[9:46] Testing 1, 2, 3, testing 1, 2, 3.

[11:29] Good Mayor, could I be where you're at?

[11:34] When I'm a nice if I was there.

[11:38] I was so full.

[11:39] Yeah. Well, it's hard to post a meeting notice on the beach.

[11:45] Usually, at least, you know, some palm trees are things.

[11:49] That's true.

[11:50] That's one of the reasons the beach is such a good place to be.

[12:03] Good evening, Mr. Bacher.

[12:05] Good evening. How was everyone doing?

[12:08] Good.

[12:10] you really have to ask us later, but so far so good. You've seen enough of these to

[12:16] know I know. Yeah, I've been around. Oh yeah. These video meetings have been an

[12:26] interesting change in my career for sure.

[12:33] I don't know about you, John, but this is the

[12:35] first time I've been able to wear like a sport coat or dress shirt, plus slippers.

[12:39] usually I never done that in the house and I didn't think I could pull it off. You probably

[12:45] could have pulled it off. I dare you when we get back into City Hall. I don't know

[12:54] how to get the confidence to honestly just don't know. We'll see.

[14:12] John, when you're going

[14:13] to check your email,

[14:17] I sent you something late and you have to know. I did check that. I responded

[14:22] just a little while I'm going to see the problem. I'll trust it. I will take care of that before the next meeting. Thank you.

[14:29] Thank you so much. I'll see you at the right time around.

[15:28] That

[15:32] doesn't sound good. No, I don't think surgeons like when you just grab it the way.

[15:40] Does it sound like much fun, either? Rotator cuff surgery.

[15:47] On your dominant arm or your other one.

[15:51] Fortunately on my left arm, that's from bearing the way to the world on my shoulders.

[15:59] Yeah, the rehab is where they get, yeah.

[16:03] That's what I heard.

[16:07] It gets me out of yard work for a few weeks though, so that's good.

[16:10] I think more than a few weeks.

[16:19] And let's miss this more talks to the rehab people and suggest your work.

[16:23] Can you give you double the gem idea, I think?

[16:32] Well, I wish you luck and.

[16:35] Oh, I think.

[16:38] for healing to you.

[16:41] Early it's not as invasive as it used to be.

[16:46] I can feel feel much harder down the road a bit

[16:48] once you get through this short-term rehab discomfort.

[16:54] Yeah, it's not typically hurting all the time,

[16:57] but every now and then I turn it wrong or I sleep on it wrong

[16:59] or wake me up in the middle of the night.

[17:02] Like, ow.

[17:05] Oh, it's not too bad.

[17:06] It's surgery's not too invasive.

[17:07] and perhaps the rehab and getting it and just rehabilitated, he would be so long.

[17:15] Maybe hopefully.

[17:17] Let's go with that.

[17:18] Yeah, I'm going with it.

[17:20] Paul had to actually have a whole shoulder replacement.

[17:25] So he's got my titanium parchment.

[17:28] Yeah, because he had a couple of those tried to fix surgeries that didn't fix.

[17:38] Does he set off the scanner at PSA?

[17:43] He has a thus far, but I assume that they will show up.

[17:48] I'm sure.

[17:53] I hope so.

[17:54] Otherwise, the scanner's aren't much good, huh?

[17:56] Exactly.

[17:57] Yeah.

[17:57] I don't know if Titanium is one of the mellows they check for.

[18:01] I don't know.

[18:05] You might have them honed in.

[18:09] You're for it.

[18:10] Can you?

[18:12] Hey, don't.

[18:13] There you go.

[18:15] No.

[18:16] what you mean is kind of the kind of offering a beat but the kind of way to do this I think

[18:20] I'll show up on the scan.

[18:23] This kind of was this process?

[18:25] Does anybody know what the process was?

[18:27] What is scanner?

[18:28] Is this what they look for density or how are they doing?

[18:31] Because I'd be surprised that you could define different levels that easily.

[18:36] Other than perhaps magnetism or density.

[18:44] That's a question for Google but probably not tonight.

[18:49] Well, I've got six o'clock, so I think we'll go ahead and start our meeting.

[18:56] Welcome to the joint meeting of the C,

[18:59] Petitucity Council and the Successor Agency to the former Petitucity Community Redevelopment Agency for Tuesday, January 22, 2021.

[19:10] You guys can hear me well.

[19:13] Ms. Burgers, if you were kind of give us a roll call.

[19:16] Council Member Harvey.

[19:19] Here, Council Member Sparks.

[19:21] You're Council Member Ford.

[19:23] Here.

[19:24] Vice Mayor Lamin.

[19:26] Here.

[19:27] Mayor More.

[19:28] Here.

[19:29] Thank you very much.

[19:31] And Mr. Obed, if you would kindly introduce our esteemed staff that are present here.

[19:39] Yes. Thank you, Mayor.

[19:41] So, obviously, let me tell you something else.

[19:43] You need a little bit of the manager.

[19:44] We have John Bocker, RIT attorney here tonight.

[19:47] We have Angela Porter, our director of Administrative Services.

[19:51] Craig Scott, our Director of Public Works and City Engineer. We have a bump-all,

[19:58] Paris, our senior planner, here tonight, and know how to serve as a

[20:03] community developer director. And we should also have my co-operator, please

[20:09] use here. Yeah, here's my fault. Thank you very much. And if you would kindly

[20:17] join me in the pledge relations.

[20:22] I pledge relations and to the Republic, which stands

[20:31] on nation, under God, in the visible, with liberty, and justice.

[20:40] Thank you.

[20:43] Now I would be looking for a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting

[20:49] June 8th, 2020.

[20:51] So moved.

[20:53] Second, we've got council number 4.

[20:56] Thank you.

[20:56] We have a motion of a second.

[20:59] Can we please have a roll of all?

[21:01] Council member Harvey.

[21:03] Yes.

[21:03] Council member Sparks.

[21:05] Yes.

[21:05] Council member Ford.

[21:07] Yes.

[21:07] Vice Mayor Lennon.

[21:09] Yes.

[21:09] Mayor More.

[21:11] Yes.

[21:11] Thank you very much.

[21:13] I will move on to announcements.

[21:15] Those that have not been to City Council meetings before, meeting orientation for new attendees and viewers,

[21:22] in conformance from the Br Act and the Outfit City Council rules,

[21:26] the meeting agenda includes items labeled as action items,

[21:29] where the City Council will consider the item and citizens are afforded the opportunity to black comment,

[21:35] relative to the item being discussed.

[21:38] The meeting agenda also includes a citizens business item,

[21:41] which is a designated place on your agenda where citizens have the right to say whenever they wish.

[21:48] The City Council may or may not choose to respond to comments as the government comes out.

[21:53] However, if the City Council declines to respond, it should not be perceived as giving

[21:57] credence to or agreeing with any statements at the City Council or its members,

[22:02] believe or incorrect, misinformed or purposefully advised.

[22:08] Measure as supports police services, a variety of recreation programs for all ages, and the maintenance of our streets,

[22:14] farce and public buildings, seek details on the web at kataicity.org.

[22:20] Citizen is interested in the receiving city of katai Community Alerts via Texture email,

[22:24] or encourage to sign up at nextwood.com or by texting your zip code to 888777.

[22:31] Like always, we don't have to hear from you, so please feel free to contact the city at 707-719-4600 or info at trottiscity.org.

[22:42] You have an on-emergency as you have the normal business hours you can contact us at 707-719-4600.

[22:48] And of course, if you have an emergency, please contact 911.

[22:53] Continue to our drop dates on the city's website and social media channels available on Facebook, Instagram, and the next door.

[23:01] Now we need, we have looking for an approval on the final agenda.

[23:05] Do we have any changes to that, Mr. Robyn?

[23:08] You may air no proposed to, you can just go ahead and have tonight.

[23:12] Thank you.

[23:14] Now we will move on to citizens' business.

[23:17] Miss Berger, if you would kindly facilitate.

[23:23] Thank you, Mayor.

[23:24] Looking to our attendees tonight if you'd like to speak at public comment.

[23:26] Please use your race hand icon on your smart device.

[23:29] If you're dialing in, dial star 9.

[23:34] Ashley Kim will go ahead.

[23:41] Yes.

[23:41] Okay.

[23:42] Awesome.

[23:42] Hi.

[23:43] Good evening.

[23:44] Everyone.

[23:45] My name is Ashley Kimball and I run north-bathiatrics along with my business partner Vanessa.

[23:52] Okay.

[23:53] She did a know.

[23:53] We've actually been partner with the city of Petite Parks and Rec department for about

[23:57] the last five or six years.

[24:00] We live in the mountain room.

[24:01] that's our crazy theater costumes that you walk by and I just wanted to let you know about

[24:07] something very exciting that's happening this spring. And that is we are beginning the first

[24:11] annual live theater at La Plaza Park. And it's something that I wanted to do last year actually

[24:19] want to put theater on any stage that I see no matter how smaller, interestingly shaped, and we

[24:25] We have a wonderful cast of 17 kids who will be performing an hour-long show.

[24:32] We just met last Monday, but we've completed the show today.

[24:35] The kids look fantastic in their costumes and we're ready to rock and roll and really get

[24:40] things kind of going here.

[24:43] This weekend, and so I just wanted to do two things tonight.

[24:46] I just wanted to first extend the invitation to you.

[24:50] You know, go pick up something at all numbers,

[24:52] come lay out on the grass, you know, crack a cold bun

[24:55] and come and join watch the kids performing.

[24:58] You know, I'm the great outdoors and live theater.

[25:01] And clearly me being very, very, very, very, I guess.

[25:04] We are a small female owned business

[25:07] and we've already given over $3,000 in scholarships

[25:10] just this year alone.

[25:13] And we are determined to never turn a child away

[25:15] due to financial reasons.

[25:17] And so we as is a fundraiser as well.

[25:20] And so I last but not least, I specifically just want to say thank you to Ashley Wilson and Damien Ovid for their continuous support of everything that I come to them for and everything that they have done to help me and especially the City Council and its employees and staff I am so grateful to be here.

[25:39] we're one of the few theater companies that is still left after this pandemic and I watched

[25:44] all of my colleagues everywhere lose their studios, their jobs, their livelihoods and I

[25:49] am still here and want to say thank you and how grateful I am to continue to be a part of the community.

[25:55] If it is possible, I do have a 17 second clip that I could show you. I don't know if it is,

[26:01] but if not, thank you so much and I appreciate your time listening.

[26:05] Thank you, Ms. Kimble. You can certainly forward that to our city manager for viewing

[26:12] down the road. Thank you so much. And such a wonderful service that you provide for the community

[26:17] and for the children. It's fantastic and I've heard nothing but good things about it. So thank

[26:22] you very much for doing that and I look forward to seeing you in the park. Thank you.

[26:29] I don't know if, well, at the end of the two business weekend, offer a comment by any other

[26:35] council members, if they like on that particular comment.

[26:40] Now, I just asked a question, what time I'm writing?

[26:45] 630, 630, both times Friday.

[26:48] We will, we quote on quote, open the doors at 6 o'clock, that's and we'll kind of begin

[26:52] pre-show steps, but you're welcome any time.

[26:55] Great.

[26:56] Thanks.

[26:56] And I'm wondering if we can get it on a city website.

[27:01] I don't think it's there as an upcoming event.

[27:03] It'd be nice.

[27:04] And I thought it was actually they got it on the market.

[27:09] I saw that today and that was really exciting.

[27:12] So thank you very much.

[27:16] You're welcome.

[27:17] Thank you.

[27:18] And what's the term, break a leg?

[27:20] Yeah, well done.

[27:21] Very nice.

[27:22] Thank you very much everybody.

[27:23] Have a wonderful evening.

[27:25] Thank you.

[27:25] Mayor, I'm just going to check in with our attendees one more time before we close public comment on

[27:33] Citizens' Business and Public comment for consent calendar and that will end public comment.

[27:45] Thank you. So with that, we will move on to our consent calendar.

[27:52] We have two items on there. The optional city city white salaries schedule and

[27:59] I'm trying to employ your association and among you, a fool of all.

[28:05] I'd be happy to move approval Mr. Mayor.

[28:09] And I'd be happy to second that, Mrs. Councilmember Harvey.

[28:13] Thank you. So we have a motion and a second. Can we please have a welcome?

[28:16] Councilmember Harvey.

[28:19] Yes. Councilmember Sparks.

[28:21] Yes. Councilmember Ford.

[28:23] Yes. Vice Mayor Lamin.

[28:26] Yes.

[28:26] Mayor Moore.

[28:28] Yes, thank you very much.

[28:33] Do we have any drugs money in future agenda items from the council?

[28:40] Not seeing on it looks like we have enough on our plate right now.

[28:44] We'll get through that and then maybe go from there.

[28:47] Thank you.

[28:49] Now we'll move on to public hearings.

[28:52] We're going to public hearing.

[28:54] I am a 10A introduction of an ordinance to amend the land use code to allow for discretionary approval

[29:00] of residential cottage housing projects.

[29:06] Looks like this is going to be Mr. Harry's, our senior planner.

[29:13] Thank you very much.

[29:14] I was in the council.

[29:16] My name is Dr. Paul Harry's and I'm a senior planner with the city.

[29:21] Tonight we're back to talk about cottage housing.

[29:25] And April 27th, we had a pretty healthy discussion

[29:30] and based on the feedback that we heard from council

[29:34] as well as the public. We decided to make some changes to the ordinance and I'm going to discuss those tonight.

[29:44] Next slide please.

[29:47] I do want to give background for those that may be missed last week's presentation.

[29:54] This totagiles and ordinances being supported by SB2 planning.

[30:00] It was part of the 15 Bill Housing Package in 2017, which was in this planning grants, our end of the

[30:10] decimal states, housing shortage, and high housing costs. In September, or actually in June of that year, we

[30:21] July and then we were awarded 160,000 dollar grant in September of 2019, and that grant is really the cover of four things.

[30:33] One is the ADUJ awardments, which we adopted in February and March, and that was to be our awardments to be consistent with the state law.

[30:43] This second piece is the Cottage Housing Ordnance that we're doing discussed tonight, and then probably an August,

[30:53] he'll start to see the objective design guidelines, and then follow in that later in the year, the by-right multi-family housing,

[31:02] as another effort all supported by this grant. Next slide, please.

[31:08] So just some time one, this actually kind of started quite a while ago when we were discussing,

[31:17] well we're looking at projects, potential projects in the city, and we were looking at one project,

[31:24] which was kind of your standard subdivision like you see, well very much like what you see going in,

[31:29] over at a kissing ranch at $100,000,000 price in there, and the developer was concerned

[31:37] that their projects were going to result in very expensive homes in order for them to

[31:43] be pooped, and there is this talk and an interest in a different type of housing form.

[31:51] And it was kind of coin, kind of choosing, kind of choosing is the name that's been applied

[31:57] to a lot of people's, a lot of jurisdictions,

[32:00] efforts to increase density and have smaller homes,

[32:05] either on one lot or multiple lots.

[32:07] But it's an impact that it has a lot of different flavors.

[32:12] And they were interested and have kind of stayed with us

[32:17] as we develop this ordinance.

[32:20] So anyway, because there is this interest,

[32:24] We consolidated into the planning grant application that was in 2019 and then throughout 2020 we spent kind of developing the ordinance and that is researching other ordinance that is putting drafts together discussing those with architects and developers getting their feedback and then ultimately on December 7 we had our first public workshop with the planning commission.

[32:52] which were again, we received feedback and minutes and changes, and then February 1st we had a second workshop.

[33:00] And then ultimately we had a commission hearing on March 15th, where they recommended adoption of the ordinance piece,

[33:08] which is the Resolution of 2021 dashboard.

[33:12] And then we presented it to the City Council on April 27th,

[33:18] and then the City Council also asked for changes and so we are back tonight to discuss that.

[33:24] So that's kind of long-time line.

[33:27] You know, one of the, I guess, part of what it, one thing to point out is when these things started

[33:33] and this project started, a lot of the state model around me, you had not really been established

[33:41] and you know, just kind of the effort that we see coming out of the state.

[33:45] So it's been a challenge to adjusted this ordinance to respond to everything that's coming

[33:53] from the state kind of continuously, but that's that's the atmosphere that we're

[33:58] entering in.

[33:59] So, next slide, please.

[34:04] Our target has always been with most of these SB2, SB2, brain grid efforts and some of

[34:11] our planning efforts.

[34:12] are to turn it housing for the missing middle, missing middle are folks that are generally

[34:21] priced out of their typical low-density single-family dwelling neighborhoods, but they also

[34:27] make too much money to qualify for give-restricted affordable housing, so there need to be

[34:33] alternatives to single-family dwellings, the traditional single-ground family dwellings and

[34:38] that they really are. And so that's what these images had to show. As a matter of fact, all

[34:45] of the housing types that are shown here are permissible housing types within this cottage

[34:52] housing ordinance. So it's a little kind of housing ordinance that does allow for every one of these

[35:00] missing middle housing types that you see here.

[35:05] Next slide, fix.

[35:09] Our goals with the cottage housing

[35:11] have been to promote sustainable development with more smaller, a more efficient housing.

[35:20] I'd been diversified as city's housing stock by providing housing type that can be affordable,

[35:26] as well as response to changing household sizes.

[35:29] We want to increase our encourage and fill the development, and where we can and

[35:35] density provide a functional common open space that

[35:42] fosters a sense of community and openness within the developments.

[35:48] We wanted to provide private areas around that, which would create a diversity in

[35:54] landscape as well as foster a sense of a personal ownership in the development.

[36:00] We are interested in maintaining the character of existing residential neighborhoods

[36:04] and we wanted to develop an ordinance that was basically

[36:10] reflective of Catani's historic developments.

[36:13] A lot of Catani's historic developments that were done

[36:16] through PUD's planning tool that's no longer in our code.

[36:23] Next slide, please.

[36:27] Just general characteristics of college housing,

[36:30] they tend to be more compact well in units, up to 1500s

[36:34] feet and size. There's common open-space requirements. The units are required to be kind

[36:43] of cluster around that open-space. It's an usually involved shared amenities, both recreational

[36:49] and front-toe, with parking. There can be transitional private open-space. This is

[36:57] allow for the common area than a private area and then ultimately for porches and homes.

[37:06] Separation between units is typically reduced, so you can create these clusters of homes.

[37:14] And because the rooms are smaller, there's a density increase given to them.

[37:21] And also, because of all the environmental protection

[37:25] through the end of the common and the open space,

[37:28] we can increase density without creating an impact.

[37:32] Pedestrian pathways are worked throughout the developments.

[37:37] They would be gradual, of course, really perkin.

[37:41] It used to be incorporated.

[37:44] And really, the idea is that the foster strong sense

[37:46] of community between the neighbors within these developments.

[37:50] And then also that a, you know, cottage housing

[37:54] probably gives, puts a certain form of development

[37:57] in someone's head or design.

[38:00] But they can actually be very,

[38:02] you can have many different architectural styles

[38:05] can be involved. They don't have to be

[38:07] something like a country cottage necessarily.

[38:10] Okay, next slide please.

[38:14] And then just a couple of images.

[38:16] These are the ideal, the image of what

[38:20] what we would like to see with the College of Childson.

[38:23] So here are the people looking down through the common area.

[38:28] Next slide.

[38:30] And here's a collection of different images,

[38:35] showing the private spaces and the common spaces

[38:39] in the transition from common up to the housing.

[38:45] Next slide please.

[38:48] So, on packet change, 77 is a track change as version of the ordinance, so that you can see specifically what changes were made.

[39:00] And I will go through what the changes are.

[39:05] So first thing we get, we heard, I think, really loud and clear that the council did not feel

[39:14] that it would be appropriate to develop these right now in the RBL, which is the residential

[39:21] very low density zoning district. So we have eliminated RBL as a potential district,

[39:27] they would not be permissible in that district.

[39:32] We removed the use permits and then actually the next three kind of go together going down the left-hand side here.

[39:40] One is we removed the use permit requirement and really elevated the cottage housing development plan as kind of the entitlement piece.

[39:50] A couple of with that is there must be an increase in the density.

[39:57] An increase in the maximum density of the underlying district.

[40:02] And this would require discretionary city council approval of both that density increase

[40:08] and the college housing development plan.

[40:11] Essentially what the council is doing is you're giving a benefit to a person or a project

[40:17] sponsor, something above and beyond what is just available for them to know if they were

[40:23] if the college housing ordinance didn't exist.

[40:28] So, and that's going to help us later,

[40:31] we'll talk about how this will help us to control the development. Because, essentially,

[40:37] they don't, they don't have to go down this path of college housing. It does restrict the development

[40:44] to what is approved by the City Council, and if they wanted to make changes to that, that

[40:51] would change density or ADU Council, they would have to come back to the Council and have

[40:56] a new development plan approved.

[41:02] So that is where our time to try to control the development and say, hey, we're going to analyze

[41:07] it.

[41:08] We may even include the ABUs, or you may include ADUs in the beginning, the ADU rules match pretty much what state law is, so that there's no strange, you know, here's what I made you, can look like over here, which is what I made you, can look like here, there are, it's all the same, same law, same apply.

[41:29] But we're kind of saying, hey, we're going to look at it as one big package and you're going to get a development in our density increase as part of this package, which is completely discretionary for the City Council to award or not.

[41:50] Moving on, we illuminated the minimum unit size, so there is no minimum previously we'll set it at ABUs or excuse me.

[41:59] the college units must be 700 square feet, that's gone, and we reduce the maximum size

[42:06] that down to 1500 square feet. With the 100 square feet, not still allows for, you know,

[42:16] three or four bedroom homes and a variety of family sizes.

[42:25] We reduce the cluster size from 24 to 18 units.

[42:31] One of the recommendations was to make that lower, some suggests it's 12, but you know

[42:36] having looked at how this would work on larger parcels, it's just concerned if we force

[42:42] the cluster size too small that we really are not putting in more roadways in order to access

[42:49] various structures, clusters, then it's necessary. When you can do, you can have, you can

[42:58] design it for a larger cluster size. Also, we are encouraging this in our medium density

[43:05] and urban density areas, and we didn't want to accidentally force higher density areas to

[43:13] try to really cut through, you know, cut up their developments in order to meet that cluster

[43:19] size.

[43:21] So we're recommending 18 units.

[43:24] We reduce the building separation from eight feet to six feet.

[43:28] Previously, the ordinance allowed this reduction, but you had to kind of move it into the common open space.

[43:35] I think the council felt like that was a little bit over us, and you know, just go ahead and reduce the six feet.

[43:43] That's fine.

[43:45] We also heard some comments that there is a concern that you would kind of get an apartment

[43:50] building look in some cases because of the attached units.

[43:55] We address that by limiting the number of attached units to basically a four-point.

[44:00] You can do multiple four-point classes, but you can't do like an apartment building of 12 units,

[44:07] for example.

[44:09] And then the ABU provision to match the size limits by state law.

[44:15] This is what I mean about making sure that our ABU chapters consistent with the ABUs that you can build as part of this in terms of what they look like and where they can be placed.

[44:27] And I removed the statement I talked about the number of ABUs that may be allowed, because we're actually going back to looking at it.

[44:34] It seemed to suggest the possibility to get a whole lot more aid to use than actually state law

[44:40] allowed for in certain circumstances.

[44:43] So we just eliminated how what the numbers are and just talked about, that's a champion

[44:50] incorporated into development plan.

[44:56] And response to one of the comments we heard, we'll be able to...

[45:00] The requirement for approaches and private open space, but only in the end news only in district, that there's a valid comment made that, in those particular districts, we're dealing with, could be dealing with multi-family type structures, without the ability to have approaches, as well the private open space may become owners in those higher density districts.

[45:26] So, there in an end news, I mean, a focus really would be great if they cooperate, but the focus will be on having functional and usable

[45:38] cognitive mistakes.

[45:45] Post approval changes would, in density or even use would have to come back to the city council for the plan to be amended.

[45:55] And then we also heard comments about the EB charging and the comments about parking.

[46:02] And we didn't propose any changes as part of the coordinates.

[46:07] And in some cases we're hearing that there's too many EB charters or more than enough.

[46:12] And in other cases people want it more.

[46:15] And we heard the same thing apart.

[46:18] That, you know, in some cases people were concerned that we were providing enough parking.

[46:22] And others work concerned that we're over-parting the projects as the business proposed.

[46:32] And because you can't really apply part into ADUs, this is actually probably a safer route

[46:40] to just stay with what we have in terms of the two spaces put in unit.

[46:47] to what we use in the city and generally it works.

[46:52] That being said, I'm an advocate for less parking,

[46:55] but I still think we don't want these projects to create an impact

[46:59] on the neighborhoods where they might be built,

[47:01] and it's best that we're just going to keep the parking

[47:05] the standards to say.

[47:09] However, within the staff right up,

[47:13] And I put it on page 75 that was packed at.

[47:18] There is some suggested language if you did want us to adjust the EB charging.

[47:26] And the way this system would work, it's a little bit different.

[47:30] And it gets at making sure that the guests have access to charger.

[47:36] So 20% of all gas-based parking spaces would be wired up with natural chargers and made

[47:44] available for charging 50% would be kind of plumbed and ready to go.

[47:52] With the older occupied parking, or the owner designated parking, it's a little bit different.

[47:57] There are 100% would be wired and ready to go with a minimum of 220 volt for the app.

[48:04] So essentially, there'd be ready to go immediately to receive a charter, but it will just basically be on the owner to purchase the charter that works for that.

[48:14] And what they would have the infrastructure to support that.

[48:18] The emphasis here is making sure that the guests are have chargers available to them.

[48:24] And then there were just some pressure on the minor, really, just type of type errors, and not really covers the extensive exchange of the changes.

[48:38] And let's move to next slide, please.

[48:40] So, we are recommending that you introduce the ordinance, and then in the language code to allow for the development.

[48:50] and regulation to the discretionary approval of

[48:54] current housing projects.

[48:56] The draft ordinance is on page,

[49:00] packet page 155, that's the clean copy.

[49:05] And with that, I will be available for questions or comments in discussion.

[49:11] Thank you.

[49:12] Thank you Mr. Harris and thank you for the staff for

[49:17] changes to discipline the council. Now I'll open up to the council for any thoughts or

[49:25] questions.

[49:28] Council member, right?

[49:32] All right, JP. Thank you. Thank you for all your hard work on this. That was awesome.

[49:36] I do still have a couple of questions. So when we talk about having the ADUs and J

[49:45] they use in the plan that comes before us, and that it sounds like at a later date, someone

[49:54] could ask to modify and add an ADU. How is that controlled? Do we like place something

[50:04] on the deeds that restrict that? I mean, who manages that?

[50:13] We would not, we purposely avoided a deep restriction pathway just because of the, the, the, the, the, the problems that I can create with financing that deep restrictions would be.

[50:29] So we went out of the way to try to develop basically this development plan is the entitlement. It's kind of like for lack of a better example.

[50:38] It's kind of like when you approve a map for a subdivision.

[50:44] For example, that would be, you know, it just kind of shows here the development plan for a particular development that's being developed.

[50:53] And that's what you have to follow.

[50:54] So it's more like here's the document showing the development as opposed to a restriction,

[50:59] restricting the development.

[51:03] That's it.

[51:03] That it is a hope that it gets carried in.

[51:06] John, are you breaking it in?

[51:07] Yeah, I'm sorry, JP.

[51:09] That's like it doesn't.

[51:10] If I get this timing a little bit.

[51:12] We talk about a fair amount about trying to address the problem you're raising.

[51:17] I can't remember Harvey.

[51:19] And I think that at a certain point it was kind of through up our hands and said,

[51:26] you know, since these plans are discretionary,

[51:29] And we can't think of all the possible ADUs scenarios that might arise.

[51:35] It's best to just leave that plan requirement discretionary.

[51:40] At the time we're looking at that plan, we can identify all the opportunities for ADU and

[51:46] try to point those out and perhaps have that have to change their projects so it doesn't

[51:55] create ABU opportunities that would be problematic for the community.

[51:59] So we just decided it was best dealt with each individual project rather than trying to address that at the level of this particular legislation.

[52:09] Right. I get that.

[52:11] I get that and that's perfect.

[52:15] But there's words in here talk about later interviews and I guess what I'm wondering or what I'm hoping is that, you know, if someone comes in and says, I want to build an ADU when one of these cottage developments, that staff or someone will say, well, this development was already approved as it stands and then what happens just does have to come back to the council or just

[52:43] kind of a like a little clarity on that.

[52:46] I understand the original one and that you would manage that and we'd approve it.

[52:53] But...

[52:53] Councilor Harvey is not a director.

[52:57] So, you're right now someone comes in for an ADU and they go straight to building permits.

[53:01] So, in theory, you know, someone would not come to the counter and say,

[53:03] hey, I should go to the ADU on my house.

[53:05] I'm in this cut, which I was in development.

[53:07] And we're going to say,

[53:13] oh, well,

[53:13] Council approval. And so, what we've been working with the Attorney's Office to respond to

[53:19] the Council's concerns, we've created a unique entitlement that essentially says, any future

[53:26] changes need to go back to the city council. So we're going to have to think about, you know,

[53:31] what are the fee structures for that? Do we want to, you know, maybe make it somewhat of a streamline

[53:37] Council review, because it may be they're not going to be a significant concern or maybe

[53:42] certain developments when the council approved them, they may even say, you know, we're

[53:47] we're considered x amount of percentages of additional 80s into the future, all those things,

[53:52] but the, the community government department would, but essentially identify these unique

[53:58] development types. And if that request came in, we would flag that as needing council

[54:03] approval prior to being able to move forward.

[54:06] That's what I wanted to hear. I just wanted to be sure that there was a process being put in

[54:11] place because as you pointed out, other ADUs just simply come in and get basically counter

[54:18] approved and if we're going to go to this much trouble to approve a plan, I just wanted

[54:25] to be sure we had that.

[54:27] My next question has to do, we eliminated the minimum size, but how does it work and again

[54:36] is just part of the plan, if they come in and say that they want a primary structure to

[54:46] be 100 square feet, yet an A view has to be a minimum of 700 square feet. How does that

[54:55] kind of work? So this always brought in that. So in that situation, an A view actually does

[55:00] not have to be a minimum of 700 square feet. What we would do is essentially the smaller home

[55:05] would be the ADU from our perspective.

[55:09] And that's always today.

[55:10] So when somebody had a small 600-square-foot house

[55:13] and they came in and said, hey, I want to build a

[55:16] 1200-square-foot ADU, we would say,

[55:18] actually, no, that is the fall the rules of the zoning district

[55:21] and your existing smaller house will be your ADU.

[55:25] Okay, I just wasn't sure it just seemed a little bit odd.

[55:30] Especially trying to marry it with the rules

[55:34] that the state put down on in you.

[55:36] So my next question, are we are reducing the separation of the buildings from eight feet to six feet?

[55:45] And when we do that, that leaves less than three feet worth of walkway from an 88 perspective,

[55:58] are there any requirements that people be able to go on the sides of their

[56:05] out-homes?

[56:12] I can think of this one as well, so, um, excuse me, I agree.

[56:16] Yeah, ADA would not, would not apply to, first of all, there will be six feet in

[56:21] between, but yes, if someone would ever fence to separate it, then that would be three

[56:25] feet between the edge of the fence and the, and then they'd have a home, because it's

[56:29] listen to six feet, but there's no ADA requirement and supply to private property

[56:35] sideyards. Okay, good. I've got to thinking about it and if someone put a fence, I'm like,

[56:41] O.G, how would you get, you know, how would you possibly get down the side of your house? It doesn't

[56:45] leave very much.

[56:49] I acknowledge the requirement for the porches and private spaces in the

[56:57] one of what was it? The most dense. Even a lot of our apartment building

[57:05] and things, at least have a portrait, a deck, or something. I mean, I guess without

[57:15] anything, it just seems like you don't even have space to put, you know, a couple

[57:21] chairs to sit out and you know meet with your neighbors and stuff. I've made even the homes

[57:27] that we have in various spots along East Katai. I don't know what their terminology is

[57:35] called. Even they have a very small front porch such that you could you know sit out on your front

[57:42] So, can you help me with that a little bit?

[57:49] Yeah, some cases they do have those.

[57:51] In many cases, in the NU or in district areas,

[57:56] many don't have those.

[57:58] So, I will say that the ordinance doesn't just,

[58:03] well, it does require an expert feet per unit,

[58:07] I would say it's more,

[58:09] it's actually more than triple.

[58:11] But whatever requirement is for a standard

[58:15] engine type development building,

[58:19] which is 150 square feet per unit.

[58:24] So, all it does is it allows you to move kind of where

[58:28] that open space would be.

[58:31] Now, it doesn't prevent them.

[58:34] But it's just a requirement.

[58:35] But I think that the open space requirement that we do have

[58:39] being, you know, 500 square feet versus 150, and allows for people to work with that space

[58:50] differently than what they might do, and then you typical development.

[58:56] That said, you know, there's also flexibility within the ordinance, whether you really

[59:09] Do it is just not an absolute requirement in those districts.

[59:14] But we could highly encourage it, but we...

[59:17] Sure. Do it.

[59:18] All right, that's fair enough.

[59:21] And then my last question had to do with the section about the common maintenance area.

[59:29] And it said that the cottage development shall be required to implement a mechanism,

[59:35] accessible to the approval authority to ensure that the care and maintenance is not like

[59:42] a HOA, it didn't say that, but is that what you're thinking?

[59:45] Yeah, that's exactly what we're thinking is something like an HOA or maintenance agreement.

[59:51] We just need to be careful whenever you don't try it on, you know, real estate law, with respect

[59:56] to promote our associations and other...

[1:00:00] We would just make sure that a part of our approval, we understood what that would be, or what that shared use agreement would be, and that it was adequate to support the development.

[1:00:19] Correct, because we have seen which is coming up later in our packet, what happens with things like the landscaping and lighting districts that can't pay.

[1:00:32] So, yeah.

[1:00:33] Thank you for that.

[1:00:34] Thank you for answering my questions.

[1:00:38] Thank you.

[1:00:39] My name.

[1:00:43] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:00:44] Yeah, actually, just remember hard and kind of started for me some of the things and the

[1:00:50] one question I wanted to ask, I have some concerns about some of the things and the proposed

[1:00:54] orders, but there were more items that discussed later, but this one question for staff

[1:01:00] I did have about a limited requirement for purchase and private open space in the annual area.

[1:01:07] Now, looking at the zoning map, I recognize the areas, I can see how few, and I know from

[1:01:12] live in here. How small they are, so I do recognize the need for this. At the same time,

[1:01:20] I have concerned about losing something that's pretty well-loved and rather common and

[1:01:25] frankly successful for the city-cutting in the last 20 years, so that most every neighborhood

[1:01:30] we built no matter how small, no matter how pricey or how inexpensive, has had some sort

[1:01:37] a small, covered fortune front for a sense of community and some sort of backyard space, even

[1:01:44] a bit small.

[1:01:45] So, I guess the question I wanted to ask you is to hear is clearly I believe we're supposed

[1:01:52] to encourage you to have a minimum of 400 square feet in the five-year-old space being

[1:01:56] providing a hydraulic unit.

[1:01:58] Clearly, that's not going to fly.

[1:02:00] I can accept that, but where's the sweet spot that we could say that we could either one

[1:02:05] allow a covered porch area or a private space. One of the other is a 50%

[1:02:15] as a 200 square feet is a 100 square feet per unit or ultimately to have

[1:02:21] in one of those two. Could we add a little bit extra then to the private

[1:02:26] to the public open space, to the central open space area? Because I think

[1:02:32] It's great to have a sense of community and have people be able to share a space, but I also

[1:02:38] know people really want a space that's there, so it's more private sometimes to sit,

[1:02:43] it's not inside all the time, and I'm really worried about just cutting that off completely.

[1:02:50] But where's something in the middle that might work to do?

[1:02:53] We'll tilt this work, we'll make this doable for the people who want to develop there, but

[1:02:58] will still provide some of these benefits for the people that ultimately have to live.

[1:03:10] I would, when I'm looking at the Indian districts, I think you should imagine two or three

[1:03:18] story multifamily type developments. So that would be the development type that will be

[1:03:26] developed in order for them to meet their density with environments.

[1:03:30] The story of the areas outside the downtown, we're talking about price selling, some pretty rural looking neighborhoods in some of those areas.

[1:03:42] That's a possibility that you could get an up with three stories in some of these M.U. in the M.U. area along.

[1:03:49] It's Katana where you see a lot of that.

[1:03:52] You already see the three stories with like village walk for example.

[1:03:57] And center or way has three story kind of kind of an in-development.

[1:04:02] But center or way is an example I think.

[1:04:05] Where perhaps there you might see this week's spot.

[1:04:09] Because we do have taller structures.

[1:04:12] And there is some sort of little porch or patio built in on the upper stories.

[1:04:19] You know, we can keep it in there.

[1:04:22] I was getting the impression that it was not going to work.

[1:04:27] Entry.

[1:04:28] I don't remember discussing it, but I see the logic of what you're saying,

[1:04:36] and I wouldn't ask to go back just to the regular.

[1:04:39] Four hundred square feet of private local space,

[1:04:41] and addition to the requirement for the common open space.

[1:04:46] But I'd like to see if we could carve out a small amount

[1:04:49] is that that's what I'm looking for for me.

[1:04:52] Yeah, we could require that everybody have at least a debt.

[1:04:57] Because sometimes there's these outside, you know,

[1:04:59] like, debts and may not be the full covered porch

[1:05:02] that you're envisioning,

[1:05:04] but that could be, you know, outside debts.

[1:05:08] And what would that look like

[1:05:09] as in terms of square footage for roughly?

[1:05:12] I was just doing some math,

[1:05:14] and I was thinking, well, like, a six-pray

[1:05:17] back to scenes reasonable. So, you know, 42 square feet, I'm not, you know, 90 feet.

[1:05:25] I'm going down the fly here.

[1:05:31] 48 square feet. You know, we could say something around there.

[1:05:37] That's where you get something.

[1:05:41] That would get, we'll talk about it later with my colleagues

[1:05:44] I think that 50 foot square foot call on is pretty small, and it keeps this within the best practices

[1:05:53] of what we've been building in Katati, which I think has been very successful.

[1:05:57] That's Kudos both to your work here, as well as our previous people working here.

[1:06:02] So, thank you.

[1:06:03] That's very helpful.

[1:06:04] That's the only question I have for staff, thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:06:09] Thank you.

[1:06:10] Come to remember our response.

[1:06:12] Thank you. I also wanted to thank Mr. House from Mr. Harris for answering my numerous questions

[1:06:19] for the meeting, but I do have a couple more that I thought I'd have to talk to you.

[1:06:24] So to follow on, Vice-Prayer Linden's comments, I was wondering about the neighborhood

[1:06:34] median zoning districts in terms of private open space. I was thinking about some potential

[1:06:40] infill sites that are within the neighborhood median zone and was wondering whether the 400s

[1:06:47] per foot of private open space requirement would preclude developers in that zone for being able

[1:06:54] to take advantage of the density bonus. Is there any concern that that amount of open space would be

[1:07:03] would just cover too much space and not allow the number of units to be built so that they

[1:07:08] otherwise could.

[1:07:11] That was one question.

[1:07:15] Would you like to answer that right now?

[1:07:17] Sure.

[1:07:18] I'm just wondering what you think about that?

[1:07:20] Yeah.

[1:07:22] It's a possibility.

[1:07:24] I don't think.

[1:07:26] I mean, because there are a couple different things that come into play that become

[1:07:29] living in factors.

[1:07:31] One is the combination of the common and private open space.

[1:07:36] You may by that may prevent you from getting

[1:07:41] to high double density, for example,

[1:07:44] a maximum density.

[1:07:46] When I'm hearing more than the 500 and the 400 combined,

[1:07:52] what I've heard is what's likely to be the bigger

[1:07:56] limiting factor is the land coverage of the underlying that comes that basically part of the

[1:08:04] underlying zoning.

[1:08:07] So, and there is a lot more coverage but still that's where we're here

[1:08:16] and people were running into limits and trying to maximize the amount of density in our projects

[1:08:22] that they were hoping designed for us, it was the land coverage itself, not the actual ordinance

[1:08:29] that was creating the problem.

[1:08:33] And is it accurate to say that was true for specifically for the NM district?

[1:08:39] We at that, we didn't apply to an NM district, but it only has just a slightly greater

[1:08:45] a lot, and then L district, for example.

[1:08:50] So my guess is it would be the same, there it's going to be a land coverage issue, that's

[1:08:58] my guess.

[1:08:59] But there's no question that between land coverage and the open space requirements, that in

[1:09:06] some cases those are going to be limiting factors, you're not going to be able to get to the

[1:09:10] That's kind of built in, baked into the ordinance in order for these projects to remain compatible with the surrounding developments.

[1:09:22] We don't want them to be an island of density.

[1:09:26] We want them to fit in.

[1:09:27] And so in some cases, they're intended to not just, you know, be a blowout intensity.

[1:09:33] But to actually have some limiting factors to them.

[1:09:37] That makes sense. I guess the reason I was thinking of the private open space in particular is that it

[1:09:43] can make it difficult if you're building more than one story to get that 400 square feet. And

[1:09:48] that's one way to build the density while complying with the coverage requirement. And so I'm wondering,

[1:09:57] I'll bring maybe I'll bring that up later just as something to consider. And then I had one more

[1:10:01] question which was about the electrical charging, I appreciate it what you had to say about

[1:10:10] the owners that have the units would be ready to go but it would be up to the owner to install

[1:10:15] the charger. What would that look like in developments that are done as a rental property?

[1:10:22] With the owner of the rental property be required to install the units or what would that look like?

[1:10:31] Well, actually, the language refers to both owner and unit designated, so there it would be the same thing.

[1:10:39] I think there were whatever owns the rental unit would kind of fall upon them to be the installer with that particular ordinance.

[1:10:49] Or we can change the ratio.

[1:10:51] and so in prior certain percentage?

[1:10:54] If there was a landlord that just didn't want to install the, they wouldn't have to, is that correct?

[1:11:05] Thank you.

[1:11:05] I have more comments.

[1:11:06] I'll say that the later.

[1:11:08] Sometimes often though, there's also programs where those chargers are not,

[1:11:12] that's not where they expenses.

[1:11:14] They're often given away.

[1:11:16] You know, so I don't foresee that being,

[1:11:21] Well, you can always end up with that.

[1:11:23] Matt, Matt, Matt, Matt, Matt, Matt.

[1:11:24] Well, I don't think it's going to be a problem.

[1:11:28] It's fine.

[1:11:30] And I would just add, you know, as the EB market becomes more mature,

[1:11:36] we are seeing just essentially all mounted plug, plug in units

[1:11:40] where the EB chart we can plug right into the dryer 40 amp plug.

[1:11:46] So as long as it's wired and ready to go,

[1:11:50] an individual who had a TV that was renting could purchase their charger and plug it into that space

[1:11:57] to insert their vehicle.

[1:11:59] Very good point.

[1:12:04] Thank you.

[1:12:05] Councilmember Ford.

[1:12:08] Just a quick follow-up on that note, within the last couple of years, the state law has changed

[1:12:13] and there are requirements that landlords approve 10-to-request to install EV charging stations.

[1:12:20] There are limits to that depends on having an assigned space for instance, so state law tries to address that issue.

[1:12:33] I don't see any other hands up from the Council.

[1:12:37] I have a lot of the same concerns that were voiced by both.

[1:12:43] Vice Mayor Lamon and Council Member Harvey.

[1:12:47] When I bring back the Council, we could talk about that.

[1:12:49] Right now, I will open it up for public comment.

[1:12:52] Mr. Rogers, if you would kindly facilitate that?

[1:12:57] Yes, thank you, Mayor Mor, to our attendees tonight.

[1:12:59] Please use your race hand icon on your smart devices,

[1:13:02] otherwise dials are nine from your telephone.

[1:13:11] Hey, Sue Excuseman, go ahead.

[1:13:18] Hello, I'm Eric Goodfck and you.

[1:13:20] My name is Cecil Sposiboulos,

[1:13:21] my with generation housing and nonprofit housing

[1:13:24] advocacy organization.

[1:13:25] We submitted our letter of support earlier.

[1:13:28] I really just want a couple of notes I wanted to mention this evening.

[1:13:32] And first, thank you to the Council for introducing this important ordinance.

[1:13:37] We'd like to thank the Plain of Commission and also for their countless hours in shaping

[1:13:40] this ordinance.

[1:13:41] And lastly, we'd also like to thank the staff for their tireless effort in shepherding this

[1:13:46] initiative and getting it to this point today.

[1:13:49] We're in strong support of tonight's Catech housing ordinance.

[1:13:52] As the staff presentation notes, the ordinance will go a long way towards offering smaller

[1:13:57] and more efficient and more affordable by design homes.

[1:14:00] and good tidying that will contribute, meaningfully, to diversify

[1:14:03] in these cities, housing stock, excuse me, housing stock, and help

[1:14:08] better natural as it needs.

[1:14:10] We concur with the decision to eliminate the minimum

[1:14:12] square of the requirements and the decision to

[1:14:16] exempt rural variability was also reasonable when

[1:14:20] we encourage the city to continue pursuing opportunities

[1:14:23] like this in the future to facilitate additional

[1:14:26] missing middle housing policies.

[1:14:28] And lastly, we just want to thank you for your leadership initiative in advancing this important policy to help alleviate our housing crisis.

[1:14:36] So with that, thank you, and you appreciate it.

[1:14:40] Thank you, Mr. Wisman, and thank you for your matter of support.

[1:14:44] I'm all appreciate it.

[1:14:48] We are more that will end public comment.

[1:14:52] Yeah.

[1:14:54] Well, I will bring it back to you in the council.

[1:14:57] Council Member Ford.

[1:15:01] Thank you, Mayor Moore. I would like to add my thanks for all the staff work on this. They really addressed what we brought up last time. I really appreciate it. We did have quite a conversation. I at least, I said things that last meeting about the unworkability of the private outdoor space requirement in the end-use zoning area. So I appreciate that removal. I barely fall within Vice Mayor Landman's 20-year timeline being within 18 years ago when we felt

[1:15:30] this place. I had no private outdoor space and that was a decision we made as a group building

[1:15:35] this place that we would rather put that outdoor space in common open space. I have lots of

[1:15:40] spaces where I can go sit with my neighbors and at times I do wish I had a private outdoor space

[1:15:47] no doubt but I'm not sad that we put that land and common outdoor space instead. And that's for me,

[1:15:55] the fact that these developments are now discretionary and have to come to council for approval

[1:16:00] means we shouldn't make the ordinance more limiting than we have to.

[1:16:06] I can envision a lot of types of developments where perhaps people aren't going to be able

[1:16:12] to need the private outdoor space requirement that we might add back in and that would be a

[1:16:21] sad reason to kill a good project. So I would favor leaving the private outdoor space requirement

[1:16:27] out of the end-use zone application, one other piece that doesn't make sense to me and

[1:16:36] then you've got introduced for this round of changes is the fourth box maximum in the end-use.

[1:16:42] Even as senior planning planer Perry's pointed out, we're probably talking, we'll tell you

[1:16:48] that buildings which in order to get the density that we're talking about in the end-use.

[1:16:54] So, I would propose to be exempt and you district from that four units maximum for building.

[1:17:05] Again, these are discretionary, so these are issues that Council gets to look at at the time.

[1:17:11] Planning Commissioner and Council gets to look at at the time.

[1:17:15] I think that will stop there. Thanks.

[1:17:21] Thank you, Ben. Council members March.

[1:17:25] So I just like to reiterate that I think it would be worth looking at reducing the private

[1:17:31] open space in the NM district just to make it more feasible to construct four fluxes

[1:17:40] or two sort of buildings to maybe like a two sort of four flux in that zone where it might

[1:17:45] just be prohibitively expensive to build a giant four hundred square foot deck on the second

[1:17:51] floor, so that was me thinking there. Then one other, we don't want to bring up was the parking

[1:18:00] and I know that there were many different points of view expressed at our last discussion

[1:18:05] about the parking requirements. But it felt to me as though there was some openness towards

[1:18:10] doing a little bit of a graded parking approach where if the units were very small that perhaps

[1:18:17] would need the two spots plus the 15% guest parking. I was looking around at several different

[1:18:24] cottage housing ordinances in other cities and two spots across the board plus guest parking

[1:18:32] was way more than than what I was seeing in almost every other ordinance. Almost all of them that I

[1:18:40] looked at had some kind of gradient where if the units are under a certain number of square feet

[1:18:45] than they would require. I saw one spot. I saw 1.25, 1.5, 1.8, but it was really only found one place that

[1:18:55] required to carry unit at all the ones that I looked at. So having two plus the 15 percent, I think we're

[1:19:02] just out of line with the norm that a lot of other cities have decided on. So I wondered if there would

[1:19:08] of openness among the colleagues to setting some sort of square foot limit where underneath

[1:19:15] that limit, we would maybe look at 1.5 spots. And the breakpoints that I was commonly

[1:19:21] seeing were 700 square feet or 1,000 square feet. So I mean, personally, I think maybe requiring

[1:19:29] and one point five spots for units under 900 square feet

[1:19:34] or somewhere thereabouts,

[1:19:36] we'd put us more in line with the norms

[1:19:40] that I've seen in other ordinances.

[1:19:45] And last thing I wanted to say was just that I am really,

[1:19:48] very supportive of the sort of men's,

[1:19:50] I'm so excited that we're doing it.

[1:19:53] I think that this is going to really encourage a lot of,

[1:19:57] both new developments that create a real sense of community with the shared open space and

[1:20:03] also in field developments and media replacement conversions that can provide some more affordable

[1:20:10] by design housing with while fitting into our existing neighborhoods. So I will be very supportive

[1:20:16] of projects that come before us in the future if they're, you know, in conformance with this

[1:20:23] I'm just so pleased to see this go for it.

[1:20:26] Thank you.

[1:20:28] Thank you.

[1:20:28] It comes from a response.

[1:20:29] What's a replacement conversion?

[1:20:32] Like, let's say there's a single family dwelling that's in pretty bad shape.

[1:20:36] Or something like that that a new owner on the lot wants to get rid of it.

[1:20:41] And a and replace it with a triplex or a duplex or something like that.

[1:20:46] Or I guess with this ordinance it would have to be a fourplex.

[1:20:49] with minimum 4 units, but if someone wanted to come in and get rid of what was there, or if there

[1:20:55] was a really large house on a single family lot, it could be converted internally into multiple units

[1:21:02] and maybe having additional smaller structures added on the property. Something's a little

[1:21:06] in those lines. The thing that's just so magical about that is if you have one, you know, if you have

[1:21:12] ten houses, single family houses and you convert one of those houses to a four-plex somehow,

[1:21:18] than you've increased your housing density in that neighborhood by 30 or 40%, 30%.

[1:21:27] Without really affecting the character of the neighborhood.

[1:21:31] So it's just a great way to help us meet our read-a-topics over time.

[1:21:36] Yeah, I think it's something like that.

[1:21:38] In my neighborhood, in a five-way to say,

[1:21:40] I'm just going to eliminate this house and go to four-plex here.

[1:21:45] I don't know that I wouldn't have a bearing on the neighborhood of that.

[1:21:50] Look, if I might say mayor, I don't think it would be appropriate in your neighborhood

[1:21:54] with lots of much too small, but I could envision other neighborhoods with very large

[1:21:58] or lots, or something like that might work really well.

[1:22:04] Thank you.

[1:22:07] Well,

[1:22:11] this is an interesting discussion, and I think it's an important one.

[1:22:17] I think it's a really important one where Katani goes.

[1:22:24] You know, the Katani House and concept, when I first heard it some years ago, was really

[1:22:31] described more as a small, attractive and affordable way for limited-infilled and small

[1:22:39] irregular plots.

[1:22:42] And now it's kind of grown into something quite different, part of that is of course the

[1:22:46] state's continued push, their requirements of JDUs and AWS, which has vastly increased

[1:22:51] the density of what we originally are looking at, but I think it needs to a really crucial

[1:22:57] question for patating for this council to decide. Do you read support as a council

[1:23:04] maximizing density as much as possible throughout infant in this community and throughout the town?

[1:23:12] And other words, a large intensity for more units to provide more housing,

[1:23:17] or do we support not going that direction in keeping a small town feel and avoiding large increases

[1:23:24] and density. I love the way staff put it. It's large in pieces that would not fit in the

[1:23:29] neighborhoods that would be like blowouts and tension. And obviously there's some space in

[1:23:35] between those two holes. But I will say I gently lean towards the large hole, especially out

[1:23:42] from listening to this discussion at the last month. And I support this because I think it's

[1:23:47] what the community wants. Now, I've spent weeks because of this, just randomly everyone

[1:23:52] I've been asking, just in general, their feelings and density, first of being able to provide more

[1:23:59] housing, and I was surprised at the answer to that.

[1:24:04] And I wasn't surprised that people would say, no, they'd like to have that small town feel.

[1:24:10] I mean, how many times have we heard that many years?

[1:24:13] But the amount of, and the consistency of all age groups and all backgrounds, very clearly,

[1:24:20] But there was some openness to, when I described, for example, the original attempt for the

[1:24:26] college house in concert.

[1:24:27] People like that.

[1:24:29] I actually felt that people did mention Charles's feet billet, which is kind of something

[1:24:32] vaguely related.

[1:24:33] That's very attractive and very little.

[1:24:37] But they're working so I have four concerns related to what's been proposed in the

[1:24:46] packet, based on our discussion from last week that we really didn't get a chance to

[1:24:52] through. I'd like to put them forward to my colleagues. I'd like to support this tonight,

[1:24:58] but I would like to go in the direction it doesn't. Take the tauty away from the

[1:25:03] feeling of the decrant I had. So I have three remaining, and I'll mention the one again, and I

[1:25:10] are both talking about it at the end of the illustrate. First of all, beginning on page 73,

[1:25:16] eliminating the minimum unit size. I was fine with the reduction of the

[1:25:22] maximal size. I let just stay away at 4 and 1200 square feet and that was small

[1:25:28] rooms but very jubles and nice place. But I'm not convinced that having house

[1:25:33] is smaller than 700 feet is a good idea. 600 500. Where does that stop?

[1:25:45] You know

[1:25:46] oversized storage. I think if we go with aluminum size, developers with flies with density,

[1:25:55] expensive neighborhood quality of life, frankly. So I personally am more comfortable with the 700

[1:26:04] than we originally had. There's a little flexibility with me on that one, but I do think we should

[1:26:09] have a minimum number. And as we stated, this is going to be discretionary, so if there's a great

[1:26:13] to be made sometime in the future to adjust that for an individual thing, we or whoever certainly

[1:26:19] be able to do that.

[1:26:24] Going to the next page, I really appreciate staff listening and reducing that in maximum

[1:26:30] unit cluster size, which is 204 to 18, and I think the restrictions of just four connected

[1:26:36] is very helpful, but I would prefer to go with existing what appears to be kind of a standard

[1:26:42] or pretty normal practice in other communities of 12, and I say that simply because I saw

[1:26:48] when architects were turned loose to be drawn, based in our descriptions, the rules that we

[1:26:54] put together as potential ordinance, we got a few nice pictures, but most of them weren't pretty

[1:27:00] like what we were shown tonight. We had some things that just looked like oversized the

[1:27:05] and complexes. Some really dense, unpleasant neighborhoods that I don't think anybody in

[1:27:11] Kentucky would be terribly happy with others in the developer programs. And I noticed

[1:27:17] that we're doing this because of the concern of reducing excessive internal roadways that

[1:27:23] might have to be built for an ingredient research. But it's this is because we're trying to

[1:27:28] avoid smaller clusters of larger parsers. But my point is if you have a larger parcel,

[1:27:35] You can build a regular neighborhood in there.

[1:27:37] You don't have to build a college, regular.

[1:27:41] If you have that much space, you might be building

[1:27:43] small, single-family homes as opposed

[1:27:45] of a college, college, and so I would prefer

[1:27:48] to see the council support that, and I would ask my college

[1:27:51] to support that.

[1:27:54] Likewise, reducing the building separation from 80 to 60.

[1:27:59] Now I know we started at 12, and we've got reduced to 80,

[1:28:02] and I felt eight was incredibly small.

[1:28:04] To go to six, thinking that if anybody puts a fence up, there's three feet to your fence.

[1:28:11] I can't think of more unpleasant and uncottage way to live.

[1:28:18] I could live, I personally would prefer a 12th, like the originally came out.

[1:28:22] I could live with age, and I could even live with the ability to reduce that if need be to six.

[1:28:29] If that extra space was put back in a common open area, again, this was the original required.

[1:28:37] So that would be the direction I give to that.

[1:28:40] Those are my main three.

[1:28:42] As far as the question of open space and Coventy Court, just in the end-use zoning district.

[1:28:49] I forgot to Mr. Ford put that forward for giving me.

[1:28:52] I'm certainly open to taking that potential 50 square foot, a small amount,

[1:28:57] giving them to have a private space of their own and putting it into the calm and open space.

[1:29:03] But remember, there's a difference, fraud song, you write people agree to move in this,

[1:29:07] that it was designed as a shared co-housing, something somewhere between apartments

[1:29:13] or condoms together.

[1:29:16] Cock-housing as I understand, it's still supposed to be,

[1:29:19] no, it's connected, it's supposed to be kind of your own living unit.

[1:29:23] So I see a difference between the two, but are completely open.

[1:29:26] If we can get the lectures increased extra in the common space there, then maybe we could

[1:29:31] for go there.

[1:29:33] But I'm not comfortable just making them a lesser than everybody else space and if something

[1:29:39] doesn't fit there because of those rules, then maybe it shouldn't be built, maybe it wouldn't

[1:29:42] be a good project.

[1:29:46] So those are the things I'd like to ask my colleagues if they'd like to support that's what

[1:29:49] I'd be supporting tonight.

[1:29:51] Oh, yeah.

[1:29:52] Am I, honestly?

[1:29:53] So many things coming up, we have a lot, so I'll be coming up.

[1:29:57] I think we need you, but I don't like the idea.

[1:30:00] Reducing private open space in neighborhoods like Mr. Moore. Even if the locks are a little bigger than his neighborhood, I still don't think that's what the people who live in the society who want. If there's an open space that happens to be next to them, somebody takes down a house. There's no skeleton effect.

[1:30:19] And also, you know, the house was small and epic, you know, the number of people living there.

[1:30:25] There's open space to talk about reducing perhaps less parking them.

[1:30:29] You know, I would shut it out entirely.

[1:30:31] But I'm not open to one point five parking space for unit.

[1:30:36] I mean, that connotates that you're sharing parking with others.

[1:30:38] That means that you have a family that both work and can't work from home.

[1:30:43] You're not guaranteed having a space when you come back.

[1:30:46] I can't see how that will work, so it opens a little discussion on that one, but that's

[1:30:52] my take of that. So thank you Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Thanks for all of the input. And thank you Ben

[1:31:04] for reminding me about the units that you have that have no open space.

[1:31:16] Most of the other units

[1:31:17] It's in a lot of the different places we have, at least have something, but I see what you're saying that some too, but that's really more of an apartment type thing.

[1:31:31] I guess what I would like the concept that we can encourage it.

[1:31:40] like the concept of if someone brings us this awesome, you know, development, that sort of

[1:31:50] like your development has some units with open space and some without that give people a choice,

[1:31:59] that might make me feel a little bit better, but to take it completely away from all of them

[1:32:07] in a particular area, that concerns me a little bit.

[1:32:13] And I don't know, I guess where I'm getting hung up with

[1:32:16] is that the requirement, is it a requirement or not a requirement?

[1:32:22] And I see what you're saying by saying, make it required.

[1:32:27] We might have issues with it.

[1:32:29] And I just was wondering, there's another way for us to

[1:32:34] that such that it was, I don't know, strongly encouraged or recommended or, you know,

[1:32:42] some form where there might be a balance there depending upon what the project is.

[1:32:49] So that's kind of how I feel about that open space. I'm willing to kind of like look at that.

[1:32:55] I'm still concerned about the parking, I heard the request to lower the parking, and I'm concerned about that in particular when we already thought I heard that we eliminated the parking requirement for the ADUs.

[1:33:18] So if now you're saying, well, the ADU doesn't have to have any parking and now the main unit,

[1:33:26] it's going to get reduced parking.

[1:33:29] I'm really concerned about parking.

[1:33:32] If you go up and down from East Cotate Avenue, where places are that don't have adequate parking,

[1:33:40] the people are parking on the street.

[1:33:41] And, you know, even some of our other developments that we've done, whether there's a little bit of parking other than Santero, which we know has a problem.

[1:33:54] I think it comes down to, you know, finding that right balance, and I'm not really willing to go way down and end up with people coming to us, which they do on a regular basis, because Santero way has a really bad

[1:34:11] problem. And maybe, and I don't know that we can manage this, maybe, Jake year or no, I can't address this.

[1:34:20] I know when we were looking at doing the apartment complex on Centuror Way, they were going to have to give us a parking management plan.

[1:34:28] I don't know whether we can have a college development giving us a parking management plan or not.

[1:34:34] You know, maybe that would make me, you know, feel better about that the parking is going to get covered.

[1:34:43] Let's see what else was brought up.

[1:34:47] I'm still a little concerned about reducing the space between the units.

[1:34:55] I like the concept of moving that space if we're going to lessen it to the open space.

[1:35:06] It's interesting because it depends who you talk to or who you listen to.

[1:35:12] There's a lot of concern with a lot of the housing that's being developed in my heart

[1:35:16] because people are saying it's too close.

[1:35:19] I can, you know, sit there and brush my teeth and watch my next or neighbor cooking.

[1:35:23] Some of that is designed in window facing which we're going to have to, I think, be a little bit more

[1:35:30] cognizant of, but, you know, people don't necessarily want to be able to reach out their window and hold hands with their neighbor.

[1:35:43] So I'm open to discussing that.

[1:35:47] The minimum,

[1:35:52] that one is a tough one.

[1:35:54] 700 seems really very small and then really what are we looking at? Are we looking to

[1:36:05] more single occupants? 700 square feet is going to be a little more difficult to have, you know,

[1:36:16] workforce housing for families. A 700 square feet, you won't even get two bedrooms, you may

[1:36:24] yet one bedroom, it may be a studio, but I just kind of, there's got to be kind of a balance

[1:36:30] there. So, it was, that's kind of where I'm at at this point. I'm willing to discuss some

[1:36:35] of these things, but those are my thoughts.

[1:36:38] Thank you. Don't you remember before? Thanks, Mayor Vort.

[1:36:44] I'm a little frustrated that we continue to focus on impact as only measured by a number of units.

[1:36:53] And I still maintain that a single 3,000 square foot home has more impact than 3,700 foot

[1:37:01] cotters.

[1:37:03] So I think we're stuck in a hundred years of finding language that's only about number

[1:37:08] of the units, which has led us to bigger and bigger houses, like we talked about last

[1:37:13] time.

[1:37:13] It's only in the last 20 years that a 1,500 square foot house could be considered small.

[1:37:18] That was a standard family home for a hundred years.

[1:37:22] So, the notion that impact is only a function of units as a problem for me, and I think the goal of the ordinance is to give people an option to propose a project that is more smaller units rather than only the current rate developers have to build their 2500 square foot homes with right up to the minimum setback requirements are.

[1:37:50] So you can watch your neighbor while you brush your teeth,

[1:37:53] because that's all the pencils.

[1:37:55] They have to scrambling a unit on.

[1:37:58] And that's, I think, leading to housing development

[1:38:01] that isn't serving our needs.

[1:38:02] It's certainly not serving that missing middle housing.

[1:38:08] So I think, yes, single person households are a population.

[1:38:16] We need to be thinking about it.

[1:38:18] And that's 700 is a huge studio, it's a very comfortable one bedroom.

[1:38:24] Most of, I looked at the pictures that JPE used in the presentation and most of those cottages are less than 700 square feet.

[1:38:32] So I really don't want to go back to a 700 square foot minimum.

[1:38:35] That would actually put us most of those pretty pictures out of compliance with our ordinance.

[1:38:43] So, the ordinance is putting out through developers here's what we're interested in looking at.

[1:38:52] So, and it's not, there's nothing in the ordinance that says we're absolutely going to approve one of these,

[1:38:59] that it's still discretionary to approve the density increase that's required.

[1:39:06] So, making it more restrictive, and I'd be completely open to a 50-square-foot private output

[1:39:13] requirements or something like that that we feel like we'll give people a little

[1:39:18] transitional space or a request or a space to sit outside. It's fine. But every little

[1:39:24] thing like that we do means we see if you are projects and it doesn't work to say

[1:39:29] what they could come and ask for a variance because at this staff level the staff just

[1:39:32] tells them that doesn't need our requirement. So if we want to see the projects we need

[1:39:37] to leave the ordinance open so that people can bring this projects that we think might

[1:39:43] might work. So I'd be open to the 50 square foot outdoor private space requirement,

[1:39:50] either as a private stew or a deck or some whatever they want to propose. As long as

[1:39:56] it's clear that open space doesn't mean on the ground and the decks and Fortges count.

[1:40:02] That was a question I should have asked earlier.

[1:40:06] I would like to see parking requirements tiered by size.

[1:40:10] So it really doesn't make partly because that would drive the cost per square foot way up

[1:40:15] if we require the same parking for 600 square foot, one bedroom as we do for a 1500 square

[1:40:21] foot, pre-bettling. So I'd love to see that tier if we could come up with something that works there.

[1:40:27] On the EV requirement, I would propose that we use the replacement languages in the staff report.

[1:40:35] I think providing the conduit and capacity to add chargers is a lot smarter than requiring

[1:40:42] a developer's installed chargers.

[1:40:46] So it is like getting the charger and installing it is the easy part of the job and there's

[1:40:50] no reason to do that when there's no electric car in it.

[1:40:55] Okay.

[1:40:57] Through the near-cut.

[1:40:57] I asked my colleague a quick question.

[1:41:00] Thank you.

[1:41:02] Yeah.

[1:41:02] I just want to ask quickly, so thank you for reminding me about the placement language I had read with you in that.

[1:41:09] What I wanted to ask you about, I hear what you're saying about flexibility.

[1:41:15] There could be something attractive or the building.

[1:41:18] Again, I'm thinking of Charles K. Village, perhaps it's less than 700 square feet.

[1:41:25] But if we were as a group to want to have some sort of at least state minimum,

[1:41:30] Even if it was open to being changed to council since we have full discussion, what would that look like to you?

[1:41:38] If you were in a business where she kind of, what is your realistic idea of the smallest structure that we should support for a working family or a working couple?

[1:41:50] I'm not talking a studio for perhaps an individual, but I say a couple or a family.

[1:41:55] Where do you think that sweet spot is? Because that would be helpful for me to hear.

[1:42:05] Well, if we want to restrict these to not being available to singles, then 700 square foot might be a reasonable minimum, but that's, I hope not something we're proposing to put in the ordinance.

[1:42:18] So, I think my, for instance, what went, when use case where I think this college housing

[1:42:27] would be attracted is for young professionals who want to be part of a community and

[1:42:33] more and more people are staying unmarried and uncomfortable later and later.

[1:42:37] And I think I want to provide places for them to live in our town that aren't just a, you

[1:42:47] a anonymous department building so that requirements for common open space and for some community

[1:42:52] of melodies I think I think we actually do want to serve single person households.

[1:43:01] Well okay if you're going to be checking on me then I'll say what do you think for single person?

[1:43:06] What is the reasonable thing that you think would fit in our city look good, be nice, not be

[1:43:11] glorified storage space. What is the number first of square footage? How low are we going?

[1:43:18] And would you think is accepted?

[1:43:26] Well, along the same lines of flexibility, I would be comfortable

[1:43:30] with the staff proposal to not include a minimum unit size, but I would be comfortable with a four or

[1:43:37] five hundred square foot minimum size of the ordinance, especially if we could add language that

[1:43:46] It said that made clear what a couple of you have said

[1:43:50] that they can always ask the council

[1:43:51] if they want to go smaller.

[1:43:54] So if the ordinance was explicit,

[1:43:56] the minimum unit size is 500, unless variance granted

[1:44:01] by council or something like that, then I know it's true,

[1:44:06] whether it says or not that the council can grant that variance

[1:44:09] I think it is anyway, but if it says it in the ordinance,

[1:44:14] than it's tells a developer, you know, that's a possibility, you know, not what we, what

[1:44:20] we, uh, were originally envisioning when we wrote the articles.

[1:44:26] So, if, and then you may have hit on, and I wouldn't keep this back and forth going long

[1:44:30] because we're taking time from others, but I think you did a really valuable thing, at least

[1:44:33] for me, hopefully for everybody else.

[1:44:36] So with that, we're not that far apart in the number.

[1:44:39] We were to pick a number somewhere in between those, but most importantly, to add language

[1:44:54] They may wish to make it a little bigger.

[1:44:56] That's often the counts of discretion in the quality of the project.

[1:45:00] If we were to, I think, frankly, not going to support it, I think it would be a good idea to have that explicitly in there. Obviously, we're putting a lot of work on future councils, but that's what they give a big bucks for. So I'm fine with that.

[1:45:13] So is that something that would be helpful to you if we have some numbers somewhere in there, but we had clarifying language that stated that it's not hard and fast, minimum, size, it's simply a guideline and there is some flexibility.

[1:45:29] Because I feel better than at least we'd have a guy close to start from when we wouldn't have some developer coming in.

[1:45:35] Yeah, I've got a bunch of 385 square foot things, and I've got to stack three deep miles wide.

[1:45:41] I know that sounds ridiculous, but that's the fear of something generally like to present against that.

[1:45:50] Sorry, I'm here more can I answer that and I'm going to move on.

[1:45:54] Okay.

[1:45:55] Yeah, that would work for me.

[1:45:58] And I just want to point out that the 300's 75 is not outrageous.

[1:46:02] If you read the counties caught a challenging ordinance.

[1:46:06] It was actually designed to support tiny house, tiny home villages,

[1:46:10] which are much smaller than 3075 typically.

[1:46:13] So, and they're very cute often too.

[1:46:18] So, I don't think a track-activeness tracks too well

[1:46:21] with unit size.

[1:46:24] But I would be fine with a number less than 700

[1:46:28] that and also included some language about flexibility.

[1:46:36] Thank you.

[1:46:37] Council member Sparks?

[1:46:39] Thank you.

[1:46:40] First of all, I would be open to expanding that separation between the buildings back to eight feet and going with that original idea from last time of allowing that perhaps they shouldn't get down to six if they increase that open space.

[1:46:55] open to that in terms of the minimum unit size, I want to, we've been focusing a lot on

[1:47:06] what constitutes a home that fits into the Katati character and I just want to

[1:47:13] re-center your thoughts for a moment on what people are living in now and what people

[1:47:25] price that at 800 and 900 square foot unit would come out to would be out of their reach.

[1:47:32] And so by reducing the square minimum square foot requirement, I think we would be providing

[1:47:38] an opportunity for homeownership to people who would otherwise be able to afford it.

[1:47:42] And to be able to have someone come in and own their own market rate, causing unit in a

[1:47:47] really nice neighborhood with a community feel to it would be an amazing positive thing.

[1:47:51] And I was also thinking of maybe a young graduate,

[1:47:56] just out of college, their first job.

[1:47:59] They're just not going to be able to afford a larger unit,

[1:48:02] but they might be able to afford something really nice.

[1:48:06] That's the star size, especially if they're a single person.

[1:48:11] So I just wanted to reframe it and think about this as an opportunity,

[1:48:14] an opportunity to provide really nice quality housing that's

[1:48:17] within a price point that people can afford in that.

[1:48:20] And that's something that a huge benefit that we get by making the unit size smaller.

[1:48:26] I would be supportive of the 500 square feet minimum with that language.

[1:48:31] I think that would achieve most of what I'm looking for as your chief.

[1:48:36] And just going back to the parking one more time.

[1:48:43] Here's something that maybe how it considers is that we can use a parking limit

[1:48:50] as an opportunity for us to incentivize structures that a size point that we want.

[1:48:58] So for example, if we wanted to make more single person friendly units at like a 600 or 700 square foot level,

[1:49:10] then we could use that parking requirement being a little bit lower to help developers make that pencil out better if they were to build that smaller.

[1:49:19] smaller unit and I think the building smaller units. I don't think they're going to be glorified

[1:49:24] Sheds. I think I did pre-phrase what my colleague said. Councilman reports that is good things

[1:49:31] come in small packages. We can have really nice units that are just a smaller size and it doesn't

[1:49:39] have to be 1.5. I did see other ordinances that went with 1.8 or 1.6. These decibel numbers that

[1:49:48] when you average it out, it all works out nicely.

[1:49:51] So I would urge my colleagues to consider it just to put us

[1:49:54] because 2 plus 15% is really way out of line

[1:49:57] with what a lot of other communities have done.

[1:50:00] And I'm wondering what makes us a different

[1:50:02] that we need so much more parking

[1:50:04] for these really small, smaller units.

[1:50:06] So I would say what if we went with under 700 square feet,

[1:50:10] it's 1.8 parking units or 1.6.

[1:50:14] I mean, if that parking requirement makes the difference,

[1:50:17] for just one development being able to pencil out of it.

[1:50:20] I think it would be worth it to provide more housing.

[1:50:24] Thank you.

[1:50:25] Thank you.

[1:50:26] Councilmember Harvey, and then I think we're going to come to some sort of a check-off on

[1:50:32] where our conclusions might be.

[1:50:34] I think so.

[1:50:36] So I can live with the 500 as a minimum.

[1:50:42] I like the words that it's explicit in the ordinance.

[1:50:47] that says a variance may be able to be asked, because then as Council Member Ford pointed

[1:50:54] out, the staff necessarily get in their thought process, here's the rule.

[1:51:02] This is all I can, you know, bring forward nothing if it's explicitly stated in there.

[1:51:08] It will at least get the conversation going that says I can ask for something different than

[1:51:16] that rather than a black, I might yes or no.

[1:51:19] So I like the 500,

[1:51:25] Laura, could you tell me again?

[1:51:29] Because I was trying to write it down,

[1:51:32] what you're suggesting for a 500 square foot unit for parking?

[1:51:39] Well, I would suggest at one point five pieces

[1:51:42] for units under somewhere around 700 or 800 square feet, but I would be happy to support

[1:51:51] some other number. Maybe could split the difference, 1.75, spots or something like that?

[1:52:01] Yeah, I could probably live with that and you ask what makes catties of different?

[1:52:10] What makes catties

[1:52:14] happening is we get lots of college students piled into these units, each coming with a car.

[1:52:24] And that's right, rather otherwise, I don't know why it happens, we could, you know, I've had enough

[1:52:30] discussions with different developers saying, well, yeah, but, you know, they'll, they'll

[1:52:35] not bring a car, well, they do, and that's just, you know, we just kind of have to accept

[1:52:40] that.

[1:52:41] So what I'm trying to react to is we are a college town, a lot of these homes, no matter

[1:52:50] what size they are, be they single family homes or condominiums on a center or way or

[1:52:56] wherever they seem to be bought up by people that invest and rent them out and we get college

[1:53:03] students in them.

[1:53:05] Students need housing, I get that.

[1:53:07] So I just want to, I don't want to cause a bigger problem

[1:53:12] for any more neighborhoods.

[1:53:14] So I think I can live with the tearing based upon size,

[1:53:21] because knowing like if we had a unit that was going to have

[1:53:24] two bedrooms, we are likely to have four students.

[1:53:29] And four students are going to bring,

[1:53:30] and that's what we've seen in Santerra.

[1:53:33] And for whatever reason that is beyond me, none of them ever use

[1:53:39] grashes if you even provide them.

[1:53:42] They don't use them.

[1:53:44] So I'm open to the tearing, but I want to make sure that we cover, you know,

[1:53:50] our reality, which is a little bit different.

[1:53:54] I like the concept and thank you very much.

[1:53:58] Council Member Ford for offering to have at least a little bit of private space.

[1:54:05] I think I can live somewhere in that in the 50's square, but range, I think, that that would

[1:54:13] give that ability for people to kind of sit in their own area and maybe have some plants,

[1:54:20] maybe I've seen people with their dogs put up a little gate and let their dogs be in their

[1:54:30] Thank you for offering to Council Member Sparks to change back to ACFee with putting, you know,

[1:54:39] if they want six, you know, agreeing that that has to go back and it's into open space.

[1:54:46] And did I miss it?

[1:54:47] Yes, we discussed.

[1:54:49] I don't know.

[1:54:50] But that's what I know for right now.

[1:54:53] Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor.

[1:54:55] Thank you.

[1:54:59] I'll try to make this quick, because I did use some time to get some useful back at the court, but then you've got a famous last story, right?

[1:55:09] So I think we're kind of getting to a better space in this.

[1:55:16] I want to understand, so if we worry with riddle and minimum size of 500, and I'm hearing that emerge, it's clearly that's lower than, I think, 700's awful small,

[1:55:27] But hey, we're all being flexible in various issues,

[1:55:29] so I'm certainly only being flexible in that.

[1:55:32] Could I just ask for confirmation?

[1:55:34] Is that with parking with that?

[1:55:36] Are we talking 1.75 for the smaller houses?

[1:55:40] Or is that for all of our college units?

[1:55:43] I can see for 600 or below, perhaps going the 1.75,

[1:55:49] although I agree with my colleagues

[1:55:51] in the voice of experience, we've been down this road

[1:55:54] and we've been burned once.

[1:55:55] I don't really want to go there.

[1:55:56] But if we can meet in the middle, I would agree to do that, so I'd like quickly to get an answer to that, and then I just have one last thing to bring up.

[1:56:07] Are you looking to see if there's a consensus on that great parking allowance?

[1:56:12] Yeah, I believe the council member sparks and council member charges were talking about meaning of something.

[1:56:17] I heard 1.75 parking spaces, and I try to get a sense, is this for a certain size or smaller?

[1:56:23] That was like 500 square feet. We would do 1.75. I don't know where you jump up to the next tier.

[1:56:33] We didn't really come to anything on that.

[1:56:37] What about at the original 700 maybe?

[1:56:40] Yeah.

[1:56:41] But I think that's fine.

[1:56:43] So I think we've agreed to almost everything.

[1:56:46] The only thing that was left was maximum cluster size.

[1:56:49] And I would like to go back to the original standard of 12.

[1:56:52] I think dealing with issue of roads is probably doable, and if it's truly a huge, huge, huge

[1:56:58] water, it's probably better for developing in a more standard neighborhood.

[1:57:02] College units, versatility will be smart, info that takes waste of space in terms of

[1:57:08] into a track and affordable housing.

[1:57:10] If I just want to say, I don't think necessarily a small house would be an attractive.

[1:57:15] I've been supporting this concept since I first heard about it.

[1:57:19] The concerns I had with some of the directions, the state has pushed us in with the requirements for JDU and ADU,

[1:57:26] and then some of the standards that we discussed potentially trimming back, that we would have that dreaded well out in density.

[1:57:33] And that is why I think is an attractive and unwanted to talk.

[1:57:37] But I appreciate the welcomeness to try and meet in the middle and prevent that.

[1:57:41] So, if we can add the maximum clustering unit, standard of 12 to this, I could support it personally as a practice all the time, kind of way in here with the mayor status too.

[1:57:51] So, thank you for the time.

[1:57:53] Thank you.

[1:57:54] Don't you remember for me?

[1:57:55] Just a quick follow-up from that.

[1:57:58] Vice Mayor Landon would do accept the similar flexibility language in the maximum cluster size.

[1:58:04] If we take it to 12 and say an extraordinary circumstance as a council member.

[1:58:10] Yeah, I think that would be fine to have that in there.

[1:58:13] It's implicit first of all.

[1:58:14] I didn't find it to the argument that people won't kind of try to talk

[1:58:17] about what's going to do with it because my experience for years is they will.

[1:58:21] And my concern is when you make it too easy to bring us something that is a

[1:58:25] project that's hopefully motivated by just bringing the greatest common

[1:58:29] profit to the developer.

[1:58:32] We won't get something good.

[1:58:33] So that's why I want some structure to it.

[1:58:34] But I'd have to be happy to go there.

[1:58:36] Yes.

[1:58:37] Thanks.

[1:58:39] So based on the input that I'm hearing and I've got a couple of concerns, most of them had been addressed.

[1:58:46] I'm not keen on being flexible on the working.

[1:58:50] I lived on Kingston.

[1:58:54] Three bedroom two bath, 800 and 40 square feet unit with five of us, and we had one working space.

[1:59:03] Well, that was very difficult.

[1:59:06] And then when my spouse or if I came in a different hour,

[1:59:10] I had to be several meters away from the home.

[1:59:16] And again, we're in college time.

[1:59:18] So you know they're going to be rented out.

[1:59:19] Because when I moved someone out of the person

[1:59:21] that bought it specifically, bought it to rent it to college students.

[1:59:25] So you got a free bedroom, one parking space.

[1:59:28] Who knows how many students are living in there?

[1:59:29] we're living in there at the time. I'm not really keen on that, but let's say

[1:59:35] in one in a time. So do we have a consensus that we can go down to and

[1:59:40] or put in a minimum of 500 square feet.

[1:59:46] Okay, we've got three. Okay, we're

[1:59:48] building on it. With the explicit flexibility by which. Correct. Yeah. Correct.

[1:59:55] Because not on that, if the developer would want to come in on your own and say,

[1:59:59] Yeah, what is it?

[2:00:26] With the original language that it could go down to six feet up.

[2:00:30] if approved.

[2:00:31] Well, damn, and everything's going to come in.

[2:00:35] Well, I just to clarify the language.

[2:00:38] The original language wasn't just giving that option.

[2:00:41] It's specifically said if they want to go to six feet clean.

[2:00:44] That is going to space with back to the common open.

[2:00:47] Yeah.

[2:00:48] I think that's where we're at.

[2:00:52] Our thumbs are going to get started this way.

[2:00:53] I know, but that's okay.

[2:00:55] But this was good.

[2:00:55] I want to use your option.

[2:00:57] I approve of this.

[2:00:58] Okay, um, the, what was the other issue? Okay, um, then you lost the start?

[2:01:06] Yeah, the cluster size. So, you need to be okay with going to 12 if we have the caveat

[2:01:13] that potentially could go to 18 depending on the project.

[2:01:22] Well, we're talking, I thought it was just language to be put again, like everything else

[2:01:25] that it's a council final decision and they could push it.

[2:01:28] But we're starting at least with a minimum cluster of 12.

[2:01:33] Is that what we were talking about?

[2:01:35] Yeah, but I'd be okay with the nearest proposal, too,

[2:01:38] that there's a hard capital team.

[2:01:41] In the order of the switch, which, as you say,

[2:01:43] isn't actually a hard capital.

[2:01:46] It turns out that actually anything we're doing

[2:01:48] doesn't matter.

[2:01:49] You do whatever they want, but that works too.

[2:01:52] Okay, bye-bye.

[2:01:54] Exactly.

[2:01:54] It gives them something to work with so that they can,

[2:01:57] which I really hate the phrase pencil it out yes okay so that ability

[2:02:05] separation oh I I I I'm glad that we looked at the current entry

[2:02:12] purchase I would be okay with that at that 50 feet at least it's something yeah

[2:02:19] Yeah, it's a little space.

[2:02:23] Uh, Mr. Mayor, was that 50 square feet or I would recommend 48, because it goes nicely

[2:02:30] with 8 by 6.

[2:02:31] But is that for private space or private cover for?

[2:02:37] I believe we tend to be used for either.

[2:02:44] But you based it on picturing a common porch, Mr. Harry's?

[2:02:48] No.

[2:02:51] I kind of went through the discussion, I kind of thought that it would be best to approach it with just private states, private open states, and that could take the form of a porch, or a deck, or like a porch, because we know, as we know, they can ask for whatever they want, they want to put it into a yard.

[2:03:16] I just want to make sure I understand the council's direction, so we'll leave it at court.

[2:03:21] And then if you look back at some of the slides on some of those projects,

[2:03:26] almost all of them had some sort of little words.

[2:03:31] Okay.

[2:03:32] And then so that's just me as a parking.

[2:03:34] I'm not really keen on reducing out parking.

[2:03:37] I think it's an initiative in the community.

[2:03:41] If a project comes in that maybe it is,

[2:03:45] design procedures or something like that.

[2:03:48] or more one bedroom unit, maybe we're going to have a variance on that, but typically I think you have to have at least two a per unit.

[2:04:01] Now, if you, if you have multiple units in that same development where you have a lot of one bedrooms and any of some two bedrooms for three bedrooms,

[2:04:11] It's not to say that a one-bedroom occupant couldn't allow their other space to be used

[2:04:19] by a neighbor or something like that.

[2:04:24] Through the mayor, if I could misdemear, first of all, I agree personally, if I was just calling

[2:04:30] this to my own, I'd stick with you, because of the history I've seen in Katodium, what we've

[2:04:35] encountered.

[2:04:36] But one thing that might make a difference, I just wanted to pull it out, maybe you'll

[2:04:40] change your perception and not if not I'd be happy to support two if that's where most

[2:04:44] of us wanted to go. Was that the proposal as I understood it was 1.75 only for our smallest

[2:04:52] to just keep caught a chance of 500 and then I think we fixed it. If 700 feet we go back

[2:04:59] to perhaps we could go back at 600 feet to 2. I don't know but that's a little different. We're not

[2:05:07] saying that all these units, no matter how big they might,

[2:05:10] seven hundred, eight hundred.

[2:05:12] You know, perception potentially larger,

[2:05:14] if they really want to attract families would be limited

[2:05:18] to 1.75 because I find that concerning,

[2:05:23] when you start talking percentages,

[2:05:25] that means neighbors are sharing partners' faces.

[2:05:28] We're fooling ourselves if we don't think we're setting

[2:05:30] the need to put us up for complaints

[2:05:31] down the road with that.

[2:05:33] But with those really, really smart houses

[2:05:35] that's where they are going to be some of it in fact. I've got to have a little

[2:05:39] flexibility. Does that sound any better? I could live with that. Yeah, I think

[2:05:46] that was, it my friends will correct me if I'm right. I think that was the suggestion.

[2:05:51] Oh, so I'm with you on this, but I think that's a reasonable small meeting

[2:05:57] in the middle.

[2:05:57] 1.75.

[2:06:02] So 1.75 at 700 square feet of below.

[2:06:06] So we'll call it the hearty sparks agreements.

[2:06:10] We'll go with that.

[2:06:11] All right, we'll go with that.

[2:06:13] If you don't get away if you want to go that way, John,

[2:06:18] it seems like it's a reasonable and anything greater than that.

[2:06:21] Interesting that it's frankly these big enough for a family.

[2:06:24] We could get multiple more than multiple people in there.

[2:06:27] number numerous car drivers, I think you're going to have two spaces.

[2:06:32] And if we have a neighborhood we're concerned about, and it's in front of us, for example,

[2:06:35] as a campus council, we can require that.

[2:06:39] We don't have to stick with that because every single thing is discretionary.

[2:06:43] I can, I can know what that.

[2:06:45] Well, what's I mean, I'm a consensus on that then.

[2:06:47] Yeah, through the mayor.

[2:06:49] That's a really good point mark because when the development comes to us,

[2:06:53] we can take a look at the surrounding neighborhood,

[2:06:56] But because we also will know whether or not there's already parking issues, we're going

[2:07:03] to make them worse with this, so that's a good point.

[2:07:11] So with those changes, do we have another issue is the EV large?

[2:07:18] I have proposed to use the substitute language instead of what's on the table now.

[2:07:22] I really agree with that.

[2:07:23] Sorry I got it. Yes, absolutely.

[2:07:30] Okay.

[2:07:33] So, John Paul knew you think that you have the best one there?

[2:07:38] Yeah, let me run through it because these will be, I'm assuming we're going to

[2:07:45] recommend introduction with these changes and I'll make the changes and they'll be in the

[2:07:50] packet for late July, okay. So the first while the harvest

[2:07:58] sparks amendment, which is 1.7 parking spaces for units, less than or equal to

[2:08:04] 700 square feet, 500, 500,

[2:08:14] 500 or 700, 500 or 700.

[2:08:15] Okay,

[2:08:19] cluster size is 12, it could go up to 18 given conditions of the site the council may consider unit sizes of 18.

[2:08:36] Go with the recommended EB charging language that's in the packet that's been discussed.

[2:08:45] require a private cover of fortunes at these 48 square feet in size in the NU district, which

[2:08:52] is a reduction from the private and poor chain of private open space that was in the

[2:09:00] landings.

[2:09:02] I'm sorry.

[2:09:02] I need to interrupt.

[2:09:05] So my hope was that a debt, so poor chain plies entrance, doesn't it?

[2:09:11] Yes, I mean, well, you wanted, we could say covered debt because you could be an internal entrance, and I could realize you're right.

[2:09:19] So should it be a covered, covered debt or covered private space?

[2:09:24] Well, I would be fine with private outdoor space, such as deck or porch.

[2:09:29] I'm sorry.

[2:09:29] Yeah.

[2:09:30] All right, I think we got that.

[2:09:32] And then minimum 500 square foot unit with the caveat that it could be smaller if they proposed

[2:09:45] that way the council could consider smaller units.

[2:09:51] We do have that language in there, by the way, already, that gives you that some discretion.

[2:09:55] And then basically keep the 8 foot separation language the way we had it originally, where

[2:10:02] you could reduce it to 6. So those are 6 items that I recorded. I think they're

[2:10:09] capturing all of them.

[2:10:12] I think you got it. So do we want to take a stab at a motion on this?

[2:10:20] Or do you want to bring it up back?

[2:10:22] Oh, I'm back.

[2:10:25] Oh, no.

[2:10:25] I'd rather you don't throw a motion on it.

[2:10:29] And then, you know, we move on.

[2:10:32] Next time, we'll be the set.

[2:10:33] This will be the introduction.

[2:10:35] Next time, we'll be the second reading

[2:10:36] and an adoption of the ordinance.

[2:10:39] That's my preference.

[2:10:40] Bear with you.

[2:10:41] Like, make a stab at it?

[2:10:43] Sure.

[2:10:44] Jump home.

[2:10:44] You're applying.

[2:10:45] You don't want to see this multiple times again.

[2:10:48] That's what I'm applying.

[2:10:49] Yes.

[2:10:50] Don't you want to hear that would be great if you want to take a stab at the bank.

[2:10:53] I make a motion that we introduce and conduct a first reading of the ordinance that was

[2:11:00] attached with the amendments as just stated by J.P., that's up to that to allow for discretionary

[2:11:10] approval of hotting cottage housing projects.

[2:11:15] How's that?

[2:11:16] Great second that. This is count number four. So we have a motion on a second. Miss mergers if you take a roll call please. Council member Harvey.

[2:11:26] Yes. Council member Sparks. Yes. Council member Ford. Yes. Vice President Lyndon. Yes. Mayor more. Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you.

[2:11:38] thank you and John Paul and I know I know all the staff for that work. I know we're a

[2:11:43] different boat group to work with but I think we end up a nice

[2:11:50] project agree may I more I'm needed brief break before the next item okay so we've

[2:11:57] got 753 show we come back at eight got to go check something inside City Hall

[2:12:05] our ban. Alright, we will take our research until 8 o'clock.

[2:18:22] It's nice day out here at City Hall, by the way.

[2:18:30] Certainly got a lot warmer as the day went on.

[2:18:34] Good, well, like, you've got that current entry way, so that helps.

[2:18:44] Looks like-

[2:18:45] She, this is how long it goes. You never win. You never lose. It always goes on and on.

[2:18:57] Are you going to sit out there then when we go like back into council chief first?

[2:19:02] What are you going to come inside?

[2:19:05] We are going to move the day outside.

[2:19:07] up. There you go. Perfect. Daniel's work on that. Yeah we could have ultimate work

[2:19:15] whole background. It's for inside the chambers and outside for breaks.

[2:19:22] And then we

[2:19:22] would really incorporate hybrid, right?

[2:19:31] It looks like we have everybody back so we

[2:19:34] we can reen at 801 and move along to public hearing item 10B resolution to approve the

[2:19:48] engineers report confirm the assessment diagram and annual assessment amounts for

[2:19:53] learning and collecting of the annual assessments or the client's getting

[2:19:57] I think assessment district, or fiscal year 21 and 22, I am guessing this is going to be Mr. Scott.

[2:20:09] Yes, Mayor, I'm into the Council of Craig Scott, City and State of Public Works Director.

[2:20:15] As Mayor had mentioned, this is the annual process for the landscape and landing assessment district.

[2:20:21] Every year we have three meetings with the City Council on this item, this is the third one in our final one.

[2:20:31] And we first came before Council in January where I was appointed the Engineer of the work and the Council provided directions to me to

[2:20:42] and then staff to prepare the annual engineers report.

[2:20:46] The second meeting was in May,

[2:20:49] and that's when we prepared and presented the report.

[2:20:53] And Council considered that report

[2:20:55] and preliminary approved it

[2:20:59] and then set the date for today for the public hearing.

[2:21:05] Next slide, please.

[2:21:09] So that the city formed originally 10,

[2:21:14] landscaping lighting districts between 1989 and 2003, in accordance with the landscaping

[2:21:21] lighting act in 1972, and that was to pay for costs associated with maintaining landscaping

[2:21:27] and street lights within developments. In 2017, the staff to street better make the process

[2:21:37] of the more efficient, we, as allowed by the act, we consolidated the 10 districts into one

[2:21:44] district in each of the original districts, the knuckles, zones, and they retain their

[2:21:50] same areas and we do separate accounting and budgeting of the expenses and reserves for those

[2:21:58] visual zones. Next slide, please.

[2:22:03] Here are the 10 zones, the numbers and the names.

[2:22:09] And just on this slide, I'd like to point out that Zelens 1 and 3, 6 were limited to staying

[2:22:20] with the original assessments. Back when those zones were formed. And Zelens 7, 8, 9, and 10 were

[2:22:31] actually, they formed with the ability to have

[2:22:35] annual inflation adjustments on a next slide, please.

[2:22:46] So this shows generally where the 10 Zones

[2:22:51] are spread out through the city on a next slide, please.

[2:22:58] OK, so every year, the city staff, mainly

[2:23:03] the public works department, provides routine maintenance

[2:23:07] the zones. And so it's useful to say, to point out, when there was something above and beyond

[2:23:15] the normal maintenance activities. And so we've got, as of 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 had

[2:23:25] sort of activities in them that are not manual. And it's perhaps every two years or every three

[2:23:32] years. For example, Zone 3, we replaced three light bulbs in top and trim trees. Zone 6 of

[2:23:40] null. We replanted several plants and mulched the strip and then did irrigation repairs.

[2:23:51] Zone 7 of our gate. We tops in the trims and trees there. And there's a zone 9 and

[2:23:58] are away. There was actually a tree that was splitting down the middle in a part of it

[2:24:03] it fallen onto the street. And so we had a contract sort of this kind of removed that

[2:24:09] tree and replaced it. And then it's own tan, a long whole river highway there. Just south

[2:24:21] of the mortal in a whole river highway. There's some streetscape there. There was some

[2:24:28] removed, and we'll see in a following slide how we've got plants to go ahead and replace those

[2:24:36] and beautify that streetscape. Next slide, please.

[2:24:44] Okay, this is the proposed assessments

[2:24:48] per property. And again, for Zones 1, 2, 6, those are the same numbers we see every year,

[2:24:56] year you're in your out because they do not change and then on 7, 8, 9, and 10, we've got

[2:25:04] the 20, 21 assessment that was already collected, shown on the figure and then our proposed

[2:25:12] on the far right, the proposed assessment for 21, 22 and in the middle there we've got the current

[2:25:22] maximum annual assessment for the last four zones there and our proposed assessment is

[2:25:29] below those maximum. But the significance there is that with those zones that are

[2:25:36] allowed to be adjusted we can take the construction cost index when the zone was

[2:25:45] originally formed and divided into what the current January 1st, 2021, CCI is and that's

[2:25:53] the amount that we could potentially raise it to. But the city is not raised the

[2:25:59] assessment every single year, that's why the actual one is lower. Okay, next slide please.

[2:26:05] And that adjustment is 2.3% this year for those of us.

[2:26:14] And next slide,

[2:26:19] these are the code, I'm sorry,

[2:26:23] the already advanced at.

[2:26:24] The last slide was for a total assessment,

[2:26:28] not just for the properties, but for everything in it.

[2:26:31] We're showing that the city collects nearly $51,000

[2:26:36] all told from the 10 zones each year.

[2:26:38] The exercise we go through is to compare the expenses, free to the zones and against their reserves

[2:26:53] and get an idea.

[2:26:57] This gives us an idea of what capital projects or what big improvements we can do each zone in a given year.

[2:27:04] And so, that some zones are just primarily just not not capable of even meeting their annual maintenance requirements as in the quiet hollow zone, just in watering the plants, just the water bill, and doing minimal maintenance, it puts them into a deficit mode.

[2:27:29] So they have an ongoing general fund loan balance that just kind of gets larger each year.

[2:27:38] Some of the other zones, though, you could see park medows.

[2:27:43] That's the beginning of circle.

[2:27:46] The zone balance had built up to just about $17,000,

[2:27:50] and we'll find out later that we do plan on spending that down

[2:27:56] to balance of $2,000 by the end of $21,22,

[2:28:00] this is some capital improvements that we're contemplating.

[2:28:09] Okay, next slide,

[2:28:12] please.

[2:28:13] Okay, so part, and it just as I mentioned in part,

[2:28:15] Meadows, we do plan on spending down some of that reserve,

[2:28:19] which is normal, which is fine,

[2:28:21] and it doesn't take more than a year or two

[2:28:24] to start building it back up again,

[2:28:26] but there's split and rail fences.

[2:28:28] I need to be sections of that fence need to be replaced and here's a picture of the pathway

[2:28:35] from the Guinness Circle to Marshway and then there's another section of the pathway from

[2:28:41] the Guinness Circle to the bridge because across Laguna.

[2:28:45] Those sections are in our city's capital budget that the council just adopted.

[2:28:52] And with the pieces that are within of the pathway that are within the department of the zone

[2:29:01] are going to be paid for by that zone's reserves.

[2:29:07] Next slide please.

[2:29:08] This slide is a little bit out of order.

[2:29:11] I apologize for that.

[2:29:13] These are the adjustments, inflation adjustments on those four zones.

[2:29:18] Right

[2:29:22] next slide please jumping back to improvements so the sort of sort of more minor improvements

[2:29:30] on some of the other zones that I just wanted to talk about was in Hope Null just

[2:29:36] lived down the street from City Hall.

[2:29:39] We're planning on doing some replanting and mulching and a lot of pristance and laying in the

[2:29:45] island there in the Colesak and then in Barton Gate refresh the plants and mulch the streetscape

[2:29:51] center away a couple of years back we went ahead and hired a landscape.

[2:30:00] The contractor to do the maintenance.

[2:30:04] At that time, also, we listened to the managing property manager.

[2:30:14] And the HOA input we received at the HOA meetings from the residents and these are some of the items that the HOA interests in improving in the park, the playground, the benches, and then repair some of the damage sidewalk.

[2:30:33] So we've been making progress each year, I think the last year we repaired the irrigation, which was good timing, because it had actually overwatered some parts of the park in less than kind of martial like, so we rebalanced the irrigation to not waste water in that area.

[2:30:58] And then in all minakers, like I mentioned before, we had to remove some dead rush, some dead bushes and trees.

[2:31:08] So we would be looking at next year in 2021, 2022, coming back and planting and mulching their area.

[2:31:17] Next slide, please.

[2:31:21] And this is our summary final slide with the recommendation, which is to, by resolution,

[2:31:28] to adopt a resolution which approves the engineers report.

[2:31:33] And it confirms the assessment diagram and the annual assessment

[2:31:35] and maths and living in collection of annual assessments

[2:31:39] for the C-Fogger Landscape and Lighting Assessment District

[2:31:42] for his 1 through 10 first round to the Landscape and Lighting Act in 1972.

[2:31:51] So that concludes the presentation if you have to respond to any questions you may have.

[2:31:56] Thank you, Mr. Scott.

[2:31:57] Do we have any questions from the Council for Mr. Scott?

[2:32:00] That's what I'm talking about.

[2:32:02] Let's remember.

[2:32:03] I just have one question.

[2:32:06] Mr. Scott.

[2:32:07] And that's our favorite area.

[2:32:11] Quil-Halo.

[2:32:13] I was a little confused because on one heart,

[2:32:17] it says that the general fund loan is $2,498.

[2:32:24] And then in the next part of the report it says the general fund loan is 1,491 dollars and 81 cents.

[2:32:35] So I wasn't sure exactly.

[2:32:37] And that's on page 181 of the packet.

[2:32:42] And I don't have a page number for your report as far as the channels.

[2:32:49] I think we were tracking it just with the annual learn-wise in this year just recognizing

[2:33:04] that it's every single year on one of the slides in here I had actually put the total

[2:33:11] the running total, which is 26,000?

[2:33:16] Right. Right.

[2:33:18] So yeah.

[2:33:21] That's the first time I think we presented instead of just showing

[2:33:24] what they're going to hold again into every year just looking

[2:33:28] at the running total.

[2:33:30] Right, but this is four that 21, 22 column on one section

[2:33:36] of the report on the first section, was it called?

[2:33:40] The first section where it shows the utility charges and the total expenses and the total revenues.

[2:33:49] On that part it says that the general fund loan for 2122 is $2,498 and then on the next section where it talks about fund balances.

[2:34:02] It says the general fund loan for 2021-22 is 1491-81.

[2:34:10] I just was having a hard time because it numbers didn't match.

[2:34:15] What I'd like to propose is that we can go ahead and make that modification.

[2:34:23] The council's so chooses to adopt the reports tonight.

[2:34:28] We could just say with the caveat that.

[2:34:30] That was a number of problems.

[2:34:32] Okay.

[2:34:34] And I don't know which one's correct, but...

[2:34:38] Thank you.

[2:34:46] I mean, last year, I remember it was Susan.

[2:34:50] I said thank you.

[2:34:55] Did you hear me?

[2:34:56] John?

[2:35:00] Oh, it looks like it's John who's lost.

[2:35:03] Oh.

[2:35:04] I was just saying thank you, Craig.

[2:35:07] Um, my...

[2:35:14] The mayor started to call me.

[2:35:16] I heard advice.

[2:35:17] You know, he's talking about my habits and my job title.

[2:35:20] I'm not sure, so I'm going to go ahead and speak.

[2:35:27] So kind of a little bit of common question

[2:35:29] since they go together or get it getting now.

[2:35:34] But so this has been an area of concern.

[2:35:37] My wife concerned for some years,

[2:35:38] the city manager will remember.

[2:35:40] In one place, we're taking their jobs out.

[2:35:42] Zones, six, open, open, open,

[2:35:45] Kristen, some court.

[2:35:47] Because one of the neighbors there

[2:35:48] my attention looking through tax filled and out the pay isn't much but still. It's

[2:35:54] notable and when they pointed out the landscaping they had they were concerned

[2:35:57] it was most of it was dead and what was originally there was pretty minimum. And staff

[2:36:02] quickly did replace that and also checks to make sure that the water and equipment was

[2:36:07] working. But within a year it was dead again and when you place it one more time and

[2:36:14] been kind of dead again for a while since then. And it's very minimum of my

[2:36:18] abscap. We're talking some rather non-script small shrubs, a little more.

[2:36:23] Mark hanging on him and we're having some technical difficulty here. I mean, I can't

[2:36:28] get getting my video.

[2:36:32] Does this help if I stopped my video?

[2:36:36] Mr. Mayor, I wasn't having any issue with, I think Mr. Mayor, I think it might be you.

[2:36:46] I think you're cutting out.

[2:36:50] You could try to stop in your video that does help.

[2:36:56] Notice the attorney has cloned himself four times as well.

[2:37:00] We may be having some issues.

[2:37:06] I'm going to ask to step Mr. O'Biet and Mr. Stop, can you hear me okay?

[2:37:12] Yes.

[2:37:13] Can I go ahead and continue with this?

[2:37:15] It was my dear to public came here for some reason.

[2:37:20] So as I was saying, so this is an area I'd like to see first

[2:37:23] to do better.

[2:37:24] Now I understand it completely.

[2:37:26] We have some fixed, non-worldly cost maintenance fund areas that we're probably everyone

[2:37:32] to be increased, because the only way to do it would be to get everyone in the neighborhood

[2:37:35] to increase what they pay for it, and that may be unlikely.

[2:37:39] But still with that, this is a limited number of places, and we're stuck with them, and

[2:37:46] the costs there, when you look at the city budget are pretty minimal, I would like to ask

[2:37:50] And it looks like you may be in which your report says you're on track and I'll be replacing

[2:37:55] the Christmas and court landscaping again.

[2:37:57] If we could make sure it stays green and then it is replaced regularly for some reason

[2:38:02] and guys.

[2:38:03] But beyond that next year, perhaps, come back with a discussion for these non-roll and areas

[2:38:08] if we can't get agreements from all the neighborhoods, can we look at ways to do a better job

[2:38:14] of the lighting, more attractive,

[2:38:16] and more, a lot will be fitting.

[2:38:18] I think a city like Katati in some of these areas.

[2:38:21] I'd like us to look at that as accounts

[2:38:23] because I think we need to.

[2:38:24] And it might be some we can do.

[2:38:26] We just accept that we have some legacy,

[2:38:28] or from districts that don't, the cost don't roll in.

[2:38:31] Perhaps from the small degree we figured out

[2:38:33] as part of our cost of doing business

[2:38:35] and providing the quality of service that we provided

[2:38:38] as a city.

[2:38:39] So that's what I wanted to ask for.

[2:38:44] Thank you.

[2:38:46] How much do you remember for you?

[2:38:48] Mr. Quick question for Eric.

[2:38:51] We've got about what the city's commitments to these districts are as part of the formation of the districts.

[2:38:59] Is there a particular service level that we're committed to provide for the whopping 32 dollars a year?

[2:39:09] Payment?

[2:39:13] The...

[2:39:15] That...

[2:39:15] A lot happens with a set and stone with the formation of the districts.

[2:39:20] All right.

[2:39:21] And so some of the original one was back in 1989.

[2:39:25] And so I think strictly speaking,

[2:39:29] it would be to the same level of standard that was established with the original development.

[2:39:35] It was originally installed with a long mortal avenue, you'll see that over the years,

[2:39:50] if it does need some refreshing, the plants do need to be yanked out and the plants put in

[2:39:56] bolts and we did make a significant effort along mortal avenue a few years back and so we

[2:40:02] try to do that. So yes, there's a standard of care, but at the same time we're getting $32

[2:40:11] a year and there's that limit. So I think the city realistically can scale back some of

[2:40:19] these efforts in those areas to stay within our budget.

[2:40:25] Either that, or we accept that

[2:40:28] We screwed up when we set up those districts and didn't allow for inflation or increases and we just have to accept it in the cities on the hook now.

[2:40:37] I mean, I think that's the direction by sort of land on this pointing and I'm not sure what the point of council makes that call and just says,

[2:40:45] okay, we're going to take the $5,000 a year, it would yet.

[2:40:48] But we'll spend what it takes to keep it to whatever level we keep the rest of the city.

[2:40:53] Yeah.

[2:40:56] Yeah, I would say that's where we're at now with those districts in particular.

[2:41:00] I mean, it's, it's unfortunate because they're paying something, but they're back something as opposed to, you know,

[2:41:09] somewhere that's not, there's not a special assessment.

[2:41:12] So, I think that's, I mean, it'll be appropriate for taking hours that we, that we may end it to the same level of care as we want the cliff to,

[2:41:19] But we don't, we're not either to take on big projects that are expensive, including the one.

[2:41:28] Okay.

[2:41:28] Thanks.

[2:41:31] So maybe we just go with astroturfing some plastic bars.

[2:41:39] That's a fabulous idea.

[2:41:41] We set the lead blow up.

[2:41:42] That's off the flower at the fifth one.

[2:41:44] All right.

[2:41:46] There's no further questions.

[2:41:47] I'll open myself for our public comment.

[2:41:56] Let's purchase a few.

[2:41:57] Would it facilitate that?

[2:41:58] If I may, this is looking after the formal public hearing.

[2:42:06] I'm sorry about that.

[2:42:07] A little technical trouble.

[2:42:09] But I will open this up for public comment.

[2:42:12] And for our attendees tonight, please use your race hand icon.

[2:42:15] We're going to start now if you're dialing with your telephone.

[2:42:22] And that will end public art.

[2:42:25] Thank you very much.

[2:42:26] I miss part of the beginning of that.

[2:42:28] There's some technical issues on there.

[2:42:31] Um, if I understand correctly, um, we, from your suggestion, or, or comment, by

[2:42:39] smelling that, um, and reiterated by Council Member Ford that, um, yes, we did, did not

[2:42:46] put in any inflation protector on those.

[2:42:50] So in order to keep the community and looking decent, we just kind of have to keep that.

[2:42:56] It will certainly be great.

[2:42:57] perhaps not as pretty as I'd like you to the point and correct the end. Unfortunately, those

[2:43:02] costs are going to destroy the city and I think it's a place we need to go. I haven't visually

[2:43:08] inspected every place closely but if Christmas and hope choose for many of the other

[2:43:14] orphaned or locked ones, I think it's a place we could and we get the opportunity to start

[2:43:19] moving. So I would talk about this for several years. I keep saying I'd like to see it done.

[2:43:24] I'm happy to vote for this tonight. I'd like to see this by next year. The other way with the process to do a little bit better the light.

[2:43:31] That's all I want to ask.

[2:43:33] Thank you very much.

[2:43:34] And with that, I would entertain the motion.

[2:43:38] I would be willing to make a motion to adopt a resolution, approving the annual engineer's report.

[2:43:46] confirming the assessment diagram and annual assessment amounts and authorizing the

[2:43:54] leveening and collection of assessments for fiscal year 2021, 22, for the

[2:44:00] Katani landscaping and lighting assessment districts for zones 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10,

[2:44:09] to the landscape and the marketing act of 1972 and with the resolution of that general fund number.

[2:44:23] I'll second that.

[2:44:24] Thank you.

[2:44:26] So we have a motion in a second, and for those of you that were not around way back,

[2:44:32] prior to 17, we had to go through each one of these, and finally we consolidated it to one.

[2:44:38] Thank you.

[2:44:39] Thank you.

[2:44:40] Thank you.

[2:44:41] So, do we have a motion and a second on this board just with you finally take a moment?

[2:44:47] Councilmember Harvey?

[2:44:49] Yes.

[2:44:50] Councilmember Sparks?

[2:44:52] Yes.

[2:44:52] Councilmember Ford?

[2:44:54] Yes.

[2:44:54] Vice-millian men?

[2:44:57] Yes.

[2:44:58] Mayor More.

[2:44:59] Yes.

[2:45:00] Thank you very much. Okay, so that is on the

[2:45:10] public hearing. I will move on to our regular agenda items and consideration of options to further explore equity and inclusivity in what's possible. And I believe our city manager is going to address this.

[2:45:25] Yes, thank you, Mayor. Members of the Council. So just to start the conversation, we did look at other communities, it's no accounting in particular.

[2:45:38] And I will just focus on some of the more, I guess, extraordinary efforts that have been going on in the county.

[2:45:47] Most cities have done some of the basic measures that he would expect, such as Resolution

[2:45:53] to Close and Racism, and then Clareifying Public Information around their operations.

[2:46:00] So, there's that, there's also just as a footnote, through all this, the Rippant Implementation,

[2:46:05] we are part of this no. 1 County Public Safety Consortium, and when this conversation started

[2:46:11] last year, the consortium decided as a group to work on implementing this jointly, and so that

[2:46:21] means that all of the cities in Sonoma County that are part of that consortium are implementing

[2:46:26] RIPA six months early, so effectively July 1 this year. The only non consortium cities that are

[2:46:33] in Sonoma County, as listed in the staff report or as the vastible healers were concluded. The staff

[2:46:40] report says that their implementation status for RIPA is unknown. I'm sure it's known

[2:46:45] by somebody, it's not known by me, but I know that the consortium members are all moving

[2:46:51] forward with the July 1 implementation date and that includes us.

[2:46:55] So, first off, first of all, some of the other cities and what they've been working on.

[2:46:59] Penn Luma, I think, is safe to say is that the most activity around us and perhaps

[2:47:06] be Santa Rosa, secondarily. So Petalema they had then a town hall last year and then that was

[2:47:14] just a mayor signature police chief sort of listening town hall and then in July of last year

[2:47:21] they had a council meeting, a listening session essentially. And at the July 2020 meeting

[2:47:29] there was various members of the community I think largely advocacy groups that wanted to do

[2:47:35] community led the listening session and advanced to the city sponsored effort. So

[2:47:40] in mid July the group and all the different groups are involved or listed in

[2:47:46] the staff report, but basically they had a listening session and they ultimately

[2:47:55] produced a report titled Community Forum on Racism Interactions with Lisa

[2:48:00] Paloma. And I guess there was some issues prior. Reportedly prior to the release of this report,

[2:48:08] where some of the groups didn't want to be. I guess participate in some of the findings of that report.

[2:48:12] But anyway, the report was released.

[2:48:16] And so that's that. I don't know what's happened at that

[2:48:20] report of it then. It was released by the groups.

[2:48:24] Around the same time, Paloma also hired the

[2:48:26] to guide a city-led discussion and that facilitator begun by conducting interviews with community community members.

[2:48:36] I think many of that led the previously mentioned community-led listening sessions.

[2:48:44] And they also, the facilitator also developed a community survey.

[2:48:49] So that was done, and that survey went through January of this year, and then in November of last year also the Police Department conducted a review of its diversity and quality inclusivity efforts term is DEI efforts.

[2:49:07] The Police Department also, with the facilitator, participated in an uncomfortable conversations

[2:49:14] with the black man, which some of you are maybe all of you have seen.

[2:49:18] It was on YouTube and the link was provided in the staff.

[2:49:24] And then most recently, in January of 2021, the City Council conducted a third public meeting

[2:49:30] in a workshop format to review the efforts to date, in March then of this year, the Petteloma City Council

[2:49:38] formed what they called an ad hoc community advisory committee,

[2:49:44] and their purpose, their

[2:49:45] state of purpose was to study and discuss issues contributing to contributing to community members,

[2:49:50] not feeling safe, or welcome in Petteloma and to develop recommendations to a group diversity,

[2:49:55] equity and inclusivity in Petteloma. And this is led by the facilitator that

[2:50:00] I will hire, it's a 28 member group, 22 named seats for community groups and six out large seats that are appointed by the council.

[2:50:11] They intend to meet six times over the course of 2021. I understand that they've met three of the six times.

[2:50:18] The interest of minor correctional staff report, the intent isn't to facilitate or to provide

[2:50:24] recommendations to the council thing to the process, obviously, to facilitate or

[2:50:28] facilitating the process of the bigger resource to provide some recommendations.

[2:50:35] And then, as we all know, Petaloma has contracted with Petaloma people services to one

[2:50:39] of food-style programs 12 hours a day initially, starting in July of this year, and they do

[2:50:46] 10 to move to a full-time service by the end of 2021 and they're currently in the process of purchasing enough fitting bands to provide around a clock service.

[2:50:57] So that's, and maybe the links to these things I talked about are directly linked to the staff reports.

[2:51:01] So you can find this documents or web pages that have details.

[2:51:07] But that's in a nutshell, that's Petaluma.

[2:51:09] Runa Park conducted three facilitated listening sessions in 2020.

[2:51:18] These were facilitated by Coro of Northern California,

[2:51:21] so facilitated.

[2:51:24] They weren't, City Council wasn't directly involved,

[2:51:27] although I'm sure that they were participating

[2:51:29] in listening to the conversation.

[2:51:35] Currently, there's no add-off or standing committee.

[2:51:38] of the council or any other body on this topic.

[2:51:42] We are working with Horne Park as you know,

[2:51:44] and with SSU on a college type model.

[2:51:47] So that's in process right now.

[2:51:51] And Renupark also has a facility to chat with the chief.

[2:51:56] It's Facebook Live Zoom.

[2:51:58] I'm not every two weeks, it's facilitated.

[2:52:01] So they are doing that.

[2:52:03] And one thing I overlooked in the staff report,

[2:52:04] but I'll just tell you there quickly now.

[2:52:06] In May, the Council did have a conversation for the conversation about this stuff, and the direction from that meeting was quarterly reports on activities that the staff will get to Council.

[2:52:23] We're going to part is moving forward on some type of auditing process of their policies and it's training, including officer, a resiliency training, but I think also a liquidity that peppers to be training as well.

[2:52:41] So that was the direction from May, maybe there was some conversation about coming up with a community engagement plan, but there's to my knowledge is nothing.

[2:52:52] saw on what that engagement looks like, whether it's more workshops or what their intent is there.

[2:52:58] I think they're planning to come back at a future meeting that conversation.

[2:53:03] All right, Susanna Rosa.

[2:53:06] They have a community engagement division, and they developed a community empowerment plan,

[2:53:10] and they did a series of 15 listening sessions in 2020.

[2:53:15] Each of those generally, each of those listening sessions started at different demographics.

[2:53:20] So youth, seniors, by-pock, in a different, just basically different demographics.

[2:53:28] They weren't city council meetings.

[2:53:31] They were facilitated kind of listening sessions kind of, I think, like, when I parked it in a sense.

[2:53:38] And then they did produce a, at the end of that listening session, they consolidated the comments received and put it into a report,

[2:53:46] although it's unclear what recommendation may be implemented from those listening sessions.

[2:53:53] The City Council, though, they did establish a free member public safety subcommittee in 2020.

[2:54:00] Today, it met three times.

[2:54:03] It was all in 2020.

[2:54:05] And the purview of the subcommittee is reviewing public safety issues, any reports, and after action reports for police fire and emergency services.

[2:54:15] Santa Rosa has also historically had it independent. We thought of her to review

[2:54:19] police department practices and incidents, but since 2018 that position has been

[2:54:24] vacant.

[2:54:27] As recently as February of this year Santa Rosa, their public safety

[2:54:31] self-committee in it, I think their council was indicated, the desire to

[2:54:36] refill that, so I do know that they had reposted that RFP to try to get a new

[2:54:42] It's my knowledge that they haven't hired them on this time.

[2:54:47] So moving forward, the community empowerment plan

[2:54:49] identified in the report to the City Council on community engagement activities

[2:54:53] and progress towards each goal.

[2:54:55] I presume this is coordinated by their community engagement division in Santa Rosa.

[2:55:00] And lastly, they are implementing a crew, it's a type of model.

[2:55:04] And as I think everyone knows here,

[2:55:06] their models are a little different than what

[2:55:08] has is dealing in this little different than what we are exploring. Santa Rosa is looking at

[2:55:15] a slightly different model that would integrate the MST team and their Santa Rosa fire staff,

[2:55:21] and Bucklew staff, so the nonprofit went all over the group into essentially rather than a two-person team,

[2:55:27] a three-person team.

[2:55:31] It's a lastly county of San Nomah. In the summer of 2020, the county board

[2:55:37] supervisors created the office of equity and originally they were tasked with

[2:55:43] improving vaccination rates for the Latinx populations. As I understand it now

[2:55:49] they're generally tasked with working with county departments to improve

[2:55:53] equity and county government. As we all saw at a council meeting they did also

[2:55:58] improve their strategic plan in January of 2021 and that included the

[2:56:04] five years strategic plan that included a racial equity and social justice pillar.

[2:56:11] So I imagine that the office of equity is going to be in part tasked with implementing

[2:56:16] some of that in county government.

[2:56:20] And then finally, the voters approved measure P, providing broader oversight and increased

[2:56:23] budget to the independent office of law enforcement review and outreach.

[2:56:27] So I'll bear up as we all know it.

[2:56:29] I don't know if it's oversea county sheriff.

[2:56:32] The County Board of Supervisors does not have a network or advisory committee.

[2:56:36] They do have a point to committee, though, including Iolera and the Commission on Human Rights.

[2:56:42] And there's other health and human service commissions that have some sort of tie in the social

[2:56:47] equities such as health and health action, health and health problems, but thank you.

[2:56:53] So those, at least with any snowman county, those are the cities that are that are that have

[2:56:59] on other things beyond just some of the basic measures that I mentioned, and I will just

[2:57:06] recap what we're doing. I think we all know, I'm so happy quick about it, but what might

[2:57:12] be of interest is sort of a update on where we stand with some of these measures.

[2:57:18] So obviously,

[2:57:18] I mean, we have a couple of times all last year, which if you know, RIPA, so RIPA is implementation

[2:57:25] is complete, and we will be full operational July 1, which is the date that California

[2:57:33] DOJA agreed to, so we'll be starting to submit data there on stops.

[2:57:41] And then the underreport for the community, so we created the first annual report as you

[2:57:45] know, and this is on the website, and this is just one of many annual reports that will continue

[2:57:50] to do. Review the annual RIPA Board report, so this is the State RIPA Board I'm talking about,

[2:57:58] which is one of the measures that we agreed to follow up on. So each year, they publish

[2:58:04] and you report and the RIPA report for 2021 is out now. It covers 2019 data, but it's under

[2:58:13] So, and I'm not to just in the future, we'll be coming back to the council, to have a conversation about that.

[2:58:22] And then training, continuing to train officers upon post-standards, including the place of bias training and de-escalation training.

[2:58:28] This is obviously not the only thing. Currently, police staff are taking an eight-hour course that's being held at Snowstaking University.

[2:58:36] And it's on procedural justice in the list of bias.

[2:58:41] So procedural justice basically means policing approaches

[2:58:43] then a precise respect, listening neutrality and trust.

[2:58:48] And then also studying the list of bias

[2:58:53] that can be barriers to these approaches.

[2:58:55] And I will say in this, we are unique in accounting

[2:58:59] that the city is also sending all of our dispatchers.

[2:59:01] Basically we're sending our entire police departments that.

[2:59:05] And I think it's a good move even though other agencies aren't seeing any dispatchers because

[2:59:12] they dispatchers oftentimes with their first contact with the public.

[2:59:17] The one example in there that I was given, but there's others, it is like a suspicious person's

[2:59:22] call.

[2:59:22] It's good to have people that are thinking about this thinking in this way when they receive

[2:59:26] these calls from the community so that it could potentially be a non-response or an alternative

[2:59:32] of response, particularly when, if the council moves forward at the coups model, there could be

[2:59:37] another sort of leg of the EMS response system besides just the diverse response for officers.

[2:59:48] Updating this into a point form and making it available, so we did look at other cities,

[2:59:52] um, complaint forms, we reviewed the RIPA board, state report boards,

[2:59:57] recommended best practices for complaint forms, and we updated our complaints.

[3:00:00] The Foreign Minister on our website is live, so that's done.

[3:00:05] Police has done a bit of legislative recommendations for now.

[3:00:10] Community survey, racism that is complete.

[3:00:14] That was proposed to be a financial process for two years.

[3:00:18] We have a baseline to complete, so we come back every two years.

[3:00:22] We are currently working with that third party to conduct the policy compliance review or audit per say of our policies, trainings and practices to make sure they're all aligned.

[3:00:35] I do expect to report the summer that they're the summer that we're going to report to council.

[3:00:41] So those are the measures that were originally, the stat was originally directed to the U.S.

[3:00:48] fall, a couple of things that have come up since then that were also working on its goods.

[3:00:54] In terms of our status there is that, is that we're currently in the data validation stage.

[3:01:00] So the consultant there has all of our data combined data from our

[3:01:05] work at Cardi and SSU and they're validating the data and putting that

[3:01:11] together, the schedule we've been provided is that they will finish that

[3:01:17] data validation work by the end of June. So I would expect the conversation

[3:01:20] again on July about where we are with this. So simultaneous data efforts we're

[3:01:26] of looking at the cost pieces, what would cost to purchase the vehicles, hard staff, so

[3:01:34] for, so that's the other half of that question that hopefully they'll all be together

[3:01:39] and able to have a fully informed discussion and July and what that would look like

[3:01:43] and what that would mean with the cost perspective.

[3:01:47] So that's, oh, and then the last thing is the use of force module,

[3:01:53] so the system is very

[3:01:55] robust that collects data, but there's a couple of things that have been a play.

[3:01:59] One is the sort of evolving standard of what is defined as a use of force.

[3:02:06] So, you know, last year what was defined as use of force got significantly more granular,

[3:02:13] such as display of a firearm and other things like that, and became categorized as use of force.

[3:02:18] So, there's that element, but then there's also that these systems were originally installed,

[3:02:24] they're installed to crank out the data that's required by like DOJ or state DOJ, the kind

[3:02:30] of normal statutory recording. Obviously we're in a different world now and we want the system

[3:02:38] to be able to output basically capture all of the use of force elements with the new broader

[3:02:46] definitions that we're using today and then be able to export it all easily so that we can

[3:02:50] reporting, so that's what I think the council and the community

[3:02:54] expects.

[3:02:56] So we did work with SSU and SRKAC to design that template and turn

[3:03:03] it on and it's currently done, but it's people are being trained

[3:03:08] on the use of it right now.

[3:03:10] So there's that, that's within the system.

[3:03:12] But as I say the staff report, before the end of last year,

[3:03:16] we designed our own internal process to track it and the

[3:03:20] and until this use the course module about turned on.

[3:03:23] So the next year in the report should have,

[3:03:24] I think, all the data at our fingertips rather than it just being

[3:03:28] embedded in the area of the reports, very hard to extract.

[3:03:34] So that is quick summary of the background

[3:03:38] of the word that the host is.

[3:03:40] If I didn't mention a community, it's because there's nothing

[3:03:44] specific to me on, and these were specific.

[3:03:50] So,

[3:03:54] for the options, I won't rehash it in a lot of detail, but what's presented in the

[3:04:03] South report are two superficial options that, and there's a conflict with me.

[3:04:09] You know, constructive, and scale to address the specific set of facts and issues of the

[3:04:15] body and one is continuing the efforts that we have on building right now and this year

[3:04:20] we did. It takes us and then decide later if we need to do something else and I will say to

[3:04:29] sort of underlying all these conversations is there's a lot of new stakeholder that's either

[3:04:33] been recently passed or is pending so this is a continually shifting landscape as well

[3:04:40] and children of legal landscape.

[3:04:46] And so this approach of course would continue to include

[3:04:50] the annual review of Ripper recommendations

[3:04:52] and the annual reports and the justing things

[3:04:56] based on best practices or specific issues

[3:04:58] and the biennial community service.

[3:05:01] So that's one potential option.

[3:05:04] Another option is, that's discussed in the staff report

[3:05:08] is forming a two-person ad hoc at the City Council, which, of course, would be supported by

[3:05:12] City staff, because it's an ad hoc, it would have a 12-month maximum term.

[3:05:19] The ad hoc, it could review city policies, training, provide recommendations to the full

[3:05:23] City Council, a body of such as this, would be available to meet with any community stakeholders

[3:05:30] to get feedback in the process of developing recommendations, and I think I'd be able to

[3:05:35] which is monthly sort of report backs to the full council,

[3:05:39] so the status updates are there.

[3:05:43] The other thing that's not presented as a recommendation,

[3:05:48] but it's obviously described in the background,

[3:05:51] is like Petaluma, for example,

[3:05:54] formed a community only ad hoc to work,

[3:05:59] in that case with a facilitator and then work through.

[3:06:05] work through the issues and then present potential recommendations to the council.

[3:06:12] That's a, that's a, that's a whole other level of that becomes a brown act body and there's much more

[3:06:20] sort of staff commitment to something like that.

[3:06:24] There's a lot of administrative maintenance plus a lot of, it just creates a much deeper level

[3:06:30] of research required, typically because, you know, you do have a assistance group and the

[3:06:37] often don't know some of the basics, so there's a lot of, you know, research and

[3:06:41] brain at the speed on the ground and a lot of research on legal questions or whatever

[3:06:44] we're going to come from that.

[3:06:45] So, at least the first flash it didn't seem like the most bang for the buck, but obviously

[3:06:52] that's another option that's out there.

[3:06:54] That's used in some other communities.

[3:06:57] And then regardless of which way the Council wants to go tonight, another option, another sort

[3:07:03] of add-on to any option, is the ability to have additional facilitated public work

[3:07:08] jobs to get input community and potentially just continue to raise awareness about, as

[3:07:16] says, the staff report implicit or unconscious bias, micro and macroaggressions, privilege

[3:07:22] specific facility. Those kind of issues. Talking with people that do this work full-time

[3:07:28] and looking at our community, the recommendation was if we did something like that, we would

[3:07:32] do one and just sort of see how it went and decide if we need to do more based on the outcome of

[3:07:37] that community workshop if we were to add on that as an optional. Obviously, if we do facilitate a work

[3:07:44] that will cost some level money in, that would just be something we'd have to consider. It's not

[3:07:50] any questions we'd have to have that in.

[3:07:55] And I think that is sort of a summary.

[3:07:58] I don't want to keep on talking because I'm sure the council

[3:08:01] on the public have many thoughts on this.

[3:08:05] So I'll just end it at that.

[3:08:06] I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[3:08:09] Thank you, Mr. David.

[3:08:11] That's quite a lot of work went into this.

[3:08:15] A lot of research went into this.

[3:08:19] At this point, I'll bring back to the council.

[3:08:21] I'll take that any questions from Mr. Ovid.

[3:08:24] How do you remember Sparks?

[3:08:26] Thank you.

[3:08:27] I just have some quick comments on the presentation,

[3:08:31] and I'll see you in the comments for later.

[3:08:32] I just wanted to say a big thank you to Mr. Ovid

[3:08:37] for putting together all this extensive research.

[3:08:39] It was really helpful.

[3:08:41] And there were several things I wasn't aware of,

[3:08:43] which I really want to give a kudos to council member,

[3:08:48] I almost promoted council member to Mr. Obed and Chief Parish, which is I'm really happy to hear about the procedural justice training.

[3:08:59] I'm looking forward to seeing that policy compliance review and I'm satisfied to hear we were being together with our University of Junior College to make that easy for us much also.

[3:09:10] I just appreciate hearing about all that and thank you for that.

[3:09:14] Thank you.

[3:09:20] And a comment you'd question from the council at this point?

[3:09:26] Okay.

[3:09:29] I will open this up for public comment.

[3:09:33] Thank you, Mayor Moore, for our attendees tonight.

[3:09:35] Please use your raise hand icon.

[3:09:38] Adrian Lobby, go ahead.

[3:09:45] Thank you very much.

[3:09:47] Thanks for bringing up this issue again.

[3:09:50] It's a very serious issue as we know.

[3:09:55] And I've been thinking about our town and how much we treasure

[3:09:58] the way that we are here and, you know, we call it charming or we call it small.

[3:10:04] It's ways we talk about it.

[3:10:06] But to me, basically, it says we all get along here.

[3:10:10] And we have some sense of harmony.

[3:10:14] But, of course, the survey that came out around racism show that there's some cracks in all of that.

[3:10:20] And I think, as we look to the future, we're going to see more and more people with color

[3:10:24] and also, frankly, more portable, coming in to Utah, and I really hope that we can get ahead

[3:10:33] of that earth and continue the kind of harmony that whatever amount of harmony we already have,

[3:10:40] and build on it so that we don't end up having a lot of racial tension since we become less white.

[3:10:48] I also want to say how amazing the work has been done.

[3:10:51] I think that the Council and the staff have taken this really seriously.

[3:10:56] There's a lot of good stuff in this report that is impressive work that's been done.

[3:11:01] And data that we will be able to use to go forward.

[3:11:04] And that's also really excellent.

[3:11:07] The things I'm concerned about and most want to see is tips and involvement and education.

[3:11:14] I think that all of us, because of George Floyd and all of these surrounding understanding

[3:11:20] of how deep and wide racism is in our culture, we realize that we really need to educate

[3:11:26] each other and we need to get down in the weeds about what's really going on, what needs

[3:11:31] to change whether it's police policy or cultural, or cultural, or cultural kinds of things.

[3:11:38] I have to say I was very disappointed in the options that you were given by the staff,

[3:11:43] to either do nothing about an ad hoc committee or to do an ad hoc committee with only two council members.

[3:11:50] I understand the Brown Act is a big issue here, but I see in San Ensemble and at the SRKC,

[3:11:57] they have very robust committees that include citizen involvement, include powerful people and involvement.

[3:12:04] And I'd like to see that here, and I'm not sure if we can get there with the options that we're giving.

[3:12:08] And in talking with some of you ahead of time, I was amazed to find that people think that

[3:12:16] core that our main goal is to oversee the police.

[3:12:21] That is of course really important because they're guys with guns.

[3:12:26] But our goal is to improve racial harmony in the city and please don't misunderstand what we're

[3:12:35] coming from. We want to work collaboratively. We want to help you with your efforts, not

[3:12:40] him or them, and that doesn't work you with the police as well. Thank you. Thank you.

[3:12:49] Can you let Delario go ahead?

[3:13:00] Yes. Okay, great. Yeah, hi. I'm Daniela Delario,

[3:13:05] or Daniel. I live in downtown, Utah. They actually live at Frogsong. And I just, you know,

[3:13:12] first and foremost, I'm also a member of core. But I first and foremost just wanted to thank

[3:13:16] all of you for all of the hard work that you've done around these issues.

[3:13:20] I'm really excited about so many things that are happening in Katati, especially the

[3:13:26] Kuhuts program.

[3:13:27] That's been kind of my biggest, I don't know, I just, I think if there's only one thing

[3:13:34] that we could do, it would just be great if we could, you know, get the Kuhuts model going

[3:13:38] and I really appreciate all of the hard work that's gone into that and then all these

[3:13:42] other things that Mr. Ovid just laid out for us.

[3:13:45] thank you so much. I do feel like an ad hoc committee would provide this space for brainstorming

[3:13:52] and discussion on how we can make a Katati and more diverse, more inclusive, more welcoming

[3:13:58] place for people with different backgrounds and overall more equitable for everyone and just thinking

[3:14:05] of some things that maybe would come up in an ad hoc committee or some things that would be

[3:14:15] the Katati logo, which I know has been brought up at City Council meetings before, creating

[3:14:20] some events, maybe international festivals, but also engaging in an ongoing dialogue that includes

[3:14:27] diverse viewpoints. And I know City Council has done so much already.

[3:14:35] I had a Luma House this ad hoc committee that we heard about, and I'm just really wondering if Katati

[3:14:41] could have one as well. I do think it would be beneficial for, you know, to give members of the

[3:14:47] public seat at the table and to hear from more diverse voices, people of color, black people,

[3:14:53] brown people, and other people of color in the community. And yeah, people of color.

[3:15:00] I have been, you know, my understandings, they have been leaving cinnamon county because of a high cost of living. And also the police response last year at the Black Lives Matter protests that that felt really scary for people who went out and were protesting and were peacefully protesting. There was a very strong police response. And I know personally I know people who don't feel safe in cinnamon county anymore because of that police response.

[3:15:30] Yeah, so I'm hoping that we can we can create an ad hoc committee.

[3:15:34] I also love the idea of additional facilitated workshops so that you can hear from from the community more.

[3:15:42] But yeah, so overall, thank you so much and I'm hoping that we can make this happen here.

[3:15:48] Thank you very much.

[3:15:51] My

[3:16:01] first word is from the report that was just presented is very inclusive and complete and I share

[3:16:20] in the congratulations that the last two speakers have given for that work. I have a couple

[3:16:32] questions in the report and I don't know how to handle this. I made a note on number 7

[3:16:49] And I've not been able to go back to that report to look that up so that I can be clearer about my question.

[3:17:01] My apologies for that.

[3:17:03] But if somebody knows what that is about and can let me know that would be wonderful.

[3:17:10] So,

[3:17:14] our police sports look like our community,

[3:17:21] many women are on it.

[3:17:24] How many officers, I don't mean in the office.

[3:17:28] How diverse is it?

[3:17:34] Does one get input from smaller groups of people who historically do not complain and especially

[3:17:47] away from groups of people who are immigrant who don't want to make waves.

[3:17:54] The first model that was presented that Damian presented comes closest to being able to access

[3:18:06] what's going on with those folks in our community because there are many people here who

[3:18:13] don't want to make waves.

[3:18:20] And we need those waves. We need to know where we are doing well

[3:18:25] and where we are not doing well. The work that all of you on the City Council and on the

[3:18:34] have to do is tremendously busy and amazing that you get it done. And that's why there are

[3:18:45] those of us who feel that some things could be expanded to the community, trained community

[3:18:56] members, and I'm going to stop there because my time is over. Thank you.

[3:19:04] Mr. Forbes shares if you needed any additional and it's just a few more seconds for additional comment. I will allow that

[3:19:25] Mayor more that will end up public a book one minute. We've got a hand up Carol go ahead

[3:19:53] of the city has done an excellent job of bringing together all the work that's being

[3:20:00] done throughout the county to deal with inclusion and operational issues.

[3:20:09] And the recommendation of a two person city council committee is if it ends up being

[3:20:23] And the City Council does not choose to form an at-hot committee or call it call that into being.

[3:20:33] Which I can understand because it would involve the Brown Act and a lot of work and issues to set it up.

[3:20:42] But if you do have the two-person City Council committee, I think it would be important to make people aware that

[3:20:55] of it. And for the members who end up on that committee to be reaching out to debt people

[3:21:04] to come and if they set up meetings to be going to speak and to bring their issues forward.

[3:21:14] And that may be harder to do if it's just two council members that would be if there was

[3:21:23] I think it's important to choose those council members wisely and be sure that they're committed to pursuing the issues that need to be addressed.

[3:21:45] Thank you.

[3:21:49] Mayor Moore, that will end the public comment.

[3:21:52] Thank you.

[3:21:54] With that, I will bring this back to the Council for further discussion.

[3:22:02] I'm so forward.

[3:22:04] Thank you, Mayor Moore.

[3:22:06] I've been wrestling with this a little since the packet came out.

[3:22:09] My first response to the options presented in the packet either.

[3:22:14] Well, first of all, the two options presented are not mutually exclusive, right?

[3:22:18] I hope we agree that number one in the packet is given.

[3:22:21] We continue with the efforts currently underway.

[3:22:24] So I hope that that's not controversial, and the issue is really, do we try to set up any structure

[3:22:30] to explore issues of racism and the totany anymore?

[3:22:34] I first was disappointed that there was not a third option of a bigger, more representative

[3:22:41] group.

[3:22:43] But I do understand a constraints that the Brown Act places on what bodies can do, and I've tried

[3:22:49] and I pay attention to what pedaling this brand active committee has been going through and

[3:22:55] and have not real excited about the potential for that committee to make a big difference

[3:23:03] in that community.

[3:23:03] I hope I'm wrong, but I'm a little worried about that direction.

[3:23:09] So the two-person council committee, given that we just instituted a new top level committee council

[3:23:16] for the year related to diversity and inclusion and given that we're a year out from George Floyd's

[3:23:24] murder and that brought to the fore a lot of issues that run very deep in our society.

[3:23:33] I think that two-person council committee is a reasonable first step for those people and we

[3:23:41] and frame it as a committee whose charge has to do with that new council goal.

[3:23:48] We could think about, okay, this is a new council goal, it's a sign a couple of us to really

[3:23:54] look at that for a year, including I would hope getting out into the community in ways that

[3:24:02] a Brown Act committee can't. So if a couple of us were this group, we could go meet with homeowners

[3:24:08] associations, just like Damian and Keith Barrish have been doing or in conjunction with them

[3:24:15] or something like that. And so I'm coming around to see that what I would have hoped would be a

[3:24:22] middle option in the report that option number two as being a viable path. Thanks.

[3:24:30] Thank you.

[3:24:31] Thank you. I have some comments that before I get to them. Could I please ask for a little clarification on the question that Marjorie

[3:24:42] compsures raised about the third party compliance review just to clarify that for listeners a little bit?

[3:24:50] Yeah sure. So, I mean third party just panerically means it's not anyone related to you or connected with the city. It's an outside

[3:25:00] that's brought in with, you know, obviously with no vested stakes in the conversation,

[3:25:08] and there's looking at the policy compliance.

[3:25:11] That's basically what it means.

[3:25:14] Thank you, Mr. Abbott.

[3:25:16] So I was also a discipline in it first, not to see an option that included community members.

[3:25:23] I know that involving the community and really truly engaging them, it can be messy and it's always a trade-off between engagement and efficiency.

[3:25:36] That said, I originally thought that it was very important to make that trade-off and to involve the community members with the receipt of the table because primarily because our council is white

[3:25:50] And that concludes the opportunity for any people

[3:25:53] color to participate in a formal way on a committee.

[3:25:59] If it's only composed of city council members.

[3:26:02] That said, I've been doing a lot of thinking about

[3:26:05] this over the weekend.

[3:26:07] And I am starting to come around also onto the idea

[3:26:10] of a two person committee, because I do see that that

[3:26:12] gives a lot of possibilities that would be a lot more

[3:26:15] difficult to work through on a larger committee. So I am open to Option 2. I would be very disappointed

[3:26:26] if we went with Option 1, which to me is an option to not investigate this further.

[3:26:49] So I'll leave

[3:26:52] to some members of the public on the subject. I agree with council member Ford. I think that

[3:27:01] the items really need to be mutually exclusive. I think it's important we've come like so far

[3:27:10] from a year ago. Look at all of the things as witness in the report that have happened. I want to see

[3:27:17] those continue. I want to see those things improved where they can improve as Damian pointed out,

[3:27:26] you know, as this whole thing evolves from a state and national perspective, I think we can always make improvements.

[3:27:36] As far as a committee, so there's a lot of structure when you have a brown at committee.

[3:27:48] You know, people have to do filings and they have to take trainings and they have to, you know,

[3:27:54] the meetings have to be scheduled and you have to be there at a certain time and they have to, you know,

[3:27:59] the public has to be led in, that structure I think doesn't necessarily allow for a lot

[3:28:10] of brainstorming.

[3:28:12] So for instance, when we see brainstorming happen, even in our regular city things, we'll

[3:28:18] have a special study session, you know, typically on a neighbor, we can, you know, not a regular

[3:28:23] meeting and less formal people are in the audience.

[3:28:28] So my hope is that we sounds like we have the police things going on a good trajectory

[3:28:36] and hopefully they will stay that way, hopefully we'll do more and get the coots thing going.

[3:28:42] I am interested in pursuing possibilities that may be out there for our community to be inclusive.

[3:28:57] I think that those things that are listed that we've done don't necessarily address that,

[3:29:03] We haven't had any special sessions on that specifically, most of the stuff that we've had special sessions on has been related to the police.

[3:29:16] I do hope that people would participate.

[3:29:20] I think that the option of having a council add the hot committee releases us from that formality.

[3:29:31] we can meet whenever we want, wherever we want,

[3:29:36] how we want and really spend, you know,

[3:29:39] if we want to spend, you know, an hour we can,

[3:29:41] if we want to spend four hours we can.

[3:29:43] You know, there's no, we're not committed to

[3:29:48] the public rigidness that comes with a brownout committee.

[3:29:54] And I think that that's more conducive in my opinion.

[3:30:00] To coming up with these brainstorming kinds of things that may be beneficial to our community. So that's why I thought that that has the most promise for us to fair it out, some possible things to see where our weaknesses are, where can we approve?

[3:30:22] We did prove that's fine, but please stop where can we improve on other things?

[3:30:28] So that's my two cents for right now.

[3:30:32] Thank you, Vice Mayor Lenin?

[3:30:40] Yeah, no.

[3:30:42] Again, another good discussion tonight, you know.

[3:30:45] When I read this, and when I listen tonight, I have to read.

[3:30:48] When I heard this described that in the communication with Dr.

[3:30:51] And against the night is option one is do nothing.

[3:30:54] I was disappointed because in my personal perception, what I heard privately from my discussions for some of the citizens involved in this, and again tonight,

[3:31:03] and everybody was a message that what we done was actually considerable, appreciate it, and actually notable.

[3:31:12] So I have difficulty calling that in nothing. Having said that, I agree, yeah, no.

[3:31:18] It's obvious. Number one is an ongoing. No matter what we do tonight, I see this whole process is an ongoing thing that

[3:31:26] Comes back is checked in and reassess and he has to so that's a given

[3:31:30] So one goes without saying I was not as terribly understood in number two at least at first

[3:31:38] But after talking with members of the public when I heard tonight

[3:31:42] The interest seems to be really for kind of a more narrow

[3:31:46] at what that's focused, how is it put a discussion on continuing harm? I like that. Essentially,

[3:31:56] Kentucky, Kentucky isn't welcoming friendly place. How do we continue that? How do we improve?

[3:32:01] I think I would have a hard time saying no to having something that helps out the discussion. Clearly,

[3:32:10] It would have to be focused on things, certainly to the city can affect.

[3:32:16] I'm not sure what might be left, but I think we have to give it the try of nothing useful arises.

[3:32:21] Or if we can't, despite everyone's best efforts, get a lot as much public input as we'd like.

[3:32:27] At least we can say, alright, we've made the other people are busy with their lives, perhaps, or some degree of satisfaction.

[3:32:34] Maybe that's a good thing.

[3:32:36] I like that this is focused.

[3:32:37] We have two separate cracks. I think we've got a good police track. I'm satisfied with it with that if this addbox would be focused simply away from the police issue and focus on the issues identified by core

[3:32:54] How do we make a total of well? How do we reduce racism as a society in what part could the city benefit and play it?

[3:33:01] those sorts of things, I could certainly support that as well. As far as facilitated public

[3:33:09] workshops for 5K of peace, I don't know if we need that, but I will note that there's

[3:33:15] my colleagues have suggested, and as I suggest, there's some of our members of the public,

[3:33:20] and our end-hawks can, and should, have in discussions with members of the public, with people

[3:33:28] who are interested. Those members of the public can help those council members find people to participate.

[3:33:34] This is something that will all share won't be just the two people if we go that route assigned.

[3:33:38] I would expect those who are interested to try and find people who actually want to participate.

[3:33:44] And the benefit of this, one complaint I've heard, a frustration with the structure of city council meetings,

[3:33:52] the limits on speaking the originality of it. You lose that with an add-up. You can sit and have

[3:33:59] in depth conversations and presents things as you wish. So I do think even though perhaps not

[3:34:08] everybody was initially warned number two, I wasn't either, honestly.

[3:34:15] It works. It'll work well enough.

[3:34:17] And if it can be focused, just on the things we've talked about and leave the police to the track

[3:34:23] have already set up and not duplicate that, that work. I could support that.

[3:34:33] Contrary for fourth. I'm almost fully in agreement with Vice-Meralainman. The one thing I'm

[3:34:40] not willing to do is tie the hands of the committee to say you can't talk about a particular

[3:34:45] thing that clearly impacts people's lives. I don't think Chief Paris would want to be locked

[3:34:52] out of the discussion about how people experience life and impotity.

[3:34:59] So I would like to frame the charge of such a committee to be, unfortunately, I don't

[3:35:07] have it in my fingertips, but I would like to have our new council goal in front of me and

[3:35:16] and frame this committee around that, that council roll, which may involve conversations with

[3:35:24] Chief Parisian police, I don't think that's an issue.

[3:35:29] I do wish you're saying this before, but remember, we've had an ongoing process for about

[3:35:34] half a year, and it's now a permanent continuing process to do just that.

[3:35:39] And as far as input discussion, we have a process of public-crossed the council, as well

[3:35:45] has any kind of somebody privately wants to talk in greater depth with the council member,

[3:35:50] or with staff, they can certainly do that.

[3:35:53] I'm not locking out discussions of the police, but I would like to limit this particular

[3:35:58] ad hoc, just to those issues that core identified.

[3:36:01] What I heard from the community in my discussions was the thing weren't, they were more

[3:36:06] interested in general issues of openness, wealthiness, and totality, and not so much of

[3:36:11] to make this at all part of policing, and that worked for me.

[3:36:16] So that's kind of something that I don't really want to move on.

[3:36:20] Not because I don't think there's value in it.

[3:36:22] I agree with it.

[3:36:23] Because I feel number one, we've done it.

[3:36:25] We've done it well.

[3:36:26] And we're already committed to continuing to do it.

[3:36:29] So I don't want to have two separate tracks going.

[3:36:32] Because I've seen that go in problematic ways

[3:36:35] in the past in my experience.

[3:36:39] Do respect that, believe what you're proposing is that we have two separate tracks going on rather than

[3:36:46] subcommittee that can talk about all those issues with all the people.

[3:36:51] Well, I agree to them.

[3:36:53] By its nature, then we already have been working on this.

[3:36:56] This is number one set to be in the thinking to do this.

[3:36:59] Support in the ad hoc is already advocating that and making two separate things.

[3:37:04] I'm willing to go that far, but I don't want it.

[3:37:09] All

[3:37:12] right, you may have to see how people are feeling about limiting what the ad hoc can talk about and not.

[3:37:18] I'm not.

[3:37:18] Well, we'll send you people off to a Knappoc to say you can't talk about this and.

[3:37:22] Well, I think you're right, let's.

[3:37:24] Well, I would like to ask the mayor to do this.

[3:37:27] This will make you clarity.

[3:37:28] Do we feel that we need to include policing and please oversight in the ad hoc at this time?

[3:37:34] I think that's the question.

[3:37:35] The question is do we feel like the need to prohibit to two of our colleagues?

[3:37:39] No, I'm trying to.

[3:37:40] question if you'd like to frame a different one if I could finish? Thank you. I'd

[3:37:46] actually like to have a person in the mayor, possibly. Thanks man. I'd like to ask

[3:37:50] the mayor if we could have a straw poll, please. Please, please, oversight and have

[3:37:54] often this time. Basically, a thumb was up with me. No, we do not want to include this

[3:37:59] or a thumbs down would be, yes, add, please, into the discussion. And wherever the majority

[3:38:05] know us, then that settles it in your right. That way, the easier for us to get to our

[3:38:10] and we'll have better direction.

[3:38:12] So I'm going to fully support asking the mayor

[3:38:14] if you could just lead us through this right now

[3:38:16] and see what the majority is at.

[3:38:17] And again, I want to underline it.

[3:38:19] This is not supporting that discussion.

[3:38:21] We've been doing that since before you guys are on the council,

[3:38:25] we've been doing this for a while.

[3:38:27] We're committed to continuing to do it.

[3:38:29] But I don't want to do it.

[3:38:30] I'm willing to take a new round of off,

[3:38:31] and I think most of itself.

[3:38:33] Even though I'm not sure what benefits in a man

[3:38:38] not green but I don't want to duplicate this over there that I'm not

[3:38:42] supported about so we'll leave it back to see where we got. I am we still got

[3:38:49] some questions in the floor. Vice-management. So let me come back here or request

[3:38:53] on that third one and where you're done. Contrary for now yes thanks. Contrary

[3:39:04] Thank you, Mr. Rare. I would also feel that it would be doing a disservice to what the potential of this process is to limit what they could talk about.

[3:39:21] I really do believe that the goal of core is to promote continued harmony, as but not

[3:39:30] at the vice-merlemma was mentioning, and I think that we would miss an opportunity to build

[3:39:36] trust between the police and the community and to build on that harmony if we were to

[3:39:43] concluded the ad hoc from working with the police as part of this process.

[3:39:49] I would envision if we if we were to create this commit this ad hoc and just for

[3:39:57] for argument state if I were committed to it.

[3:40:00] I wouldn't.

[3:40:03] What was that?

[3:40:08] Sorry.

[3:40:08] I thought I heard some speaking.

[3:40:10] I would envision, specifically, of reaching out to the police and having some really hard

[3:40:19] to hurt discussions, and I think there would be a role in this opportunity to precludes

[3:40:24] often happening.

[3:40:27] Can you come to a moment, Harvey?

[3:40:32] I guess what I'm struggling with is that this is seen to move from focusing on more

[3:40:41] generalities in the community to what can we do to the place and I struggle with this a

[3:40:55] little bit because we have a lot of things in the works and we they're not complete yet.

[3:41:02] So we've only had one annual report.

[3:41:05] we have an audit that's ongoing, we have cohorts in progress, we have policies being looked at.

[3:41:15] There's a lot of stuff that's in flux that I feel like needs to play out, see where that's at.

[3:41:24] We as a council can review that if there's something that comes up from any of that stuff that we get reported on,

[3:41:34] We may say, you know what? Maybe we should have some folks looking into that.

[3:41:40] But we don't have that data yet to be able to know whether or not there's anything there there.

[3:41:49] I was hoping that what we could do is let that percolate a little bit, let's get more information,

[3:41:57] let's get more data. In the meantime, what I was hearing were there were other things

[3:42:04] things that we possibly other than the police could be looking at to help the community be more

[3:42:13] inclusive and have better harmony.

[3:42:16] And that's what, you know, I kind of heard we were trying to do and it sounds like that

[3:42:24] maybe not what people want to do.

[3:42:27] So that's my frustration at this point.

[3:42:35] Thank you, I feel like we're, I just feel like we're not, we're talking past one and a little bit, because I agree with

[3:42:43] most of what Council member Harvey and Council member Lyndon said, and I just feel that

[3:42:50] that including a discussion about the police as part of this overall look at the city's goals.

[3:42:55] It would just be one part of what we're trying to do.

[3:43:00] Also, the word oversight was brought up, and I think that the word oversight has become a bit of a third rail, and I just want to reframe that term a little bit, because I think a lot of times when people hear oversight, they think a group of citizens who may not be that familiar with for these practices coming in, and this is what people think of cocaps in the year, was coming in in second guessing decisions after the fact.

[3:43:28] And to me that's not necessarily what oversight means, oversight could be a front-end process which is more about community engagement in looking at how the public interacts with the police and what policies we have in place.

[3:43:45] And just having some opportunity for input and feedback on what our policing policies look like, and I think it's a good practice to include people of color and that conversation.

[3:43:55] and that's something that people have been longing for.

[3:43:59] And I don't think that we've provided an opportunity

[3:44:02] for people of color to engage in a meaningful way

[3:44:07] in a discussion on what our policies should be.

[3:44:13] We've done a number of other amazing things

[3:44:16] but that's one place that I think this ad hoc committee could potentially,

[3:44:20] maybe not, that could potentially look at

[3:44:24] as just one of many things that they do.

[3:44:29] You come to remember, Ford?

[3:44:32] I'm trying to figure out a way to frame a charge

[3:44:35] for a subcommittee that I could live with

[3:44:38] that my, me, some other council members needs.

[3:44:43] I,

[3:44:45] my interest is not in a committee

[3:44:49] who's focused or charged is about policing.

[3:44:53] But if I'm talking with a group of community members

[3:44:56] and issues that involve the police come up.

[3:45:00] I'm not interested in being muscled in saying I can't talk about those with fellow people in town.

[3:45:08] So, I'm perfectly happy to, like I said, to frame the charge of a committee around the, for instance,

[3:45:17] and I'm open to other charges, if you aren't comfortable with the council level,

[3:45:21] but with the council level about diversity inclusion, which is about both city practices and city services.

[3:45:28] And so if I'm talking with community members and issues come up around, you know, building permits and I can talk about those issues and see if I can figure out what's going on, but I can't talk about them if issues that involve the police come up, that doesn't make any sense to me and I'm not, I'm not interested in forming a committee like that that's muscled in what they can talk about.

[3:45:57] But when you're if I could suggest, I hear what you're saying, Mr. Ford, and I don't think

[3:46:05] draconians, I might have sounded, because I don't think my suggestion or my vision of

[3:46:09] this was, if you're having a community discussion, and if somebody asks about something

[3:46:13] to do them with the police or wants to make a succession, that number one you can answer

[3:46:17] their question or discuss with them, or even to listen to what they have to say, I think

[3:46:22] that's part and practice of what we do, whether we're staff or elected to whom we meet

[3:46:26] with the public, so that would never follow me.

[3:46:30] But bringing back recommendations,

[3:46:33] re-oversight, or outside council review and recommendation

[3:46:37] on policies, that's the third rail

[3:46:40] that I wouldn't want to go to,

[3:46:42] and already one of our colleagues tonight kind of brought it up.

[3:46:45] Yeah, let's consider oversight.

[3:46:47] A different definition, a kind of definition of it,

[3:46:50] and open the door to review policies outside of this body.

[3:46:55] When we've already set up the process to review policy in response to this

[3:47:02] understanding of the strengthening community.

[3:47:04] So I think we're getting it something here if we can stay away from that.

[3:47:09] I'm not suggesting if somebody wants to ask a question or have a discussion

[3:47:13] we can't do that, but I'm not looking for a group coming back

[3:47:18] doing a second track work on oversight and policies that's separate from what we've already been

[3:47:23] or continuing to do. Does that sound like we're getting a little closer at all?

[3:47:34] Certainly closer. Well, that's better than farther.

[3:47:39] So I think we know where we're at. If you'd have some good discussion,

[3:47:44] I would like to see where the council is a whole act. Do we really want to kind of

[3:47:48] lose it? I don't mean restrict, as I was just discussing with Ben. I'm not talking about

[3:47:53] that you have to leave the room, cover your eyes, and ears, and mouth, and somebody mentioned

[3:47:58] it's pleased.

[3:47:59] But I am saying this is not, I don't want to see this via separate committee that's working

[3:48:03] on bringing back recommendations and oversight and policies, and generally a second track

[3:48:08] to our current, at least work we've been doing.

[3:48:12] If we could see where the majority of us are out on that, and I think I can tell you some of the comments.

[3:48:17] But then I think we're in a good place to know how to craft with Ben and I and the rest

[3:48:22] of us we're trying to do here.

[3:48:26] That's right.

[3:48:27] I guess thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:48:31] So all of us, as council members, have the ability to talk to whoever we want to talk with.

[3:48:39] What ever subject, I get people that randomly call me on all kinds of things.

[3:48:45] So, nothing in what the subcommittee would be doing would be saying, oh, I can't talk about that.

[3:48:53] You can talk to people about it, but if you get information that is useful to any of the other 10 things we're working on,

[3:49:05] it would make more sense to say, you know what?

[3:49:08] This is appropriately to be placed in one of these one-to-ten things.

[3:49:15] Let me take that information and incorporate life-wise

[3:49:20] when we get these reports, people were going to have a public review of them.

[3:49:26] So it's not like we're going to get the report and we're not going to go over it.

[3:49:30] Likewise with the annual reports, likewise with the Ripper statistics, and so on and so forth.

[3:49:36] And as far as policies are concerned, we have, in some of our meetings last year, we had members of the public pull out sections of the policy manual and ask questions about them and ask for changes on them.

[3:49:53] One of the discussions around that had to do with the legality of things.

[3:49:59] So, you also don't want to have someone wordsmithing things that is going to put us in a legal situation and you don't want to also give them a false expectation that they can do that when the reality is any policies we have have to be policies that are defensible.

[3:50:26] So it gets to be a little sticky wicked there with that, asking about them, going over them,

[3:50:35] you know, saying why they're the way they are or explain what they mean.

[3:50:39] Like we did on a few of them last year.

[3:50:42] I think that is a great idea.

[3:50:46] But telling people that they can, you know, re-do them all.

[3:50:49] I think that that gives people a set up for failure, expectation, so that's what I have to say.

[3:51:00] Thank you, Mayor.

[3:51:01] Council Member Sparks.

[3:51:04] Thank you.

[3:51:04] I appreciate everyone's comments.

[3:51:06] I want to say that I do not have any interest in giving people the impression that they're going to be able to rewrite the policy.

[3:51:12] And I was more just saying that people could have some opportunity to give input and

[3:51:20] a more, as several people pointed out, and I appreciate the comments that people were able

[3:51:26] to come and give feedback on policy during city council meetings.

[3:51:32] The format of the city council meeting is very formal.

[3:51:35] People have limited to three minutes, and I know there was a desire for people within the

[3:51:40] community to be able to give feedback and comments in a more open, conversational way, and

[3:51:48] really have their ideas considered and be able to express them fully.

[3:51:53] So, I think that that would be helpful to be able to give people the opportunity to speak

[3:51:58] on issues that really matter to them in this ad hoc format.

[3:52:04] And I suppose I'll leave it at that.

[3:52:08] Can I ask you a question about that?

[3:52:11] Sure.

[3:52:12] So do you feel qualified to be able to legally assess and give a person an input on what

[3:52:26] it is that they are telling you that they want to change?

[3:52:30] No.

[3:52:30] And that is why I would want to include people from the police department and that conversation.

[3:52:38] It's not even the police department.

[3:52:41] You're talking that things have to get approved by legal to be able to be changed.

[3:52:52] That's kind of, sure.

[3:52:54] I mean, I don't want to, we all know this, but the amount of community would make recommendations.

[3:53:03] And I wouldn't envision recommendations to be wordsmithed policies, but rather principles and values and broader ideas that we could provide to staff and to legal to try to work on the details on if I hope that makes sense.

[3:53:26] So, you're not suggesting reviewing the existing policies and have people discuss them, because there are certain policies that are worded a certain way, because they have a legal definition, they're worded that way, because they have to be worded that way.

[3:53:48] And it would be hard to, you know, without having a bunch of attorneys there with you to be able to explain why things are worded the way they are.

[3:54:01] And that's all I'm really, I'm really, I'm really thrilled about that.

[3:54:04] Yeah, I think what I was envisioning more was let's say people wanted to discuss the use of force policy,

[3:54:12] which I think we can really get from flexible.

[3:54:16] And so even though there's a little bit of room

[3:54:18] to tweak it and modify it in order to save compliance

[3:54:23] with the law, as I know it's very important,

[3:54:26] we're getting updates pushed out from flexible.

[3:54:30] And I think there's been a hunger in the community

[3:54:32] to be able to have a conversation about just what sorts of,

[3:54:39] I know that flexible also in some cases

[3:54:41] provide it's alternate wording that you can use if you want to go a different route with

[3:54:48] particular policies and there are other groups that are nonprofit organizations and institutes

[3:54:54] that provide legal templates for wording for policies as well. So I would envision that people

[3:55:03] who were conversing with the ad hoc committee could say, hey, you know what? Let's think about instead

[3:55:10] going with the wording exactly the likesable uses maybe we could think about trying to go

[3:55:17] more towards a particular goal. But not words to think because I agree with you that

[3:55:23] that that's not a productive any meeting I've had that has more than three people and

[3:55:27] where we're doing words to think has been a pretty much a disaster. So I wouldn't want to

[3:55:31] go in that direction either.

[3:55:34] Well and I would think that if there were, I'll just throw a number out there. There were five

[3:55:38] policies out there that people had, you know, kind of heartburned with or whatever.

[3:55:44] It would seem to make more sense to have those agendas and have the proper people available

[3:55:53] to be able to make those explanations as to why it is the way it is.

[3:55:59] In some cases, it's an education to the public to understand what those words mean.

[3:56:06] And I can't remember the one off the top of my head, but I know that last year, Chief

[3:56:14] Parrish, on the couple of them, and what those words meant, because they weren't what

[3:56:20] people thought they were, and maybe that's just an educational process.

[3:56:27] Through the mayor of my mind,

[3:56:33] one last step.

[3:56:35] I think we're getting to the point where everything has been said, but not all of this

[3:56:40] I said two or three times, I'll kick my second or third time, and perhaps we can get closer to something.

[3:56:49] But, you know, I'm confused.

[3:56:51] One minute, I hear talking about oversight and policies, and I hear we're not saying we want to talk about oversight and policies.

[3:56:57] But then, immediately, we're talking about tweaking flexible policies and outside accounts for me, just with a general public.

[3:57:08] That is a separate track, there's no question in my mind and I'm not sure if anything,

[3:57:12] not only sure nothing helpful can come from it because it will have false expectations

[3:57:16] from great issues but we've already been through this already decided how we're doing this,

[3:57:22] with our regular view of RIPA and what upgrades we may need to make.

[3:57:28] I hear the calls for opportunities for people to participate.

[3:57:32] But the opportunities do exist. We've made them in this great abundance as we possibly can.

[3:57:39] We've covered that. And these sort of discussions we're talking about, tweaking flexible.

[3:57:45] That's something you need to do in full public with council presence, with staff presence, ideally with the chief president,

[3:57:52] and certainly with council presence as we've done in the past.

[3:57:55] and that goes back to why I'm supportive of all of this saved this one area because I do

[3:58:03] agree with my colleague is kind of the live wire and there's a reason for it. So I'd like to

[3:58:09] see the charge I would say if simply would be something I believe like Adrian might have said

[3:58:17] in this lobby might have said it to correct me if I'm wrong I think she said welcoming

[3:58:23] inclusive to investigate how to how to continue to be an inclusive and welcome a place

[3:58:28] and to further improve that. That's a general thing that can do all aspects of where

[3:58:34] the city can touch, but it does not charge them with looking into the police oversight

[3:58:39] policies or the expectation that it does allow people, of course, to discuss it if somebody

[3:58:46] has questions or private things. So that's my comment. I'd love to see where we go and

[3:58:51] We've a, please note. Thank you. Thank you.

[3:58:54] Thank you.

[3:58:55] Time to move forward.

[3:58:57] I'm basically fine with what Vice-merlana just said.

[3:59:01] I did fine in last meeting's tack at the strategic objectives that we approved.

[3:59:06] And it makes more sense to me to use our new reality of strategic objective as the charge to the council,

[3:59:12] which is, so I would propose, as an alternative to what Vice-merlana proposed,

[3:59:17] that the charge we to investigate, how capacity of the target can promote an equitable compassionate

[3:59:24] and healthy community that honors diversity as a source of strength.

[3:59:29] That's the name of our strategic objective.

[3:59:31] I think I could support that and I think that it makes sense because it matches our strategic

[3:59:36] objective and it accomplishes what we've all talked about and if we're agreeing to that,

[3:59:41] I think it solves and I hope we were serving this, we'll remember the guidelines that

[3:59:47] counts if they're not ones that are completely comfortable for all of us, but yeah I can definitely go for that.

[3:59:55] So I haven't offered any input on this yet.

[4:00:00] We are doing no longer ready. So we're not allowed to give. Now the question is, do we want to add number two to that?

[4:00:08] I do not personally have a problem with the two-person ad hoc. My vision of something like that would be with the staff, whether it be to the manager or whether it be another, but does he can't in staff and Chief Harris should be so desires to be on there?

[4:00:27] or even a lieutenant or something along those lines.

[4:00:32] And I would look at it as World, a ad hoc

[4:00:36] community relations.

[4:00:40] And discussing community relations and engagement

[4:00:42] and education so that we can teach

[4:00:46] anti-racism, not just be non-racist,

[4:00:50] but teach anti-racism and educate the community.

[4:00:53] My concern is, volunteerism, I mean, Council Member Sparks talks about getting somebody

[4:01:03] of color on volunteering to be on a ad hoc or something like that.

[4:01:08] I'm concerned being that the council is white.

[4:01:13] My concern is getting volunteers all, I don't know, I mean, I don't care what, what, you

[4:01:20] You know, possibly they come from a gender or whatever they may have, a volunteer is coveted.

[4:01:28] Now, getting those people and members of the community involved can be difficult as we know.

[4:01:37] So my concern is if you have an ad hoc and you have for 12 months, you know, and then they come back and say,

[4:01:43] hey, we have looked at this outreach and we can do better here, or there was an incident that came out from the police,

[4:01:50] And that's something that we can talk about.

[4:01:53] I certainly don't want to say that that body, that ad hoc, has any oversight, legal oversight.

[4:02:04] I think that's where the council comes in.

[4:02:06] And if there are issues that do come up, and maybe they come to this community relations

[4:02:10] formation, then those members that ad hoc can bring that information back to city council.

[4:02:17] and I can be discussed further.

[4:02:22] Those are kind of my concerns

[4:02:23] of what I would think would occur with something

[4:02:26] on these lines.

[4:02:33] Any further comments on that?

[4:02:41] I'm just going to say it's pretty weird to have a muted

[4:02:44] council.

[4:02:46] I think you saw the Mr. Mayor.

[4:02:49] Is that something that you guys could look

[4:02:52] to address or support something on those lines?

[4:02:54] Does we already encompass number one?

[4:02:56] We never do number two and then you know Bander you had an inclusive and diversity type title that you were considering

[4:03:06] Well, it's our our city. Yeah, our city council is strategic objective for the year right now

[4:03:13] Does the does the term community relations work for you guys?

[4:03:20] Wow

[4:03:21] We know it's because we don't want to exclude anybody, you know we want to be a close

[4:03:26] And then you know it could be on anything, you know?

[4:03:31] What does that mean?

[4:03:33] I guess community engagement does not get to me.

[4:03:37] It certainly doesn't imply anything about that anti-racism.

[4:03:42] And nor does it give any address reaching out necessarily to people who feel underrepresented in the city.

[4:03:50] So it's just not a term that, to me, calls up what I hope this ad hoc will be about

[4:03:59] whereas, you know, actual equitable compassionate and healthy community sort of, to me,

[4:04:06] calls up more of those ideas.

[4:04:10] But where I think we're fairly clear on what this group will be thinking about and trying to engage with people around.

[4:04:20] So I'd be okay with a term more like that, but I don't see a reason not to use what we just adopted as our strategic objective.

[4:04:27] No, and I don't have an issue using that.

[4:04:30] I just want to try to make sure that we're more inclusive.

[4:04:34] I see.

[4:04:35] Yeah.

[4:04:37] And the pragmatic side of me, how long do you really think this is the one?

[4:04:44] A couple of years until people's interest this is term-limited at one year. This isn't a head-hock. It would just be one year

[4:04:51] And then so a year from now we might say, okay, this looks like something that's working and then we may

[4:04:57] Look at it as going a commission on there or committee or many committee and fall into the brown act

[4:05:04] I think if we wanted to institutionalize something it would be like a standing committee and it would be rather good

[4:05:14] Okay, but that's not the cause now right now. I'm just trying to look down and

[4:05:20] what this is going to work like and what it might have all been to.

[4:05:23] Why? Why is my lemon?

[4:05:26] Oh, I'm sorry to realize I had my hands still up, but you noticed what you called on me?

[4:05:31] No, I'm sorry.

[4:05:33] That's okay, I think I'm here in consensus, so I'd like to suggest that we move this

[4:05:39] and I'd like to nominate due to their participation and their interest in them.

[4:05:45] Councilman for Sport and Harvey to participate if they're willing, don't you love another

[4:05:49] people volunteering to do work. But if you're willing to service our representatives,

[4:05:54] you have to count to those to do an ad, that would be my most important.

[4:06:04] The Councilman for Harvey, did you have any questions prior to any seconds on that motion?

[4:06:12] And I make that end up. Yes, thank you. I am okay with the wording based upon our

[4:06:19] school that we have. I'm okay with wording at Hopkins Committee in that fashion and it does

[4:06:26] tie two or one of our goals and I think it doesn't preclude us from engaging the community

[4:06:34] in all those aspects. And I accept your nomination vice mayor and I'm willing to participate.

[4:06:46] I'm sorry, I'm just works.

[4:06:49] Well, you all haven't had it just to get me,

[4:06:52] no, we not well yet, but I am a very good rulekeeper,

[4:06:55] and I'm very good at doing what I'm told.

[4:06:57] So I would like to be considered for this committee as well,

[4:07:00] and I would keep in mind that the charge that has been given to the committee.

[4:07:10] We have a second on council member, Raymond's motion.

[4:07:15] I would second that motion.

[4:07:20] All right, now we have a motion and a second on the floor

[4:07:23] as any further discussion.

[4:07:25] Yeah, hold on. I'm still picking. There's a tough year for me coming up.

[4:07:35] I'm going to

[4:07:38] amend that to that most been to replace Council Member Ford with Council Member Sparks.

[4:07:47] Well, I don't know if I need an amendment, if you're not willing to serve, then I'm not going

[4:07:52] to nominate you, but if I think if we talk about all the work that needs to be done in the community,

[4:07:57] we have a passion for reaching out to get people. This is why it's difficult. So with that,

[4:08:05] I looked all that and now many council members sparked an argument.

[4:08:13] I will second that motion.

[4:08:16] The first motion is withdrawing. We have a second motion before.

[4:08:22] Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair.

[4:08:25] Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair. The motion that I heard was only to appoint the committee

[4:08:30] It's the council created in the committee.

[4:08:32] I think it's important because you're creating an opportunity to be very clear about what the charge of that committee is.

[4:08:41] And I think I think everyone agreed with Council Member Ford's suggestion.

[4:08:47] So maybe Council Member, if you could incorporate Council Member Ford's suggestion.

[4:08:53] Let me restate that.

[4:08:57] I would move that we create an ad hoc.

[4:09:02] That is described in the council packet.

[4:09:06] With the charge of as described in our strategic objective,

[4:09:09] this government report put down and I don't have it all right now

[4:09:13] because I think it will write that fixed.

[4:09:15] But at any rate, I do support that.

[4:09:18] And to serve on that ad hoc, we are nominating

[4:09:21] Council Member Sparby and Sparks.

[4:09:26] And I would be second that motion.

[4:09:31] Mr. Robert, does that suffice for the legal legal ease on there?

[4:09:35] It does, and I think my understanding would be the roller committee would be

[4:09:40] determined to the Council within 12 months of recundation for a better that objective.

[4:09:49] And with regular, and I, as I understood from the staff report, and I would imagine

[4:09:53] that I will include that with the regular report out at the Council meeting,

[4:09:57] to ask the progress, discussions, et cetera.

[4:10:05] So we have a motion and a second on the floor.

[4:10:08] Can we have a role-comers purpose?

[4:10:10] That's a member, Harvey.

[4:10:12] Yes.

[4:10:13] Council member Sparks.

[4:10:15] Council member Ford.

[4:10:17] Yes.

[4:10:18] Vice-millionman?

[4:10:20] Yes.

[4:10:20] Mayor Moore.

[4:10:22] Yes.

[4:10:24] Thank you.

[4:10:26] Thank you all for participating in that.

[4:10:28] That's not always easy to try to

[4:10:30] to looking census on that.

[4:10:34] Mayer actually worked real quick before we move on from the side of him just the.

[4:10:38] The

[4:10:41] facilitated workshop is that something that's of any interest or something we should table

[4:10:45] for the moment and just like the ad hoc at going. Only

[4:10:48] if the ad hoc comes back and recommends it, then we can decide to do it.

[4:11:02] I think the ad hoc should meet at 7 a.m. in the morning like the continuum of care

[4:11:09] ad hoc. Just make it equitable.

[4:11:13] Not happening.

[4:11:20] Okay.

[4:11:22] Now on the month to radio, agenda item 11b, katani of local hazard mitigation plan.

[4:11:29] This would be a mystery of it.

[4:11:31] It is, yes, thank you.

[4:11:33] May her members of the council.

[4:11:35] So while Lauren loads up the 50 slide slide deck,

[4:11:39] I'm just joking, sorry.

[4:11:41] This will be very quick one.

[4:11:43] So the original schedule that we, the last time we had all met

[4:11:47] was in on Mays, and then we had that very long presentation

[4:11:51] as you recall.

[4:11:54] The schedule for time was that the public review draft

[4:11:57] would be out on June 15th.

[4:11:58] That has not happened.

[4:11:59] It's been postponed by the county to allow for more senior,

[4:12:05] or jurisdictional reviews of administrative drafts

[4:12:08] before they go out for public review.

[4:12:11] And in the staff report, there is a schedule,

[4:12:15] and that's the new schedule for the local hazard mitigation

[4:12:19] plan, public.

[4:12:21] It's really the full schedule,

[4:12:22] but it includes the public component of it.

[4:12:26] So the public comment period is now set for July 12th.

[4:12:31] So what you have in the packet is administrative draft.

[4:12:34] Essentially, it's a final draft that will go off to the public.

[4:12:37] And this is just to be clear, this is the Katati Annex within Volume 2.

[4:12:42] So the full report is Volume 1 and Volume 2.

[4:12:47] Volume 1 is largely just the county staff county white staff, which will come out in July

[4:12:52] with full public review drafts. But most of I think was a direct interest to us and to the community

[4:13:00] is what's in our annex specifically. And I will point out that of so most of the annex, as you guys

[4:13:10] saw is background information and stuff that's probably not that particularly interesting,

[4:13:16] but a couple of things that we'll call your attention to is the list of actions proposed actions

[4:13:22] on page packet page 241, that's within the annex that's probably one of the most important

[4:13:28] parts because it was some proposed actions the city could take to try to address some

[4:13:32] of the high risk, high risks to identify them for the community. The other thing I wanted to

[4:13:37] point out was that on packet page 241, fire risk was elevated in this draft by staff, so there is

[4:13:50] The review criteria that FEMA uses to rank risks and, as you can see by the numeric risk

[4:13:57] ranking, far enough, rank very high, earthquakes or the highest rank, but because of the

[4:14:05] obviously, because of the recent experience in this area, the wildfires staff elevated

[4:14:11] that in terms of a higher risk type disaster compared to where it fell out naturally in the

[4:14:22] So, with that tonight, this is, like I said, a administrative draft for the initial review

[4:14:28] in comment and any comments I received tonight, I will bring back to the consultants, tetrotech,

[4:14:37] that's draft in this administrative draft, and have them appropriate at the prior to the release

[4:14:42] of the full public document which would be on July 12th, and at that time, of course, there

[4:14:47] will be another opportunity for Council and Public to provide additional comment.

[4:14:53] That would be happy to answer any questions.

[4:14:57] Thank you.

[4:15:00] Thank you. On page 241 and 242, where we've got this table of the projects, the timeline column has a footnote that sort of specifies it's either short term or long term or ongoing, but then the words in that column are low, medium, and high. So it's just trying to understand what low, medium, high means and context of a timeline.

[4:15:38] So, the low is longer

[4:15:46] term.

[4:15:49] So, with the footnote, right at the punch short term, is within five years long term, within ten years and ongoing.

[4:15:54] This is not ongoing. I think with no specific completion date, believe that in that context,

[4:16:06] low is within five years.

[4:16:11] I'm sorry. No, that's long.

[4:16:16] It's with with in 10 years. Sorry. Although that's a good clarification. I should get from a consultant's little crystal clear.

[4:16:23] Because if you only have two options in the footnote, but three options in the table.

[4:16:28] So anyway, I will follow up on that.

[4:16:32] Thank you. If I may have had a couple of other questions on that, people, for item number 10,

[4:16:39] the Fund and Implement evacuation coordination and backup power project, I was really interested

[4:16:46] in seeing the city do some kind of study about evacuation routes and, you know, what it

[4:16:53] would look like to try to evacuate city really quickly and even a kind of traffic fire.

[4:16:58] And I was wondering if that, I noticed it's still the same that that I get's an earthquake hazard.

[4:17:05] I was wondering if that had anything to do with that idea of envisioning how a fast evacuation

[4:17:13] can happen and whether that would be applicable well for yourself.

[4:17:19] Yeah, so evacuation, so currently right now the evacuation zones have been set and the evacuation

[4:17:27] testing, we're planning to do this fall, I don't know if we haven't done it yet, or later this summer.

[4:17:35] But I guess the answer to the question, it wouldn't just be earthquake to be any reason,

[4:17:38] but we might have to indicate it would first.

[4:17:41] They see it would just categorize this in earthquake as the mitigated disaster.

[4:17:48] Although you couldn't, you couldn't pick wildfires here, so.

[4:17:51] Sure.

[4:17:52] And what would this implement evacuation fund an implementing evacuation coordination?

[4:17:57] How would that differ from what we're sort of doing already?

[4:18:04] So I think it would really just be perhaps some planning grants from FEMA that would

[4:18:12] allow us to further refine maybe what we're already doing.

[4:18:16] And certainly on the back of our project, that was something that we would need to structure from important.

[4:18:21] Is there any possibility to bump the timeline on that one?

[4:18:26] Because it seems, in terms of a low probability, but very catastrophic event, you know, if I were

[4:18:35] keen to through Katani and we need to do that quickly, that would be super important for saving lives.

[4:18:51] Any further questions on this?

[4:18:54] Okay.

[4:18:54] Since this is an action item, I will open it up for public comment.

[4:19:01] Thank you, Mayor Moore.

[4:19:02] Looking to our attendees tonight, please use your race hand icon for public comment.

[4:19:10] Mayor Moore, that will end public comment.

[4:19:13] Thank you very much.

[4:19:18] Mr. Oga, do you have enough feedback on that?

[4:19:23] I do.

[4:19:24] Yeah, thank you.

[4:19:25] I will go back to the consultant.

[4:19:28] Get clarity on those things before we get to the public release.

[4:19:32] Okay, thank you very much.

[4:19:35] Now we will move on to 11c,

[4:19:39] appointment on a voting dog,

[4:19:40] get an alternate to the 21 layer kelp in the cities,

[4:19:44] annual conference in Sacramento.

[4:19:51] So thank you Mayor members of the Council, so this is not going to be one that you can, you can't cast your vote from your couch this year. It's going to be in person.

[4:20:01] In Sacramento, so the League of California cities of which we are member requires that we appoint a voting delegate that will vote on a conference resolution to the annual business.

[4:20:14] in the packet that the conference, as the mayor said, is in Sacramento, the dates for the

[4:20:18] conference are September 22nd, 24th of this year. The business meeting will be held in the

[4:20:24] last day on Friday, 24th of September, and in addition to the voting delegate, the city may also

[4:20:34] So a point up to two ultrimates and the ultrimates can be city council or city officials.

[4:20:45] And typically in the past, the voting delegate has been people who plan to attend the

[4:20:51] conference.

[4:20:54] Obviously, for obvious reasons, because it will actually be there.

[4:21:00] So that's in if the mayor that goes,

[4:21:04] I think typically it's mayor of high snare right for going,

[4:21:07] but I think it could be hard to put it to anybody.

[4:21:10] So, anyway, with that I'll give it back to the council

[4:21:14] and take any comments for a question.

[4:21:18] Thank you.

[4:21:19] Thank you.

[4:21:20] Yes, mayor.

[4:21:21] I'd just like to move the way I said,

[4:21:23] I'm leaving past 10 PM.

[4:21:24] Oh, thank you. I thought we had moved out of time to 11, but no, no, no, no.

[4:21:31] Oh, did we? I thought we would have to attend.

[4:21:35] I thought we would get to 11.

[4:21:37] Oh, okay, if you fall, that's fine.

[4:21:40] Good day, I count for 11 o'clock, could we go that long?

[4:21:43] Sure.

[4:21:44] Yeah.

[4:21:45] Let's leave it to each other.

[4:21:47] Okay, sorry. That's okay.

[4:21:49] Come to me with my hearty.

[4:21:52] Yes, I know that probably you and the vice mayor may want to attend.

[4:21:58] I just wanted to offer that I will need to attend that meeting because if everything goes

[4:22:06] the way it is planned, I should be appointed to be the president of the North Bay Division

[4:22:14] at that meeting.

[4:22:15] So I am required to attend and I'm happy to be a delegate if you, so would like that.

[4:22:25] Thank you.

[4:22:27] I would be interested in going in September and if something is not something else,

[4:22:35] I can't make it.

[4:22:36] I certainly would like to have alternatives there.

[4:22:39] Um, so Susan, you're going to be at our crusher, you're anticipating the, um,

[4:22:45] President of North and North faith division.

[4:22:47] That's the plan.

[4:22:48] Can I, boring simply unforeseen?

[4:22:51] Exactly.

[4:22:52] I'm just a member of work.

[4:22:56] Um, sorry.

[4:22:57] Can you take Vice Mayor land in first, I want to figure, um,

[4:23:00] uh, certainly.

[4:23:04] Vice Mayor land?

[4:23:05] I just want to say, unlike most Councils most of the time, once again,

[4:23:09] hearing you guys thought is being incredibly happy.

[4:23:12] Susan and John, you said exactly what I wanted to hear,

[4:23:15] because in September, I really don't want to go this afternoon.

[4:23:19] So, and also though, congratulations to Councilmember Harden.

[4:23:23] This is very impressive and that's not only a big thing for you,

[4:23:26] but it's a big thing for Katana,

[4:23:28] it's indicative of what you've done for the skin and the atmosphere.

[4:23:31] So, but those up on that, yes.

[4:23:33] So, I would be happy since you already have to be

[4:23:39] there. You've seen logical and frankly, I'm completely fine with it. So if you

[4:23:45] do want to do it, I say thumbs up.

[4:23:48] I'll turn over for it.

[4:23:50] Yeah, so I've nominated Mayor Moore to be the delegate and Council Member Harvey to be our

[4:23:55] alternate for that.

[4:23:57] Thank you.

[4:24:02] I'd be happy to second.

[4:24:05] Thank you. So we have a motion and a second on the floor. Any further discussion?

[4:24:12] Thank you, Ms. Burgers. Could you do a roll call?

[4:24:14] Councilmember Harvey.

[4:24:17] Yes.

[4:24:17] Councilmember Sparks.

[4:24:19] Yes.

[4:24:20] Councilmember Ford.

[4:24:21] Yes.

[4:24:22] Vice Mayor Landman.

[4:24:24] Yes.

[4:24:24] Mayor More.

[4:24:26] Yes.

[4:24:26] Thank you.

[4:24:29] Okay.

[4:24:30] So now we move on to our two managers report.

[4:24:38] So thank you Mayor.

[4:24:41] I can get the top.

[4:24:43] All right.

[4:24:44] So on good, real quick, as everyone knows, the color of the funder is in the color cure

[4:24:51] because some in masks are no longer required for fully vaccinated people in both indoor

[4:24:55] situations.

[4:24:57] There are still some settings that require masking regardless of vaccination status.

[4:25:00] And that's included.

[4:25:03] There are brands of it.

[4:25:04] Other trend.

[4:25:05] Terminals, hope for reforms, disability, so if you need another reason not to get arrested, that's

[4:25:12] on the good reason, he got to wear a mask when he got there.

[4:25:15] And there are unvaccinated people, obviously,

[4:25:18] with the wear mask indoors, according to the latest rules.

[4:25:20] Maybe actually, obviously, but they slept

[4:25:21] with the wear mask indoors and followed other related rules.

[4:25:27] On the ground.

[4:25:28] It's a report packed with 105 brow kits and another event

[4:25:34] planned for August, 21.

[4:25:36] But we who have electric, it's a public work.

[4:25:39] So if people miss the path, drop, hit, hand out,

[4:25:42] we can stop by the city and pick up their kit from.

[4:25:45] I recommend you for them.

[4:25:48] All right, so Cypherits in Water Road, rapid flashing,

[4:25:52] platform to begin, they're affected.

[4:25:54] They both expect to be fully operated

[4:25:55] by the end of this week.

[4:25:58] We are rebuilding the way funding.

[4:25:59] Finally, just out now.

[4:26:02] The Commissioner Roofing Project is that construction

[4:26:05] three next week.

[4:26:07] So we're all going to see the Roof getting torn off next week.

[4:26:10] Pert section is getting work to be in the next month on July 12th and so pretty weird coincidence that we're going to park us also doing some work nearby and they threw us down on Mertle that could use everyone for a moment we figured out that they had their own project going on.

[4:26:30] Anyway, that got cleared up because their son got moved, his energy can't, and we're going to be in our own project center shortly.

[4:26:39] Local road safety plan, meeting, and coming up the chatter day at Mayan, and the Zoom link and other, you know, really meeting details are going to be quickly covered very shortly.

[4:26:51] The world of planning last night, planning for making it free item, the odds of you, the product, some multi-family, well, mixed use of multi-family projects on the corner of Charles needs to tidy and that cut the sign review, re-approval, they change the product a little bit and that got approved last night.

[4:27:13] multi-family of active design guidelines I've got recommended by planning

[4:27:18] committee for that will be coming to count for. And then the reds

[4:27:22] sensory designer to you got approved by thanks for your question.

[4:27:30] So, up in the fleet world this year the MAD award because the award for officers

[4:27:36] that make the most driving under the influence of a few arrests in general and across the board

[4:27:46] and all these because of the pandemic and the fewer context and also less far being open

[4:27:53] up.

[4:27:53] So there's this left.

[4:27:54] I think people will need to drive and drunk.

[4:27:57] But the mad is a warning, please department officers who have the highest arrest account

[4:28:02] for DUI and our department, Tyler, and Officer Tyler Wardell.

[4:28:06] the highest amount of 15-month years ago.

[4:28:08] This is the second amount of worth of great, great-for, great-for, great-for-hum, great-for-hum.

[4:28:15] We could have an area of some meetings coming up.

[4:28:17] We could rely on 19th to the 23rd of the week of a week

[4:28:22] Monday through Friday, there will be various areas that we'll be holding

[4:28:27] meeting before and it will continue to be in Zoom format for now.

[4:28:31] Residents and businesses are encouraged to attend and if you have any

[4:28:35] about what beat you're in, the math is available in the three-web site in the police page, and we're

[4:28:41] also going to be putting up a book information as we look closer to what people know about it.

[4:28:48] And then also something new that we have been esteemed,

[4:28:54] we would be the first law enforcement

[4:28:56] agency for the Insanoma County to have something called a bullet wrap. It is another

[4:29:01] and devices that simply wrapped you about that man kind of,

[4:29:05] it wrapped you in a rope, other ways to sort of put someone down

[4:29:11] without having to use other tools that could be, you know,

[4:29:17] technically,

[4:29:20] rith gear, fused, to option one before hopefully they hurt.

[4:29:24] Anyone else who's been off, so we've been working on that.

[4:29:30] And then, in recreation with Pat Saturday, we held our annual community art tail in the

[4:29:34] category.

[4:29:35] We raised a little over $600, the recreation program, and they could be enough to cover

[4:29:40] all of the color, awarded the summer for children at the New York Camp.

[4:29:44] Big news.

[4:29:46] And then we also have many donations for the community, and we want to thank everyone for

[4:29:49] the generosity.

[4:29:51] And we're hoping that there was another one there, and maybe even one in the fall of here.

[4:29:57] So stay tuned for that, I'll do

[4:30:00] Earlier tonight, the coming Friday and Friday are a student theater group, North Bay, theatrical, will be holding their first ever

[4:30:05] Saturday family theater in the park at McLoss Park. The summer theater can't participate, will be performing high school musical

[4:30:12] junior, and the show starts at 6.30 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and everyone's welcome to attend. On July 23rd and 24th, they will perform in line

[4:30:22] key kids also at 30 p.m. today.

[4:30:28] We are starting a new step. This year it's a art

[4:30:31] informed camp at the Rondafati Ranch. There will be two quick questions with the

[4:30:36] first one starting on July 19th, and the second question, starting on August 2nd.

[4:30:41] The campus reformer in grade 1 through 3rd, and they'll get to the end of the day. It's

[4:30:47] in an environment where our activities, the last day of the session will end with a

[4:30:52] public art show to farm for children to showcase their creations on the few weeks.

[4:30:57] And the camp is now open on the city recreation website.

[4:31:02] It's on now, if that's not the truth.

[4:31:04] And then the biggest news of the night is kids day is coming back, it's not in the normal

[4:31:10] day, obviously, because of the delay in reopening this year.

[4:31:14] but it is scheduled for August 14th and we hope to be celebrating all of this birth. It's from 2020 and 2021 in a very

[4:31:23] merry, unburnt this celebration to the 28th Annual Kids Day Creative Festival and we'll have

[4:31:29] what more to eat health on that coming up soon, but at the day it can be very fun.

[4:31:35] Farmers market continues at the Plaza Park through every Wednesday through the end of December

[4:31:40] from 4th to 3DS, I'm 30 p.m. So come on by for the many things that the farmer has to offer.

[4:31:49] Also, how do you accord you in testable? We'll be back here.

[4:31:52] We can play from the weekend, this is number 25th and 26th and we'll plot the part.

[4:31:56] For more info or to participate, you can visit katoncast.com.

[4:32:00] I think you're also pushing out information about that as well, but in case you haven't seen that yet.

[4:32:07] That's what's going on with them. And then for anything

[4:32:10] related to the World of Recreation, you can contact us at the Welfan, at 365-422, where you

[4:32:17] will send the Katouisity.org and the latest information is always on our website and Facebook page.

[4:32:23] And then with that, I will be happy to answer any questions.

[4:32:29] Thank you, Reserveit. Don't come in or hurry.

[4:32:32] At Damian, we're doing a national night out this year.

[4:32:38] We will, it's August 30th.

[4:32:42] And is it possible that maybe we can have a demonstration of the route?

[4:32:48] Actually, yes, we're discussing it out now, but I think we'll definitely probably,

[4:32:53] well definitely probably, that doesn't only make much sense.

[4:32:57] The Chief and I are talking about potential demonstrations that we can do.

[4:33:01] Thank you.

[4:33:02] Thank you for all that out there.

[4:33:07] Any other questions on the city manager's report?

[4:33:12] Thank you, Mr. Robert.

[4:33:15] Next we'll move on to the city council member report.

[4:33:21] And who would like to start?

[4:33:23] Council member parking.

[4:33:25] Oh, you want me to start? Okay.

[4:33:28] On June 9th, I attended the education subcommittee.

[4:33:33] It was a great meeting.

[4:33:34] We had a presentation on that, say, social advocates for youth and all the different programs

[4:33:45] that they have and the things that they're doing and that was a great presentation.

[4:33:52] Then on the 10th, and was at the Sigma meeting, a little bit more to share on that for

[4:33:59] They have been doing the guide program where they get information from the different well owners.

[4:34:08] They sent out about 8,000 requests for information.

[4:34:13] And of that, they got 200 calls, 120 voice mails, 91 online surveys, 23 paper surveys, and 15 email inquiries.

[4:34:29] So that was just as of that point.

[4:34:33] But so people are doing a really good job of helping

[4:34:37] round out that data to help us with our plan.

[4:34:42] The plan is proceeding.

[4:34:45] The schedule is going to be tight.

[4:34:47] But we're getting there.

[4:34:50] The outweight group is had some folks' groups

[4:34:55] and had a presentation on some of the information

[4:34:58] that they learned from those focus groups, so now they will be working to format messages

[4:35:07] and provide more education and things like that so that we have that coming forward.

[4:35:14] And then there was a little bit of discussion.

[4:35:17] Danny and I already mentioned about the drought and how serious some of that stuff is.

[4:35:23] On 610 I also attended Marison Council members, but I'm sure the mayor is going to report on that.

[4:35:28] And my June waste management agency meeting was canceled because we didn't have a full enough agenda.

[4:35:38] So that is all I have for tonight in my short question.

[4:35:43] Thank you.

[4:35:46] Vice Mayor Limiton.

[4:35:51] Yeah, two things very quickly.

[4:35:52] First of all, I also attended the American Council members committee.

[4:35:57] And I'll leave it to the Mayor to talk about it.

[4:35:59] But I didn't want to guess who credit to our mayor.

[4:36:01] is kind of forced to pinch it numerous times and I found out evidently much of my

[4:36:07] surprise without any pre-warning really.

[4:36:12] It was a difficult meeting in many

[4:36:13] senses but you brought a lot of calm and clarity and ran it well and I think

[4:36:17] that was a good reflection on the city so I wanted to give you credit for that.

[4:36:22] Having said that one thing I'll be very careful about this is it involves

[4:36:26] something that we're going to be seeing as a council but given the interest in

[4:36:30] that is including our city about potentially looking at the cessation of new constructions

[4:36:36] of gas stations, any new ones are any of the big process, if the last R&K meeting I did ask

[4:36:45] for two things to be agendas, first of proclamation of support from the Regional Climate

[4:36:51] Protection Authority for the concept of the cessation of the new construction gas stations

[4:36:56] in this county.

[4:36:58] And secondly, along with that, we recommend

[4:37:00] to all our jurisdiction members,

[4:37:03] which would be all the cities in the county,

[4:37:04] as well as the county, that they also,

[4:37:07] if they're not already claimed to agendaist this issue

[4:37:09] for discussion, I did this because it's logic,

[4:37:12] it's an item of interest,

[4:37:14] it is logical that the regional climate protection

[4:37:16] authority might want to look at this,

[4:37:18] and wearing a regional climate protection authority

[4:37:20] hat in the middle of our support list.

[4:37:23] Of course, this is up to the individual jurisdictions

[4:37:25] to do it way will but there's nothing wrong with us. Indeed it's one of our main functions

[4:37:31] to suggest things that we is a bigger community to look at together. So that should be on the agenda for the next meeting.

[4:37:39] So we'll hear about that, perhaps next meeting, we'll see where that goes. Thank you Mr. Mayor.

[4:37:45] Thank you. Council Member Sparks.

[4:37:51] Thank you. I also attended the members of Council members meeting and I just wanted to second

[4:37:55] But I just really like my comments, but you did a great job picking up the slack of that meeting.

[4:38:00] Thank you.

[4:38:04] Thank you.

[4:38:06] And likewise, I just want to add my thanks for forwarding my nomination to the measure of oversight.

[4:38:12] Maybe at that meeting.

[4:38:13] Sure thing.

[4:38:15] Thank you very much.

[4:38:16] That was a difficult meeting at best because as much as I offered to run the meeting from the get go.

[4:38:23] For the mayor of Florida, she was insistent on trying to move the meeting from her in the in the Annapolis long vacation

[4:38:36] And so there were some issues where she was not getting information she needed and she wasn't sure what direction

[4:38:41] So I appreciate your support. Thank you very much on that

[4:38:47] I did attend the library local lab meeting via zoom

[4:38:52] We have a new interim director of the World of Park, Italian Library and they do have a good program going on right now

[4:39:01] They have reached out to all of the

[4:39:04] Rens of Italian high school students and I hope to bring it down to the junior high level of a library

[4:39:11] High card

[4:39:13] So students know what their student name is numbers are because they're used now for everything and the whole school system

[4:39:22] So the snowman kind of library system is going to recognize that student number for the students to be able to access library services for anything I want and not have that stuff.

[4:39:34] And have a little greater forgiveness for previous lines and things like that so that there's no as the interim director indicated there's no library shaming.

[4:39:44] So I thought that was great, so they're doing some pretty good things and light up coming out of the COVID.

[4:39:52] And unfortunately, the tax that was passed, I think it was 2018 from library.

[4:39:59] They're in a pretty good position that haven't been in here, so they're working to do some capital improvements and some upgrades to the library system as a whole.

[4:40:09] And of course, they've got the new Rosalind library coming online.

[4:40:12] So that's really good.

[4:40:13] So libraries don't have some pretty good things.

[4:40:15] And I'm in coordination with the students.

[4:40:18] The other really good news is, I think we finally got our live

[4:40:22] related premium and for our access carrier for remit.

[4:40:28] The wonderful news is I believe it's a 39% increase

[4:40:32] as well as I correct the point then.

[4:40:36] But it's a really difficult market right now.

[4:40:38] So I think we're happy to have that bound

[4:40:40] The positive side of the roadmap meeting is the medical program is doing really well and that was implemented and I want to say five or six years ago, so that's really really well.

[4:40:54] So it's the name and the name and the name of the insurance world.

[4:40:59] I think that's it on my also reports.

[4:41:04] And so now we can move on to public comment on non-action agenda items.

[4:41:10] We have any attendees interested in something.

[4:41:15] Thank you.

[4:41:16] I will open it up to public comment

[4:41:21] and that will end public comment.

[4:41:24] Thank you.

[4:41:25] And then information seemed after the agenda was posted.

[4:41:30] There was that letter that came in from Generation Housing, which I believe you did receive.

[4:41:33] It is now posted to our meeting portal.

[4:41:38] Thank you so much.

[4:41:42] And then we are...

[4:41:44] We were going to go in a closed session regarding the contract with our city manager,

[4:41:51] but I don't know that we have that contract completed yet.

[4:41:54] So we will put that off until the 20-7 and then any contract issues will be

[4:42:04] backdated to meet with the existing end of the current contract, which is

[4:42:10] July 11th.

[4:42:13] You should be good on that.

[4:42:16] And listeners, anything else at this point out, we will go ahead and

[4:42:21] including meeting, and turn the meeting at 10, 24 p.m.

[4:42:29] Thank you all very much.

[4:42:31] Have a lovely fourth animal.

[4:42:33] Don't talk to you guys and take care.

[4:42:35] Thank you.

[4:42:36] I don't.

[4:42:37] Yeah.

[4:42:38] Have a great night.

[4:42:39] Bye.

Cotati City Council Regular Meeting

Transcript