24:40] But in any event, I guess they went to the legislature. I didn't follow it that closely.

[1:24:44] but I understand he went to the legislature and they again made it possible for the county to again go out and tax an increase.

[1:24:53] I'll be shocked if there's any value return to the people of the county of law.

[1:25:00] General Sanjalists, in terms of emergency or mental health or anything else that was supposed to address. If any of that should come to pass, I think what we're going to do is create more bureaucracies that will be the last thing on their mind to eliminate the problems that they're supposed to be addressing.

[1:25:17] Kind of like the homeless issue. All of the money that is being raised. And what's happened in the last year? Increases in the population of homelessness.

[1:25:26] What that is in Humine.

[1:25:29] Talk about caring for people and we've just passed large tax measures to fund these bureaucracies,

[1:25:40] and the result of it is an increase in the homeless population.

[1:25:44] Oh, yeah, we just get rid of them off of the streets so we can have a world cup.

[1:25:48] Oh, yeah, and the Olympics are coming and where we're going to put them.

[1:25:51] One suggestion was by a candidate for Mayor of Los Angeles, Mr. Potomac, Palmdale.

[1:25:55] We will not accept other people's problems, but it is a terrible issue for the people that are affected by homelessness.

[1:26:07] It is inhumane and yet all these tax measures that get passed do nothing to address the problem in effect.

[1:26:17] Anyway, thank you.

[1:26:19] Yeah.

[1:26:19] Something below.

[1:26:19] Just a real quick.

[1:26:20] As a proud lifelong Democrat, I, too, was shocked when I was the only person in the

[1:26:25] Antelope Valley who opposed Measure P.D.

[1:26:27] Well, you, okay.

[1:26:30] I won't speak to that.

[1:26:32] Okay.

[1:26:33] Let's get back there.

[1:26:36] One, I think any conversation about taking it back to the voter.

[1:26:39] We missed the deadlines for the LA County consolidated elections.

[1:26:43] It would have had it got approved by the County Board of Supervisors to put it on the elections.

[1:26:48] We missed that timeline.

[1:26:49] I think for now, the best thing we can do is defer the implementation.

[1:26:56] You said it was going to be deferred till 2035 and 2036.

[1:27:01] But does that give future councils the discretion to keep deferring it?

[1:27:07] Like it does not need to be implemented again.

[1:27:09] It's just going to bring back the conversation then, correct?

[1:27:12] Correct. If this resolution tonight is adopted, this would be filed with CDTFA, and it

[1:27:19] would be scheduled as such. However, the Council or Future Council does have the option

[1:27:25] to bring forward another resolution prior to those dates and further delay.

[1:27:31] So we also have the ability because the way the resolution that allowed us to defer

[1:27:38] It's pretty flexible.

[1:27:40] We could stop the implementation fully right now.

[1:27:43] We don't need to, we don't need to repeat it.

[1:27:45] Our last question is in the answer was no.

[1:27:47] Once it already is implemented,

[1:27:48] you can't take it off without the voter correct?

[1:27:51] We were told that it would need to go back to the voter too.

[1:27:54] It says the city may face the further

[1:27:56] otherwise implement and collect the lower rate.

[1:28:02] Why can't we do that now?

[1:28:05] I have worked with these staff.

[1:28:07] that's what it says for multiple months and we have been informed that this is the the method that we

[1:28:14] would need to go forward and that we would have the option to further delay via resolution in that

[1:28:18] is so. We can delay can we can delay the full implementation of of measure PD not the portion that's

[1:28:28] already implemented is my understanding. Okay I wouldn't I would like to suggest that we get a more clear

[1:28:36] legal analysis of that point, because I disagree, and if there is a will, there's a way we

[1:28:42] can get it done. We don't need to take this. We couldn't do this when I introduced my motion

[1:28:47] and we had a discussion last month, but then the desire was to bring it back as this

[1:28:51] resolution now. But since we're here, if we can, if we can stall 100 percent of the implementation

[1:29:00] of the Measure PD tax increase we should.

[1:29:03] The reason it's coming.

[1:29:06] Mr. Mendez, how much does Measure A.V. produce in tax revenue to the city?

[1:29:13] It is for A.V.

[1:29:14] And how much?

[1:29:15] No, no, I mean A.V. and then also P.V.

[1:29:19] 22, 20, 27 million.

[1:29:23] P.D. or A.V.

[1:29:24] They're the same at this point.

[1:29:25] 27 million, that's 54 million.

[1:29:27] Okay. So in the study that that's being suggested here, can we try to figure out, you know, what we're going to cut in order to address that 57 million dollar shortfall.

[1:29:40] Yeah. 54 million.

[1:29:43] That's exactly what I was going to suggest is like back to the the fee item. We need time to go through it to see what needs to be adjusted.

[1:29:50] With the implementation of measure PD, one, we need the clarification if we can remove it after it was implemented.

[1:29:56] that it was my understanding we could not, so we do need clarity on that.

[1:30:00] But if we did have the ability to fully take it off the books, we do have to find a replacement for that $27 million, because things were already programmed in the budget.

[1:30:10] So what I think my motion is, if we do pull a comment, let's do that right now.

[1:30:18] Don't go too far, Miss Samsung.

[1:30:21] We have Dr. Thorinado.

[1:30:27] Remember, November.

[1:30:29] Delaney tax increase is not tax relief.

[1:30:32] Let's stop calling this tax relief.

[1:30:35] 11 and a quarter percent of nearly 10 years

[1:30:37] is not relief.

[1:30:38] It's punishment for the people who can at least afford it.

[1:30:42] The reality is this, Mr. Law.

[1:30:45] In a city of more than 106,000 people,

[1:30:47] only about 27,000 people voted for measure P.D. 17%. The other 135,000 residents still

[1:30:55] get the bill. Let's stop pretending this is good news. It is simply moving the burden

[1:31:00] for today's families to tomorrow's families. The people of Palmedale have had enough. They

[1:31:06] are tired of paying more and getting less. Every year we hear the same message. More taxes,

[1:31:11] more fees, more government. Meanwhile working families are drowning under inflation, housing

[1:31:16] cost, utility bills, gas, groceries, and insurance.

[1:31:20] Pomdo already has one of the highest those tax in California, 11.25.

[1:31:25] When the country increases a tax effect, the residents will pay 11.75.

[1:31:30] Tell me why working with the Amazon Palmdale should pay higher sales tax than shoppers

[1:31:34] in some of the wealthiest communities in California.

[1:31:37] There is no good news because there is one.

[1:31:40] You call this delay?

[1:31:42] I call it admission.

[1:31:42] You know, the future tax increase are too much, they are too much today, there will be

[1:31:49] too much in 2035 and 2036.

[1:31:53] This council should stop asking taxpayers to solve every financial problem.

[1:31:59] Government has their responsibility to control spending before it reaches deeper into the

[1:32:02] pockets of working families.

[1:32:04] Families have already tied in their budget, it's time for City Health to tie in their own.

[1:32:08] To not tell us, to don't tell us, this is for benefit.

[1:32:12] to not ask us to celebrate a tax increase that has simply been placed on a shelf. We're

[1:32:18] not fooled by a different date on the calendar. The people of Palmdale deserve more

[1:32:22] than one higher sales tax rate in the highest sales sector in the United States. We deserve

[1:32:28] an economy where families can afford to shop in their own city without feeling punishment.

[1:32:33] People of Palmdale deserve a city council that earns public trust before asking another

[1:32:36] dollar.

[1:32:37] Thank you.

[1:32:39] We have Eugene Hernandez.

[1:32:42] Pass again.

[1:32:44] Anyone else with cards in?

[1:32:46] No.

[1:32:51] So I'm not an economist, but I spent a lot of time listening to that.

[1:32:56] I didn't Thomas Sol, who some of you may be familiar with.

[1:33:00] I think he would tell you that one of the things that's going on here,

[1:33:04] if you're not just the city council in the city staff of all these fees and taxes,

[1:33:08] but the county, which that's a whole lot I'd like to know how we fight the county and I mean

[1:33:13] what does this city do to fight the county but that's another discussion for another time.

[1:33:18] But what doesn't seem to be considered is the fact that if you keep raising fees and you keep

[1:33:23] raising taxes on the citizenry, eventually they leave. Everybody here knows many people probably at this

[1:33:30] point who have left for Texas, left for Tennessee, left for Florida and if you want to increase

[1:33:36] Tax revenues, the best way to do it is to broaden your tax base.

[1:33:41] It's not to tax them into oblivion to where they have to leave.

[1:33:45] This is actually counterproductive, and I would ask the council and the city staff and whoever

[1:33:50] else is involved in this to take that into consideration.

[1:33:53] When people can't afford to be here anymore, you won't get their tax dollars.

[1:33:58] Pretty simple.

[1:34:00] You know, you think that the math is, well, we need more money so tax the people more.

[1:34:04] That's not how the math really works, how it really works is people say I've had enough

[1:34:09] I'm going where I can afford to live. I moved to Palmdale my family did 25 years ago

[1:34:14] Because largely because it was more affordable. There were other reasons too, but that was a big one

[1:34:19] It's no longer the case

[1:34:21] And I don't want to leave Palmdale

[1:34:24] But if the people in charge keep you know putting these these bonus taxes on us

[1:34:30] I'm not gonna stay

[1:34:31] That may make some of you happy, but nevertheless, it shouldn't be that way.

[1:34:37] So please, anything you can do to relieve us of this.

[1:34:40] Do it.

[1:34:49] Taxes is not my forte, but when it starts impacting this part, it affects everybody I say,

[1:34:57] even Republicans.

[1:34:58] Having said that.

[1:35:00] We already know the state is 6%. We also know that 3.75 comes from District and County. And we also know that on

[1:35:10] October 1st is going to go up another 0.5%. Right? 0.50. When you put it all together, explain that to the young

[1:35:18] children here watching this. When you defer it for another seven years, right? It's going to impact

[1:35:30] So, this has long-term impacts, not just for future city councils, for families who had just

[1:35:36] got out of college and had trying to start their own family.

[1:35:39] So, the solution right now, in my opinion, is as Ms. Adagone eloquent said, and Mr.

[1:35:44] going on now, though, is, number one, stop sounding like it's a benefit for the taxpayers.

[1:35:49] Because it impacts this enfranchised and marginalized communities.

[1:35:55] people who want to make chains like yourselves in the city console want to present the right

[1:36:00] tax.

[1:36:01] Because I understand that in order to run a city, yeah, you need a tax.

[1:36:05] But this right here, the highest tax in California, how do you sell that to the average

[1:36:10] pair who's just trying to pay their rent?

[1:36:13] And by the way, they will be priced out.

[1:36:16] Because when you see this in public, guess what an owner of a property wants to do?

[1:36:21] Raise it again.

[1:36:22] And again, and again, and who's the one impact in the one who's just trying to live check to check and provide for their family.

[1:36:31] So I believe we have a console who has great common sense.

[1:36:35] You have two lawyers here and two other representatives can come to a solution that really looks out for the best interest of the everyday taxpayer here in Palmdale.

[1:36:45] Thank you.

[1:36:50] Please note.

[1:36:52] No clotting for taxes.

[1:36:54] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:36:54] to conclude Dr. Coronado's comments, the people of Palmdale deserve better than one of

[1:36:59] the highest sales tax rates in the United States. We deserve an economy where families

[1:37:03] can afford to shop in their own city without feeling punished at the cash register. The

[1:37:07] people of Palmdale deserve a city council that earns the public's trust before asking

[1:37:10] for another dollar. I am not asking you to delay these tax increases, I am asking you to

[1:37:15] repeal them. Bring Palmdale sales tax down to 10.25 like Malibu, where Larry Ellison

[1:37:21] worth more than $300 billion owns a home, or 9.75% like Beverly Hills, where Jeff Bezos

[1:37:28] worth more than $240 billion owns, one of the most expensive estates in America, or even

[1:37:33] 7.75% like Laguna Beach, where Lancaster Mayor, RX Terrace, chosen purchased a $6.6 million

[1:37:40] home.

[1:37:42] Apparently, the majority of the billionaires worth $100 billion is their lower sales taxes

[1:37:46] in the heart of your family is a palm deal.

[1:37:48] And Dr. Coronara reported to remember November.

[1:37:51] What I would like to add, Council,

[1:37:53] is that when we talk about the increase

[1:37:54] in the Latino community, there have been several reports

[1:37:57] regarding changes to federal integration enforcement.

[1:37:59] And the impact that has had on businesses in Los Angeles,

[1:38:02] where many of our residents are paying,

[1:38:04] excuse me, you formally employed, or are currently employed,

[1:38:07] in restaurants and commerce centers,

[1:38:10] where they don't have the foot traffic,

[1:38:11] and they don't have the revenue coming

[1:38:14] into their businesses the way they used to before.

[1:38:17] These people are also paying higher taxes.

[1:38:19] So when we talk about tax increases

[1:38:20] amongst the Latino community,

[1:38:22] we're not just looking at the city's taxes on paper,

[1:38:24] we're looking at the larger macroeconomic picture.

[1:38:27] And like Dr. Coronado says,

[1:38:28] if we have higher sales taxes in some of the wealthiest communities

[1:38:32] in California, then as a lifelong person

[1:38:34] who has refused to admit what party preference I have,

[1:38:38] I would, I would wager, I would agree with Mr. Lola

[1:38:41] and Mrs. Dutton Court.

[1:38:42] Thank you so much.

[1:38:50] Good afternoon, everyone.

[1:38:53] I'm a new resident in PAM though.

[1:38:55] I've been to the meeting of humble times.

[1:38:58] I watched the meeting from my house a couple of times.

[1:39:02] And it seems like taxes is just a popular word here.

[1:39:05] It's just every time taxes, taxes, taxes, but not lowering taxes and increasing taxes.

[1:39:10] And as a new resident, I'm not happy about it.

[1:39:13] Something is to happen.

[1:39:14] This only shows lack of leadership from all of you.

[1:39:20] This is just not okay.

[1:39:22] Something is to happen.

[1:39:24] I hope it happens soon as possible.

[1:39:26] There is no time to wait.

[1:39:27] There is time to waste.

[1:39:29] It is to happen.

[1:39:30] Thank you.

[1:39:32] Anyone else?

[1:39:33] Very yes.

[1:39:35] Since Mr. Olsen was kind enough to invite me to speak.

[1:39:39] well now they're proposing to defer a tax increase and people get up and speak

[1:39:47] against that. Have you all gone insane? Let's defer the taxes till 2050. Keep

[1:39:57] deferring them. This is a good thing for the-

[1:40:00] The residents. So I was astounded to hear people speak against deferring these tax increases. Thank you.

[1:40:10] All right.

[1:40:11] Oh, we got a medical visitor from my son and George White sites.

[1:40:15] Come on up.

[1:40:17] You want to speak on taxes?

[1:40:20] The forum.

[1:40:21] So you got a great event out there.

[1:40:23] Thank you

[1:40:31] very much.

[1:40:31] Thank you very much.

[1:40:32] Congress member White Sides. Thank you so much for coming out.

[1:40:40] Congress member, come up to the

[1:40:44] mic. Come up to the mic. Congress member, so the listening public can hear you, they can't hear you.

[1:40:52] And did you mean that? Yeah. Welcome. We're thrilled that you're here. Okay. I just wanted to say hello.

[1:40:58] And thank you for all you do for our community. And you got a great event outside. So yeah. Thank you.

[1:41:04] on George White's side's local carnage.

[1:41:06] No, okay.

[1:41:06] I mean, yeah.

[1:41:08] Thank you for the dollars that are coming our way as well.

[1:41:11] And maybe for working in a nonpartisan or bipartisan way with us, you know, it's

[1:41:17] always a battle in Washington, but here we're very local and we're comfortable working together.

[1:41:21] It's absolutely right.

[1:41:22] Thank you.

[1:41:23] And for those that aren't aware, whenever we go to DC, Congress member White

[1:41:26] size has an open door policy.

[1:41:29] He welcomes us.

[1:41:30] He sits with us.

[1:41:31] He doesn't just have us meet with staff.

[1:41:32] He sits with us personally. He understands and listens to all of our issues. We bring him binders of all of these funding requests

[1:41:39] And he actually reads them and he actually delivers and he's he's produced millions of dollars for our community

[1:41:46] So we owe a debt of gratitude to our Congressmember White. So thank you

[1:41:53] Okay, that was a little on north of Docs, but he has given this city a lot of money. So we'll allow it

[1:42:01] Wait, hold on.

[1:42:03] Is there anyone else that wishes to speak on this, because we'll have another chance

[1:42:06] of discussion here?

[1:42:07] Anyone else?

[1:42:08] Okay, we're closing public comment on this item.

[1:42:10] Go ahead.

[1:42:11] Thank you.

[1:42:11] So, I know that we missed the opportunity to get it on the ballot for the November election.

[1:42:16] But what is the next election that we could put that on the ballot?

[1:42:19] To actually repeal it, because this is the public has to repeal it, right?

[1:42:22] The next primary and the last one we do is stand the low in the election.

[1:42:25] Well, that was very, very, very costly.

[1:42:27] I know that it's very costly, but I'd like to see the numbers for special election, because

[1:42:32] you know, originally I came in on a special election years ago, years and years and years ago

[1:42:37] when Steve Knight stepped down. So I know that special elections can take place. I just don't know

[1:42:43] at what cost, I mean every. Why don't we include that in our analysis of where we're going to

[1:42:55] repeal this measure, right? We have to look at the fiscal impact.

[1:42:59] We can suspend it, like we're going to do now. And then, at the next election, we know we can't.

[1:43:05] Not the what's up. We suspend the future, but not what's already on the books. We need clarification for that.

[1:43:12] So, 2828 would be the soonest week of how the public voted.

[1:43:14] Yeah, no, I think what Councillor Wetton Court is suggesting is actually, I mean, she gets possible,

[1:43:18] whether it's the will and the council is another thing, but it's possible. We can do two things

[1:43:22] simultaneously, we can defer per second to the resolution that's presented to us today to 2035 and 2036.

[1:43:29] While we also explore the possibility and the financial ramifications of a repeal on both

[1:43:36] a special election and the next primary election.

[1:43:41] Okay, we could put all that in the analysis.

[1:43:43] I just want to say, like, there's a couple of different ways to look at this.

[1:43:46] So yes, Malibu has a lower tax rate, correct?

[1:43:50] sales tax rate, but they have higher home values, would you agree?

[1:43:57] Okay,

[1:43:59] so property tax is given to each city based on a percentage negotiated with the county at time of incorporation.

[1:44:09] The money we get from property tax is just a little over 6% of 1%.

[1:44:17] That's not very much money, so for cities like this, we unfortunately had to put it on the ballot to let the residents decide if they can help us cover some of these costs.

[1:44:29] Everybody here agrees that 11.25 and now coming in October 11.75 is an extremely egregious amount for people to pay.

[1:44:42] of that, Palmdale is getting 2.5. Most of it is going to the state, a majority of it

[1:44:49] is going to the county. So I understand the concern of the burden that it's putting on all

[1:44:54] of us, but what we've been able to do with that 2.5 is create the...

[1:45:00] Community Preservation Program. We're getting to a legal dumping in graffiti in 24 hours. We're starting to take care of some of the infrastructure issues that was not addressed by previous Councils.

[1:45:11] We are doing roads. We are doing a whole lot of things that was deferred. We have to take that on now. And I understand the burden it's costing everybody. But the question is, what are we doing to fight against the county? What are we doing to fight against the state?

[1:45:27] because it's easy for us to get y'all that about our 2.5 of 11.75.

[1:45:35] But I think the bigger argument might be, let's take the fight to the state in the county.

[1:45:39] Yes, 11.75 is egregious, but what services are we providing?

[1:45:45] $27 million worth? Do you want to cut?

[1:45:49] I think there's a couple of different ways to look at this, but I think we should approve this as is.

[1:45:56] We get the analysis on what we can do in the future and then bring it back with

[1:46:03] Those recommendations. Yes, Mr. Lowe. So

[1:46:08] City of Long Beach the sales tax there's 10.5%

[1:46:12] their face right now

[1:46:15] With a $58 million dollar budget deficit for the year 20 to 20 26 20 27

[1:46:22] So what's gonna happen there in order to meet that deficit?

[1:46:27] They're going to have to eliminate 413 positions in their city, and maybe that's a good thing, right?

[1:46:33] Because I don't know exactly my understanding of the way that the city of Palmdale is running,

[1:46:38] that positions are looked at very carefully, and we have an outstanding employee base.

[1:46:45] And I think that would be a difficult thing for us to do here, especially a lot of the fact that in 2001,

[1:46:53] I think our employment here was around 500 employees, and then because of recessionary periods

[1:47:00] that kicked in, it got reduced by over half, right?

[1:47:03] But it had terrible implications for services to the residents of Palmdale.

[1:47:08] I mean, we've got to consider that we need to deliver services to all of the residents

[1:47:13] of the city of Palmdale, regardless of where they are at, regardless of what their

[1:47:17] station is, what their status is, we have to deliver services across the board.

[1:47:22] So they're talking about eliminating 413 positions, including 260 direct layoffs, and so when we talk about eliminating these taxes,

[1:47:35] yes, they are painful, but yet what it has to translate into is services that are valuable to the community as Mr. Olson has just pointed out.

[1:47:48] Some of the things that are now being done because we've had these tax measures approved by the voters by the way

[1:47:55] We didn't approve them. This these measures went to the voters and the voters approved them

[1:48:00] Some have questioned whether the voters knew what they were doing. Well, I think that that's insulting

[1:48:06] Because I think that the voters do

[1:48:08] Look at the ballot and they do look at the measures and then they make a determination based on that information

[1:48:14] So we just have to keep in mind that because these two tax measures were passed and I'm all

[1:48:20] for deferring, I'm all for deferring this into eternity, but we have to take into consideration

[1:48:28] what would happen if we in fact repealed these two tax measures.

[1:48:32] And if it gets placed on the ballot in 2028 then you know they will have to be dealt with

[1:48:38] at that point.

[1:48:39] but consider the consequences of a, of a, of an action like that. That's all I have to say about that.

[1:48:44] So I just like to follow up points first to Councilmember Lois.

[1:48:49] The voters are smarter.

[1:48:52] Our city attorney sat here and told the voters, quote, this is not a tax.

[1:49:01] They, they supposed to believe the city attorney or not.

[1:49:03] I mean, what was portrayed to our residents, I think, was disingenuous and so for us to

[1:49:16] now sort of suggest that the voters are smart enough, but we've told them the Harper

[1:49:20] Murns told our voters that it was not a tax, expressly quote, this is not a tax.

[1:49:26] So I just want to be clear on that and then to follow up on Marylson's point about property tax in Malibu versus sales tax here.

[1:49:38] When this matter came before, I was clear, in the state legislative analysis, it says sales taxes are regressive taxes.

[1:49:47] They have the hardest impact on those who are cash-stacked.

[1:49:50] They're the ones that are renters.

[1:49:52] They're the ones that are filing petitions and mobile homes

[1:49:57] because they're concerned about a $50 rent increase.

[1:50:00] Not the property owners. If we would have done an income tax as a different thing, but what was implemented was a regressive sales tax. It's the lowest economic factor in our community, the hardest.

[1:50:15] And so I just want to make sure we're clear on what was presented to our community and how it was, and I just don't want there to be misconceptions in sort of revisionist history on what was before the voters.

[1:50:30] So, I agree the previous city attorney said that this is not a new tax, and I guess we

[1:50:38] can argue semantics.

[1:50:41] He probably would suggest it's not a new tax mechanism, but the end result did lead to

[1:50:48] an increased tax, and when I bought into that at the time, I wrote the four to encourage

[1:50:57] people to vote for this tax, and I repeated that saying that this is not a new tax, but

[1:51:02] the end result was a tax increase, so I apologize for my statement encouraging people to vote

[1:51:10] for that.

[1:51:15] It was wrong.

[1:51:18] So now that we know it was wrong, let's fix the wrong. Let's get it done. We can get it done.

[1:51:23] I think there's a way we acknowledge the wrong. Let's fix it. Let's rectify it now.

[1:51:29] I think we will see if I'm there.

[1:51:35] I think we approve this now.

[1:51:37] We bring back what we can do in the future on what has already been implemented.

[1:51:43] That's my motion.

[1:51:44] Can we get a cost analysis of what the special election would cost.

[1:51:47] Right, so I'll go in the analysis.

[1:51:50] I'll move to adopt the proposed resolution tonight to defer.

[1:51:56] The 0.5 remainder of the implementation of measure PD, the first 0.25 to 2035 and the second

[1:52:05] 0.25 to 2036, while simultaneously directing staff in the city attorney to provide

[1:52:12] and working with our financial department to provide a financial analysis on the implications

[1:52:18] of a full repeal, but also the cost and timelines for putting a repeal measure on either

[1:52:26] a special ballot or an upcoming primary general election.

[1:52:29] And that will, that study will include the budgetary impacts as well.

[1:52:34] Well, that was the motion I made.

[1:52:36] I just wanted to be clear and say all of that.

[1:52:38] My motion, and her second, all in favor say aye, and you want to pose passes unanimously.

[1:52:45] Do you want to do your city manager report now or you want to wait until after these council discussions?

[1:52:52] Let's go council discussions, 9.1, discussion on oversight procedures for city manager position.

[1:52:59] Councilman Raleckon asked for this to be on the agenda, so I will let her start.

[1:53:05] All right, so we've got a couple of these on.

[1:53:08] I actually was just overall was hoping that there would be some semblance of a staff report.

[1:53:13] I think I handed, I submitted formal motions for both the City Manager City Attorney and so I would have and I requested that a staff report be provided on the defibrillator 9.3 item. None of that was afforded, so that's slightly disappointing but in any case I'm happy to present my items 9.1, so the 9.1 specific to the City Manager.

[1:53:41] So the Palmeda Municipal Code specifically dictates that the city manager works under the direction and not the pleasure of the city council.

[1:53:49] Yet there currently exists very few if any oversight mechanisms for the city manager.

[1:53:55] Essentially the city manager approves his own, there is a process and there are subordinates who approve certain expense reimbursements and charges to the city.

[1:54:09] But there are subordinates to the city manager, which creates a conflict that puts the subordinate in a precarious position to call into question any of those expenses of your loss.

[1:54:24] And outside of that sort of internal process, there really exists no oversight mechanisms.

[1:54:30] There's also the City Manager has the authority to enter into contracts unilaterally on his own up to $125,000.

[1:54:39] Doesn't have to bring it to the Council, ever? Doesn't have to tell us after he had their executed?

[1:54:44] So we don't know when those contracts are entered into. I find that to be problematic.

[1:54:53] So these deficiencies have gotten us into some very costly legal hot water.

[1:54:58] And we're all cl-

[1:55:00] Here on on historically what this city has paid because of prior misconduct in the city management position. But unfortunately, those practices still continue today. I submitted, not the public records request that I have had the lawsuit based on, I submitted an additional public records request specific to city managers expenditures.

[1:55:27] And there was a delay in getting those documents, I got a two binder, I had to print them out because there were 65 PDFs of them and I printed them out and I have two huge binders there here and I went through them with a fine tooth comb and a lot of the practices that put us in that legal hot water but still are occurring today.

[1:55:50] I do this specifically because I want to make sure that we are addressing the structural

[1:56:01] problems so that we can provide the oversight necessary to ensure that our taxpayer dollars

[1:56:07] are protected.

[1:56:09] So expense reimbursements, travel, hotel rooms.

[1:56:13] There was an expenditure at the Renaissance Hotel in Palm Springs where the city manager

[1:56:19] to use taxpayer dollars to pay for an over $1,000

[1:56:23] at night hotel room.

[1:56:25] And an over $200 bar tab at the hotel

[1:56:28] lobby cocktail lounge.

[1:56:30] Two days later, he's in Vegas staying at the Trump hotel

[1:56:36] in an $800 night room.

[1:56:40] And then flights to get to these fancy hotels.

[1:56:44] He booked flights in the main cabin seats.

[1:56:47] But then, so those are the regular rates, right, for regular folks, then he upgraded his seats to essentially double the price.

[1:56:59] Public servants don't get to upgrade on taxpayer dime.

[1:57:04] And then there are the elaborate meals, $500 lunches in Long Beach, $700 dinners in Vegas.

[1:57:10] countless meals, and on the expense reimbursement, it says meals with, and it's

[1:57:16] underscores, meal lunch with, working lunch with consultant, working lunch with

[1:57:21] developer. Well, that's concerning for a variety of reasons. I mean, the

[1:57:25] conflicts of interest that are presented when you meet with consultants or meet

[1:57:29] with developers, I mean, raise red flags all over the place. We shouldn't be

[1:57:34] paying for lunches with select consultants and select developers, but even though

[1:57:39] There were many undisclosed consultants and developers that were a couple that I found.

[1:57:45] One of which, a lunch with a consultant, none other than with Willden Engineering, which is the firm that I've been raising over and over and over again in the past several months.

[1:57:58] Why are we having lunch with Willden when we're awarding contract after contract ever contract with them?

[1:58:04] Why are we having lunches with developers feel Terry and Daniel Singh?

[1:58:10] Are we meeting with every, every, every other developer?

[1:58:13] I don't, I just doesn't make any sense to me.

[1:58:17] And then to make matters worse, I found other lunches,

[1:58:21] the, the million-dollar auto-mallagrements,

[1:58:23] were all negotiated at lunches that we paid for.

[1:58:27] And then, the same for AV edge.

[1:58:29] On top of the $300,000 that we give them,

[1:58:32] We're paying for lunches with AVH2.

[1:58:35] I mean, they're also council,

[1:58:37] it was listed as council club rentals

[1:58:40] at the NLA Valley Country Club,

[1:58:42] presumably for golf club renters, rentals.

[1:58:45] I mean, tax payer shouldn't be paying for golf club rentals.

[1:58:48] I mean, this is just a flavorant waste of taxpayer dollars,

[1:58:51] and it must be stopped.

[1:58:53] I'd like to hear from public comment on,

[1:58:56] on their suggestions on how we as a council

[1:58:58] should manage and implement some,

[1:59:01] I think some pretty necessary, but strict oversight mechanisms for the opposite of the city manager.

[1:59:08] But there's a laundry list of things that we can do, but I think we just, we've got to do something and we've got to act now.

[1:59:14] This is not agenda is for public comment. Council reports and announcements request for future agenda has never been agenda is for public comment.

[1:59:20] I'm not going to allow it now because I think we need to get those back straight.

[1:59:25] We shouldn't proceed in the way that you're proceeding. I think that

[1:59:30] Yes, we should know exactly what's being spent, but I think that you're creating liability here

[1:59:37] I'm creating liability the liability exists already. Why are we spending a thousand dollars at a hotel?

[1:59:42] Why are we authorizing those expenses being authorized?

[1:59:48] This is for council discussion

[1:59:50] It doesn't matter, it's an agenda, it's an item like...

[1:59:56] You don't need to have...

[1:59:59] You don't need to...

[2:00:02] I mean, whether we could argue legally all day and then whenever you take me to the mat, I step right up and I will hold this city accountable because there need to be active measures to control the taxpayer dollars.

[2:00:23] Why can't we just listen to the people?

[2:00:25] Why?

[2:00:26] We're not going to public comment.

[2:00:27] Why?

[2:00:28] Do you have...

[2:00:29] No.

[2:00:31] Because I'm afraid the liability equates to this city.

[2:00:33] We're not doing it.

[2:00:34] The liability equates to here from the public.

[2:00:36] Do you have a solution?

[2:00:37] Because we're moving on.

[2:00:38] The liability equates.

[2:00:39] What liability?

[2:00:40] Please are taking the liability equates to allow the public to comment on there.

[2:00:43] Give us their feedback on how we should provide oversight.

[2:00:46] Because you clearly invited people to come here to speak.

[2:00:50] This is political grandstand in and I think the liability the liability comes from this

[2:00:57] Okay, yeah, okay

[2:01:00] But let it pass you know public comment tonight though

[2:01:04] Political grandstanding is what you did with the Amar's mayor, but you

[2:01:07] How could you shut down the opportunity for the public top to provide their vote? We're done with that. Do you want to move on to 9.2 what do you mean?

[2:01:13] We're done with that

[2:01:15] That we have done nothing with that. We're not doing public comment

[2:01:18] Do you want to continue the item?

[2:01:23] I'm going to go found just by Google.

[2:01:33] It's going to be a costly one.

[2:01:37] How much bad legal advisor we need to get from our perverse.

[2:01:40] Enough.

[2:01:52] Do we have to take public comment yesterday?

[2:01:55] No.

[2:01:55] It's a discussion item on the agenda for council.

[2:01:57] We're moving on.

[2:01:58] Trash.

[2:02:04] If I'm wrong.

[2:02:05] 9.2.

[2:02:06] You'll deal with it if you're wrong.

[2:02:08] Just like you said, you're quote with measure PD.

[2:02:10] You said, if the voters don't like it, it's on me.

[2:02:13] It is on you, Eric, and it's time for you to step up and take action.

[2:02:18] Do something, but having a discussion, but no action, because you guys agendized it that way,

[2:02:23] and you guys think that we're precluded from taking action or from hearing from our public, is completely preposterous.

[2:02:29] 9.2?

[2:02:33] 9.2? 9.2 is the word I'm not going to do anything.

[2:02:34] I'm just going to continue to talk about all of its wrong, but 9.2 is self-explanatory.

[2:02:40] We're getting bad legal advice.

[2:02:43] I don't know why you guys continue to pursue the litigation on the CPRA, my public records

[2:02:51] request on City Attorney Billing, which I won, which now is costing the City $190,000

[2:02:57] on my end, $124,000 on the City's end.

[2:03:01] That's ridiculous amount of money on legal expenditures.

[2:03:05] The City Attorney continues to provide faulty legal advice.

[2:03:09] The staff reports are terrible.

[2:03:13] I went to a measure A.V. meeting and she was literally on the table like this and constantly

[2:03:19] on her cell phone. I mean, we went out. I thought we directed that we were going to go out

[2:03:25] to replace our city attorney. I don't know where that process stands, but something is

[2:03:33] to be done. I mean, enough of the bad legal advice that continues to cost this city millions.

[2:03:39] If we open that process, the application period for applicants closes on the night, and then we

[2:03:45] will set a special meeting to interview those guys.

[2:03:48] If I wanted to have a conversation with you, Eric, I would have just called you.

[2:03:51] I want to hear from the people.

[2:03:53] Okay.

[2:03:53] But we're not doing that here on this item the way it's agenda is.

[2:03:57] Why not?

[2:03:57] 9.3.

[2:04:01] 9.3.

[2:04:03] 9.3.

[2:04:05] 9.3.

[2:04:06] 9.3.

[2:04:11] 9.3.

[2:04:12] 9.3.

[2:04:12] All

[2:04:18] right. Well on a much lighter note, well not lighter. It's a heavier heavier emotionally, but but I think equally important. I don't know if some of you have may have seen my post on on Facebook.

[2:04:33] But when my brother Richie at the age of three was in a car accident in North Hollywood and at the time there were no pediatric trauma care centers in that area.

[2:04:43] He had to be teleported from North Hollywood to Children's Hospital of L.A., and that process took

[2:04:51] over an hour. What's called the Golden Hour? As soon as the time immediately following the impact of

[2:04:58] drama.

[2:05:00] And so, unfortunately, the following day, he passed. Now, my father ultimately served in the California State Senate. And while he was there, he passed legislation called Richie's bill. My brother's name was Richie. He passed Richie's bill. And what it does is it generates funds. Those EMB fees and registration licensing fees that everybody hates, that that up after you get your bill. And then you're like, oh, no, what's that added on?

[2:05:29] It's one of those, there's several of them, but it's one of those fees, and those fees compile

[2:05:36] and are distributed statewide to establish pediatric trauma care centers across the state.

[2:05:43] As a result of Richiesville, Northridge Hospital opened its first pediatric trauma care center in the San Fernando Valley,

[2:05:53] which would have been able to service my brother, but now is thankfully able to save lives

[2:05:59] of millions in the San Fernando Valley. All that to say, there's so much that we can do to save

[2:06:07] lives here we can do our part. In my district, I think the slightly over a month ago, a seven-year-old boy

[2:06:15] I had a hard attack, essentially had cardiac arrest on a playground in my district at a school.

[2:06:26] And it got me to think, what can we do to help?

[2:06:29] We can't control what happens at schools, and particularly at the private school, where

[2:06:33] he was attending, but we can do something on city property.

[2:06:37] We can provide defibrillators and make sure that staff are properly trained at all of our parks,

[2:06:45] at all of our rec centers, at Dry Town, at Legacy Commons, at all of the various city properties.

[2:06:54] And I asked for staff to do an analysis of which facilities we could, we have, like an inventory of the facilities that we have,

[2:07:04] where we could potentially install a defibrillator

[2:07:08] and the cost of a defibrillator itself

[2:07:12] is only $157 and training, I think,

[2:07:17] would also be diminished, but the value.

[2:07:20] I mean, saving one life alone, I think is well worth it.

[2:07:23] And if we're talking about a meaningful expenditure

[2:07:28] of taxpayer dollars for me, and I think for our community,

[2:07:32] this is one.

[2:07:33] And so I'd like to propose that we move forward with the implementation, the purchase, and

[2:07:40] the implementation installation of defibrillators at all of our city properties that I've

[2:07:46] listed in others that, even if I, if I, if I've omitted them that they be included as

[2:07:52] well as a subsequent training for all of our staff on how to use those defibrillators.

[2:08:01] No, you're not letting me make a motion, you're not letting people talk, I don't know.

[2:08:06] I would love that idea, let me just say that since we're just guessing that.

[2:08:11] No, it's on.

[2:08:12] Oh, sorry.

[2:08:13] I guess I'm too quiet.

[2:08:14] No, I think that's a great idea.

[2:08:16] I know that you and I a couple weeks ago were looking for medical kits and stuff inside

[2:08:19] City Hall.

[2:08:21] And we couldn't find the defubilators, we didn't find the medical kits and it's like we

[2:08:25] to get on our game here because I've been rushed to the hospital more times than I care for.

[2:08:30] And it might be one of our council members, maybe my life one day. I haven't had a heart attack yet,

[2:08:34] but you know, the stress sometimes gets to you. So I think everybody needs to be trained. I don't think

[2:08:40] just the staff. I think the council needs to be trained. I would actually like to have the public

[2:08:46] classes because like at the school or at a park, what if there's no staff available and you just

[2:08:51] have someone they're going, what do I do with this thing?

[2:08:55] I would be nice to offer that kind of training to everyone.

[2:08:58] Every minute counts, the reason I'm still talking

[2:09:01] is because I had paramedic rescue within, you know,

[2:09:06] very short period of time, the rescue is right across the street.

[2:09:09] And they got me to the hospital very, very quickly.

[2:09:11] And they got me to a stroke hospital.

[2:09:12] So I was able to save my brain.

[2:09:15] But every single minute counts, I'm sorry to hear about your brother.

[2:09:18] Thank you.

[2:09:18] And he's still saving lives and he's our little angel.

[2:09:21] Well, I guess I'm confused because when we had discussions, preliminary discussions, at the

[2:09:28] former meeting where we took a vote to agendize the items, I specifically said an action

[2:09:34] item.

[2:09:35] Why did you guys just do this to play Kate Me into sort of trick me and tricking the listening

[2:09:42] public to think that we're going to do something more or not?

[2:09:45] I mean, what is the value of having three discussions we've already had?

[2:09:49] we voted to put these items on the agenda last meeting and we have the similar discussions then

[2:09:56] we're doing it again now but we're according to your...

[2:10:00] Reaction, we're precluded from taking action, we're precluded from hearing from public comment. What is the purpose of these in?

[2:10:06] You asked for it to come back as a council discussion, and that's what we're doing.

[2:10:10] No, as an action item.

[2:10:11] No, as an action item.

[2:10:11] As an action item, what I wanted to talk about.

[2:10:15] Motion was for discussion for the last ones. However, we are in council actions and request for future agendas.

[2:10:23] So if there is a request for a future agenda action item, it can be brought forward at this time with a motion in a second.

[2:10:31] I'll make the motion to bring back for the defibrillator to be able to vote on that because I think that's very, very important to the public health and safety of this community.

[2:10:40] So that would be my motion to bring it back as an agenda item that we can vote on.

[2:10:44] Thank you. I'm happy to move that.

[2:10:47] and I'm glad at least I can just I just I we've already did it. I will go back in and look at the look at the videos and I hope that everybody else does too.

[2:10:56] This is really ridiculous, Eric.

[2:10:58] Okay, I want to post that.

[2:11:02] And that's that's that's nine point three are we're not doing anything on nine one and nine two we're just going to like let the city manager and the city attorney exists with no oversight mechanisms.

[2:11:15] Do you have a specific request to bring back an action item?

[2:11:19] I already did that. I actually had them printed. I wrote out my motions last time and I submitted them.

[2:11:24] I submitted them.

[2:11:26] To you and to the city managers in the city as any clerk.

[2:11:30] They were in writing. They were printed out.

[2:11:34] I had them prepared. So I don't know.

[2:11:35] I know that I have personally asked for face to face.

[2:11:40] As spreadsheet or something, something to keep me notified of anything, any contract signed

[2:11:47] that's over $100,000 because we're responsible as a Council for that money and we need

[2:11:52] to be able to track it, to monitor it, and to know what as soon as it happens.

[2:11:59] So I'm hoping that City Manager is going to work on that and get us maybe a monthly list

[2:12:03] or, you know, quarterly list of all the things that he has spent over $100,000 on.

[2:12:11] So, I guess I'll move again to have both out of 9192 comeback as action items.

[2:12:21] Okay, we can do that, but when it comes back, the action item will be completely thought out, right?

[2:12:28] I had it already thought out. It had points with quarterly reports and everything.

[2:12:32] I did not get that.

[2:12:33] And then your request was to bring back a discussion.

[2:12:36] So that's what it is.

[2:12:37] We could table these and go to a close session and come back.

[2:12:39] And I can print them out for you.

[2:12:41] And we can then take action on them.

[2:12:44] If that's what you like.

[2:12:44] I don't want you to go to something me read it.

[2:12:46] And then you can do that.

[2:12:47] No, everything is not what you are there.

[2:12:49] And I have a can do attitude here.

[2:12:53] What are you doing?

[2:12:54] OK.

[2:12:54] We're not playing baseball.

[2:12:58] OK.

[2:12:59] Yeah, the elections in November everybody's aware.

[2:13:02] Fantastic.

[2:13:03] So again, we're not going to do anything.

[2:13:04] Yes, we can bring them back as action items and then we'll discuss it and vote on that.

[2:13:09] If I want to have in front of me the clear path of what you're suggesting, the way that I understood it is we had a discussion.

[2:13:16] We asked the city manager, can you provide us with monthly or quarterly emails outlining everything that you signed under your discretionary?

[2:13:24] The answer was yes. I would like to see those emails. It should start.

[2:13:29] If we want to bring that as an action item to vote on, let's do that.

[2:13:33] That was it first of all, when I requested that last meeting.

[2:13:38] I raised the issue at, in my time, under council request for future agenda items.

[2:13:45] We are not permitted to take action then.

[2:13:49] So for you to say that you directed the emails and all these other things that could not

[2:13:54] procedurally happen, what happened at the last meeting was I read into the record and it

[2:14:00] of specific motion items, I said therefore moved to and I wrote them out and I handed them

[2:14:08] out, maybe you guys trashed them because clearly there seems to be no concern or no urgency

[2:14:12] for this, but I was very specific with what I wanted on the agenda which would be an action item

[2:14:20] to bring it back as an action item, not as a discussion item and you can't just go ahead and change

[2:14:25] when the council votes to bring it back, you can't just change it. I didn't change anything,

[2:14:29] This agenda was not prepared by me.

[2:14:32] I asked this question everybody.

[2:14:35] So then everybody remember the same way that it was asked to come back for it.

[2:14:38] The next question goes to the city attorney and the city manager.

[2:14:43] Why is this a discussion item on all three of them?

[2:14:46] Discussion items only when I specifically wrote out printed and handed to everyone.

[2:14:52] My motions with included action items.

[2:14:55] I did not get a copy of the motion.

[2:14:57] I'm also not responsible for the open session.

[2:15:00] agenda, but I do recall that the requested motions were for discussions, and I specifically remember

[2:15:07] Mayor Protem Bishop asking a question in the response being these are just for discussion.

[2:15:13] That being said, this is how they are placed on the agenda. Again, if council would like to

[2:15:18] have them to a future agenda, it requires a motion to a second, and we need some sort of clear

[2:15:24] action as to what what is the item going to be. And I think it gets confusing when you say

[2:15:30] something big and ambiguous like oversight procedures. I wrote it out so I will resend it to

[2:15:36] everybody involved. I think that would be helpful. There were two like motions. One was

[2:15:42] specific to the city attorney and one was specific to the city manager. So all of a sudden they all

[2:15:47] disappeared. I know I went because I didn't want to print them here because I didn't want you guys.

[2:15:52] There's so much internal strife that people don't understand happens behind the scenes.

[2:15:59] I went to kinkles to print them out.

[2:16:00] So I know, I pay for them personally.

[2:16:03] I know they were here.

[2:16:05] So all of a sudden, nobody has them.

[2:16:14] See, imagine it's a report.

[2:16:19] There's still no clear action.

[2:16:21] I mean, I'm with the council would like for us to do on 9192.

[2:16:23] If there's no action, there's no action, but right now we don't have any clear action.

[2:16:27] Okay, the pending motion on the floor, we didn't vote.

[2:16:31] We'll make the motion, and we'll make the second.

[2:16:34] I think it is to be just, well, we have a discussion, but I want to see her.

[2:16:39] You know, we all agree that there needs to be oversight, but I don't think that we all agree that you just draft something,

[2:16:45] bring it back, and then we'll all agree with that.

[2:16:47] I think we should all have input on what we want to oversight.

[2:16:49] I didn't suggest that.

[2:16:51] I've drafted it as a template, which is what you guys all are asking for, that there be something

[2:16:55] something expressly written out some actual action plan, a clear action plan, I did that work already.

[2:17:02] I gave it to everybody and now it's somehow disappeared and now we're back at the discussion stage.

[2:17:09] I will again read it and resummit it to everybody, which includes very clear.

[2:17:16] But what I did say at the last council meeting was these are not exclusive.

[2:17:21] Like if because there were other things that people were suggesting you wanted emails and you wanted some other I don't remember

[2:17:27] Remember everything that you guys are suggesting I said this is just the bare minimum of what I would like to to consider at the next meeting

[2:17:33] All suggestions are welcome and then we can take we can consider them all together and

[2:17:39] Defide which ones we actually want to implement that was the plan

[2:17:43] But I'm happy to do it now again. So the motion is on the floor to bring back as action items

[2:17:51] I don't know, actually on which specific oversight mechanisms to implement for both the city manager and the city attorney.

[2:18:01] I'll second your motion.

[2:18:02] I'll favor say aye.

[2:18:03] Aye.

[2:18:04] You know what I pose?

[2:18:05] No.

[2:18:05] We'll bring it back.

[2:18:08] Okay.

[2:18:08] City manager report.

[2:18:12] Members of the council.

[2:18:13] We have three events coming up this month.

[2:18:17] Actually today we have national might outpumps it on square.

[2:18:21] It will be going until 830.

[2:18:22] So we have time to go out there.

[2:18:24] Please go out there and enjoy it.

[2:18:26] Also, a summer concert series has two concerts coming up this month,

[2:18:29] one on Friday, August 7th, which will feature war.

[2:18:33] And the other one on Saturday, August 22nd,

[2:18:36] will feature drum roll.

[2:18:37] And that's it.

[2:18:38] Thank you.

[2:18:39] We're moving on to item 10, close session.

[2:18:42] Now is the time for public comments related

[2:18:45] to the closed session items.

[2:18:48] If you have a comment related to those items,

[2:18:51] Were there any slips?

[2:18:53] Yes.

[2:18:54] Wow.

[2:18:55] Yes, Mayor.

[2:18:56] We have Kevin Shankman discussing 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3.

[2:19:01] So really quickly, I want to say I'm really impressed that there's bipartisan support

[2:19:06] for getting rid of the sales tax, Democrats, because it's regressive Republicans,

[2:19:10] I guess, because it's any tax at all.

[2:19:13] Now, this item, I can only guess as to what the anticipated litigation is.

[2:19:18] So I'm going to guess that it's about recovering expenses from the city manager.

[2:19:23] I have heard quite a bit about the city demanding $1,100 back from Council Member Alarcon

[2:19:29] that were spent out of discretionary funds for bikes for kids, $10, $1,100.

[2:19:35] That seems like a perfectly appropriate use of discretionary funds.

[2:19:38] For that same amount of money, what did the city get from city manager sale mendas?

[2:19:43] He spent one night at a hotel, including Trumputel branded hotels, and how do we find this

[2:19:53] out through a public records act request?

[2:19:55] Not a council member saying, hey, turn it over because I have oversight, responsibility

[2:19:58] of the city manager.

[2:20:00] Let me see the stuff. No, had to go through months of a public records act request. That is crazy. Now, what we have

[2:20:07] seen in those public records is some stuff that like rivals Robert Rizzo in the city of Bell.

[2:20:17] I would

[2:20:17] have thought that this council would have learned from the Rhonda Perez fiasco, but maybe not. And in

[2:20:24] of a humble proposal I have one for you.

[2:20:29] Bring back as an action item that whenever a city council member requests records from the city

[2:20:37] manager or city attorney regarding their billings, their reimbursements, their expenses,

[2:20:43] that it must be provided to that council member promptly.

[2:20:48] Now, put it putting over to the discretion of the city manager in the city attorney items

[2:20:54] about oversight of the city manager in the city attorney isn't saying now Eric I know

[2:20:59] this is difficult to run a meeting okay I get it I run commission meetings in

[2:21:03] Malibu but when you're getting advice that's trash it makes it all the more

[2:21:08] difficult thank you the city attorney recruitment process closes on the night

[2:21:13] put in

[2:21:18] put in I would I would okay next we have you Jean Hernandez on 10.1

[2:21:27] One thing is very, very obvious today, is that we need to fire the legal firm that has

[2:21:35] been corrupted since William was there, and they give bad legal advice, and we can go with

[2:21:42] them anymore.

[2:21:43] And we have to get rid of Mendus, just like run the bettas for you to spend thousands of dollars

[2:21:50] of our tax money for your hotel, who knows whether you hired street walkers to be with you?

[2:21:58] How would that sound?

[2:21:59] How would it be to a class that you do it?

[2:22:01] Don't interrupt me.

[2:22:02] How is that related to the closed session?

[2:22:04] It's relating, you know, you did a poor job tonight, you acted like a fool, you silence

[2:22:10] people, and you should resign as the city councilman, do us a favor.

[2:22:16] Next.

[2:22:17] We have Marcos Alvarez.

[2:22:23] All right.

[2:22:26] I've been to the events of where we suddenly

[2:22:28] go and had a park over on 30th street east

[2:22:31] and have a new art.

[2:22:34] And what the pushing pull is to ask her to give back

[2:22:39] 1100 dollars over your own discretionary fund is outrageous.

[2:22:43] Because when you go out there,

[2:22:45] you were there by the way, Eric.

[2:22:47] You showed up and you took a picture and you were gone

[2:22:49] in less than five minutes, respectfully.

[2:22:51] Having said that, thousands of children were very happy.

[2:22:56] So to me, that's money well spent

[2:22:58] than something over in Palm Springs or wherever

[2:23:01] was that on a hotel.

[2:23:03] So do the math, right?

[2:23:04] So I would hope that they back off, wherever

[2:23:07] is asking for that money, and double it.

[2:23:10] Double the discretionary fund on the way it's been spent

[2:23:13] such as misaladacon, okay?

[2:23:15] Thank you.

[2:23:19] Council, when we were here last month to discuss the placing the election of the mayor back

[2:23:25] on the ballot, we were treated to a social studies lesson about different forms of city

[2:23:29] government.

[2:23:30] There reminded me a lot of Ms. Mastari in my elementary school at Sunnydale.

[2:23:34] I'm wondering if the structural issue is in the structure of government in the city.

[2:23:37] And if it's not an opportunity that we have, if we survive the ballot in November, and any challenges

[2:23:42] to the implementation of a not large elected mayor, might we not have the opportunity to change

[2:23:49] the current system of our council so that there is a different role for the city manager than

[2:23:54] what we have now. And so what we're doing is introducing complexity to the council, we're going

[2:23:58] to introduce even number voting to this council. How do we, can you make it relevant to the

[2:24:05] As you consider in close session,

[2:24:08] potential exposure to litigation,

[2:24:10] I would question whether that item might not be

[2:24:13] any concerns about the future

[2:24:15] at large in your elections.

[2:24:16] And as we talk about oversight of the manager's position,

[2:24:21] introducing the position is an opportunity

[2:24:23] to go ahead and address the issue

[2:24:25] that Council has with the current city manager,

[2:24:28] which I believe is structural,

[2:24:30] and clearly it's not working.

[2:24:34] And I just hope the item is in a brown-like light.

[2:24:35] Congratulations. Thank you.

[2:24:39] Ranzu Guerrero.

[2:24:46] Good afternoon. My name is Ranza Guerrero.

[2:24:48] First I want to say so thank you so much to Miss Andrea.

[2:24:51] I feel like you were the only person with a backbone

[2:24:53] and it's entire chamber other than the citizens here behind me.

[2:24:57] So I'm very proud of you for that.

[2:24:58] I think it's insane.

[2:25:00] I'm 18 years old, and I have a bigger backbone than any of you here. I respect both of you completely, but you are quiet. You are quiet while you hear that city manager is clearly not using the money that he is given for what it is used for. It is needed for. He is using it for a nefarious intentions. No one should be using that money to be in Las Vegas. You're working California, sir. What are you doing in Las Vegas?

[2:25:24] to the items listed on the agenda, let me just be clear.

[2:25:29] So the part of the problem is the way that it's agenda is,

[2:25:32] it's ambiguous on what the anticipated litigation could be.

[2:25:36] So it could be anything.

[2:25:37] These people can talk about whatever,

[2:25:38] because who knows what the anticipated litigation is,

[2:25:41] because it's so improper.

[2:25:42] Exactly, and this is my time, Mr. Eric, so I'll continue.

[2:25:46] If it's relevant to this, you are a public servant.

[2:25:49] You are a public servant, and she's the only one acting

[2:25:51] like a public servant in this room.

[2:25:53] You're a public servant. You work for me. You work for everyone in this room.

[2:25:57] You work for council, please.

[2:25:58] You work for everyone in this room.

[2:25:59] And I expect you to act that way. I'm 18 years old.

[2:26:03] I'm going to vote in November. You keep saying,

[2:26:06] Oh, yeah, I know November as the election year,

[2:26:09] then act like it.

[2:26:10] I want you to act like it.

[2:26:12] I want you to say, I want you to do.

[2:26:14] I want your actions to match what you say

[2:26:16] because you've said continuously.

[2:26:18] You care about the people of Palmdale.

[2:26:19] Then act like it.

[2:26:21] Because I don't care about a spreadsheet.

[2:26:22] Google spreadsheet. He's already done actions in the past that have shown us that he's not using

[2:26:28] his money correctly, and I expect you to go back and investigate. I expect you as the attorney

[2:26:34] of this council of this city to investigate and to actually provide for the people of Palmdale.

[2:26:42] Thank you so much for your time.

[2:26:44] Next.

[2:26:45] Rafael Correro.

[2:26:55] What are we going to say?

[2:26:56] I'm a pro that.

[2:26:57] That's my daughter.

[2:26:58] I'm very proud.

[2:26:59] She will be in American University this August.

[2:27:02] She's going to be just four years over there.

[2:27:05] Starting in the initial relations.

[2:27:10] And what's the other one?

[2:27:11] And what are you talking about?

[2:27:13] Ten one.

[2:27:15] This is referring to the city attorney.

[2:27:17] I hope you do a good job.

[2:27:18] And on your agenda.

[2:27:21] Just wishing you well.

[2:27:22] And it's kind of disappointing to see the behavior today.

[2:27:30] I was not expecting it, this is new to me.

[2:27:33] Nobody invited me here.

[2:27:35] I come here every time.

[2:27:37] You see me here.

[2:27:38] You made a reference saying that she invited people here.

[2:27:44] I'm here every time.

[2:27:45] I'm here every time.

[2:27:48] I'm very disappointed.

[2:27:49] I really hope that you realize that all of you work for us, the community, and we are not being

[2:27:58] represented, but we need all of you to be accountable, very important, and like everyone

[2:28:07] has mentioned it, we are going to see each other in November.

[2:28:10] Thank you.

[2:28:11] Next.

[2:28:11] I choose two tiers.

[2:28:16] Which item are you speaking of?

[2:28:17] 10-1. I was in the right here. I was just walking by. I was going to go enjoy the national

[2:28:24] thing. Speaking of 10-1, I just got to remind you guys to do your fiduciary duties and remind

[2:28:33] you to be ethical. I don't really like to talk because when I talk, I call a spade of spade and

[2:28:43] people don't like that so I'm just going to keep it short and what I heard I wasn't aware of

[2:28:49] I haven't been to the knees in a while but it's just I don't know I'm just strolling by and

[2:28:55] what I hear I didn't like but especially for you Eric you know like give us the time to speak

[2:29:02] because this is it is in our constitution you know I love the second amendment as well you know

[2:29:07] Like so that's how I got to remind you fiduciary duties and unethical. You have a great day

[2:29:16] X

[2:29:18] Anyone okay, we're closing public comment. I'm just gonna say two things

[2:29:28] Okay,

[2:29:32] well, they figured that out. I just want to say I

[2:29:35] always invite everybody to come to our meetings because the more public participation

[2:29:39] the better, and I've been doing that, I've been the biggest advocate on this council

[2:29:43] for public participation, so I don't know, Eric, why you think that this is political

[2:29:48] grant standing, it's time that our voices are heard, and so I've asked the community to come out

[2:29:53] and speak their truth, and so I'm appreciative of every single one of you who came out here, whether

[2:29:57] I know you, or just me, I'm gonna meet you when I-

[2:30:00] All right, when I come down and say hello. Thank you for being here. Thank you for being part of the democratic process.

[2:30:05] But I'd also like to interject a motion, because I got all of those public records that I spoke about the hotel records and all of the things that raise issues of concern about the city manager and his actions.

[2:30:21] So I'd like to make a motion based on that the matter arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda, the matter requires urgent action and that we add an item to our close session agenda to discuss all of those personnel matters pertaining to the city manager.

[2:30:46] If you haven't spoken yet, I will give you the opportunity, just like consent calendar, you're

[2:30:57] giving your time for matters on the consent calendar.

[2:31:01] This, you gave your comments.

[2:31:10] Mayor, Mr. Shankman charges $950 an hour.

[2:31:14] If he wants to talk, I think we should let him talk.

[2:31:17] He drove here.

[2:31:19] Yes.

[2:31:19] And I didn't.

[2:31:21] I didn't.

[2:31:22] I didn't appreciate that.

[2:31:23] I mean, that.

[2:31:24] That that underscores the point is to why we want to take his legal advice.

[2:31:29] And avoid.

[2:31:30] Yes.

[2:31:30] Please.

[2:31:31] It is your time.

[2:31:35] Hi.

[2:31:35] My name's Tony Nomorano.

[2:31:36] And I'm also a Washington DC student at Howard University.

[2:31:40] So at Anza will be joining me.

[2:31:42] And so relating to 10.1, 10.1 to 10.3, this is my first city council meeting, so I'm very

[2:31:49] interested in how it's going so far, but from what I'm looking at, so I can't really guess

[2:31:53] what any of this is about because I don't know, so I could really only speak about what the

[2:31:57] roles are, and it's just very interesting to see the dynamics over here, especially what you're

[2:32:02] calling out from a city manager, and I do know that the city attorney provides legal advice about

[2:32:07] the different like contracts that are given by the city manager and whatnot and so which

[2:32:12] which is baffles me about this whole discussion is just the response to what she brought

[2:32:19] up. I can understand wanting to do more of like a thorough investigation and ever and see

[2:32:25] sources and whatnot but I just don't understand why you misdemear and some of the other

[2:32:31] council members one are just silent but two are filling a type of way at the fact that

[2:32:37] people back here are feeling a type of way about what's being brought up and before you

[2:32:42] say this is in relation I think that if the city attorneys the one handling most of these cases

[2:32:48] and then if it's being accused that there might be some not-so-legal things going on I would say

[2:32:53] there's a relation there that should be looked at but just an in this entire meeting you guys brought

[2:32:59] in so many thoughts about the taxes so many statistics and I appreciate your apology as well

[2:33:06] too. But when it came to anything that she had to say, all I heard was just yelling, all I

[2:33:16] heard was this is irrelevant. All I heard were excuses compared to everything else

[2:33:25] that I was brought up today. So I really just encourage you, they just listen to what

[2:33:30] the people are saying back here and stop making them so mad. It's easy. Just listen to

[2:33:36] I promise.

[2:33:37] So, thank you so much.

[2:33:39] Anyone else?

[2:33:41] Anyone else?

[2:33:42] Kevin, I'm going to let you and then we're going to finish after Kevin.

[2:33:46] Great.

[2:33:46] I have 10.2 and 10.3.

[2:33:48] I'll try to combine them into one.

[2:33:49] Thank you.

[2:33:50] So, my comment relates to 10.2, particularly because it is litigation and I want to remind

[2:34:01] Council that it is your responsibility under both the charter and the municipal code to have oversight of the city attorney and have oversight of litigation and that requires you to get the legal advice on those matters.

[2:34:18] Now, how about with respect to shields versus city of Palmdale and all of the other litigation that's pending.

[2:34:25] We have an action and we just simply say, if any council member wants to see the city attorneys

[2:34:31] of buildings, we show it to them.

[2:34:34] That way they can have oversight of the city attorney with respect to 10.3 and the amount,

[2:34:43] you know, the teamsters local 1986 and the amount of money that we, that we as a city

[2:34:50] have to pay those good people.

[2:34:54] You know, this is a working-class city and, you know, working-

[2:35:00] Class, people don't go pay $1,100 a night for a hotel, or $8 or $900 a night to go to a Trump puto brand in hotel. They don't run off a bar tab of hundreds of doubt, well, some of them might. And they don't go for extravagant meals. That is just a horrible, horrible example. And, you know, look, I don't think anyone's ever accused the Palmdale City Council of being all that politically sophisticated, but you don't need to be politically sophisticated to know that it is a bad look.

[2:35:30] to try to demand $1,100 from Councilmember Alarcon for giving bikes to kids at the same time

[2:35:37] as paying for sell men as to be at a hotel for $1,100 a night.

[2:35:43] Thank you.

[2:35:45] Okay.

[2:35:47] We're closing that and we will adjourn to close session.

[2:35:51] I got to say my items.

[2:35:53] So good evening, Mayor and City Council.

[2:35:55] Tonight, we have items 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3 for closed session, and we can convene back there whenever you are ready.

[4:03:23] Good evening, Mayor. Again, in city council members, the item 10.1, there was no reportable action for item 10.2, there was no reportable action and for item 10.3, there was no reportable action.

City Council/SA

Agenda

Transcript