This timeline provides an overview of the work undertaken over more than five decades to understand the library's condition, complete improvements, pursue outside funding, and consider its future. It shows that the issues are longstanding, and that the city is repeatedly responded as information and resources have become available. In 1983, a slab in water proofing study
documented plaza deck cracking and water intrusion, and recommended removing and replacing the slab and water proofing system.
Five years later, and concerns about structural loading.
The same general area of concern examined in greater detail in later MHP evaluations.
By 1990, the city had pursued Proposition 85 funding for repairs, renovation, and expansion.
that application was unsuccessful and and the group that grant program is no longer available.
In 2003 and 2004 the city volunteered to voluntarily strengthen portions of the building
including its walls and columns those are visible downstairs and resurface the bid well plus.
Those improvements addressed identified conditions at the time but cracking and water intrusion
later returned. In 2021, the city's desire to install a shade structure over the Bidwell
Plaza prompted a preliminary structural review. Visible cracking and evidence of water intrusion
raised questions about the plaza's ability to support the proposed improvement and led to a
broader examination of the building. In 2022, the CDA facility condition assessment also aimed
to determine if a shade structure over the bid well plaza was possible. It documented
cracking beyond typical allowable limits and confirmed ongoing water intrusion. It recommended
a comprehensive structural evaluation of the building. In 2023, MHP completed its phase
1 and phase 2 work. The structural analysis produced an estimated repair cost of approximately
approximately $2.87 million, not including any soft costs, while the accompanying visioning
process included seven workshops and explored how a modernized library of approximately
50,000 square feet could function on the Civic Center site.
Also in 2023, the city applied for an $8 million grant through the state's Building Forward
Program to help fund critical repairs and building system improvements.
The application was competitive but was not selected because of the program's criteria
play significant emphasis on disadvantaged communities.
The 2023-2024 Bureau of Veritas Facility Condition Assessment separately identified approximately $7 million
in building system and component needs over a 20-year period assuming a 3% annual inflation.
I should also note that the MHP Phase II report includes an in-depth evaluation of all building systems as well.
Finally, in 2026, MHP updated its report and found that the targeted structural strengthening and plaza waterproofing recommended previously remain necessary and updated the estimated construction cost to approximately $3.2 million.
dollars. That also does not include any soft cost or any additional EOC strengthening.
Taken together, the timeline reflects continued assessment,
investment on the city's part, pursuit of grant opportunities and public
visioning, not inaction.
These photographs show examples of the city's prior structural work,
including reinforcement at the rear wall and at the columns. They're important because they
demonstrate that the city has invested in the building over time. They also show why the
current discussion is about the remaining system-wide needs not acclaim that nothing has ever been
done.
The Plaza was resurfaced as part of the work conducted in 2003 and 2004. That improved
the surface condition, but it did not provide a permanent solution to all of the underlying waterproofing
and structural issues. With the Plaza serving as the roof over occupied space below, a durable solution
needs to coordinate concrete repairs, drainage, and water proofing rather than treating each
item in isolation.
These images help translate the reports into visible conditions,
staining and leakage below deterioration at the plaza surface and water returning at some previously
repaired areas. This will be evident in a couple more slides after this one. The concern is not simply
about appearance. Continued water entry can enlarge cracks and over time damage concrete and
reinforcing steel which has occurred since the 2004 repairs. That is why the
2026 MHP report recommends addressing both the waterproofing in the near term
coordinated with the structural repair work.
The most recent examination of the
library began with a potential public space improvement to reiterate the city
wanted to add a shade structure over the bidwell plaza to make the plaza more
comfortable and usable because the plaza is also the roof over occupied library
space, adding a structure required confirmation that the deck could safely support the additional load.
The preliminary review identified visible cracking and evidence of water intrusion,
which led the city to broaden the inquiry rather than proceed with the shade structure and isolation.
The 2022 CDA facility assessment and documented cracking that exceeded typical allowable limits
in several locations and recommended a comprehensive structural review.
That recommendation led to the detailed MHP engineering work completed first in 2023 and updated earlier this year.
This drawing maps observations from the March 2022 visual survey on the library floor plan.
This is a field observation record. It's not a comprehensive inventory of every crack at leak.
The legend explains that the color coded annotations reflect certain issues.
pink identifies areas that could not be accessed or were in use, gray identifies areas where no issue was noted, yellow identifies slab cracking, orange identifies beam cracking, and white identifies locations where both beam and slab cracking were observed, green marks areas that had previously received epoxy injection repairs,
the teal or cyan color identifies new or existing cracks where active leakage or water
staining was observed. When those colors reviewed across the plan they show that cracking earlier
repairs and evidence of water intrusion were not confined to one isolated location. They were
observed in multiple portions of the building including some previously repaired areas supporting
the recommendation for building wide engineering evaluation.
The updated MHP work organizes the
findings into four important areas. First, under current loading, cracking in the main memes and
girders appears stable and does not present the immediate concern. However, recurring water intrusion
should be addressed in the near term so continued moisture does not cause further deterioration of
the concrete or the reinforcing steel. Second, the seismic analysis found that the main structural system
generally meets the higher standard applied for an essential facility. The principal exception is the
bidwell forum area for receded tonight where MHP recommends anchoring the walls, wrapping supporting
beams with fiber reinforced material and adding new shear walls. Third, four central pier foundations
should be enlarged by adding approximately one foot of concrete around their full perimeter.
This work would allow those supports to carry the 100 pound per square foot live load used in the essential facility evaluation.
Fourth, if the library remains the city's emergency operation center, the non-structural systems also matter.
Mechanical, electrical, plumbing, information technology, ceilings and similar components require additional review and anchorage.
That work is not included in the current repair scope, but is estimated between $200 and $400,000.
The updated $3.2 million figure assumes a start date of work in September of 2027
and covers the defined structural strengthening and bid-a-well plaza waterproofing construction.
It excludes design and other soft costs, broader modernization, comprehensive waterproofing beyond the defined scope,
interior improvements and EOC-related non-structural work.
This plan shows the first major element of MHP's recommended work, enlargement of the
4-central peer pad footings beneath the library.
The four highlighted locations sit in the central portion of the building, MHP recommends adding
approximately one foot of concrete around the full perimeter of each footing so the peers
can support the 100-pound per square foot live load associated with essential facility
standards. The drawing is conceptual and would need to be refined through final design,
but it helps show that the foundation work is targeted to four specific supports rather than
requiring wholesale replacement of the building's foundation system.
This plaza level framing plan
illustrates the recommended strengthening near the bid well forum. The darker lines identify existing
concrete masonry share walls that support the high roofs. Where those walls are discontinuous,
MHP recommends fiber reinforced polymer wrapping around the supporting floor beams.
This adds strength to the existing concrete without replacing the entire beam.
The plan also identifies a new concrete shear wall aligned with the wall below.
Together, the wall and beam improvements create a more continuous path for seismic forces
through this portion of the structure.
As with the prior slide, this is a conceptual repair diagram.
Those precise dimensions, connections, and construction sequencing would have to be developed
during a final engineering phase.
The final conceptual diagram focuses on the high roof framing above the bid well forum
with similar strengthening anticipated at the north high roof.
The proposed work includes a new shear wall and collector beam to gather and transfer seismic
forces into the supporting structure. Continuous cross ties and hold downs would connect the roof
framing across the building. Additional blocking, tie rods and hold downs would secure the framing
to the walls and connect adjacent framing bays. In plain terms, these improvements would tie the
roof walls and supporting structure together so they respond more reliably during an earthquake.
These roof framing measures are part of the targeted bit of well-formed strengthening described in
the update and are separate from the plaza waterproofing work that must also be coordinated
with the structural repairs.
I'm halfway done.
Structural work is only part of the library's needs.
The 2023 mechanical electrical and plumbing review found major systems that are original
to the building, obsolete, at capacity, or well beyond their expected service life.
The two original air handlers are approximately 53 years old.
The electrical switchboard and panels date to 1970 and have little or no spare capacity.
The existing water and sanitary systems also limit expansion.
The facility condition assessment, as I mentioned, identified nearly $7 million in building
system and component needs over the next 20 years using a 3% annual inflation figure.
That figure is a planning forecast across many systems.
It should not simply be added to another estimate without aligning the scope timing and
escalation assumptions.
The figures on the screen were prepared in 2023 and are conceptual hard construction estimates
and generally exclude design, permitting, inspection, relocation, or other soft costs.
They're useful for comparing scale, but they're not current construction bids.
These options illustrate different policy choices.
The repair option addresses defined structural and water proofing needs.
The expansion concepts add space and reconfigure the existing campus.
A new building represents a substantially different long-term solution.
The current structural construction estimate has since been updated to $3.2 million.
Staff recommends carrying a larger overall project allowance roughly between $4.5 million to
to recognize the design and other project costs subject to refinement.
The deck and Paseo concepts were developed through the 2023 MHP and FIFER visioning process,
which included seven public workshops and explored how modernized library of approximately
50,000 square feet could be fit within the existing Civic Center.
Option one on the left screen builds more of the new program above and around the existing
library using connected roof decks and a new stair and elevator element. This concept sought to
maximize connections across the upper level outdoor spaces while adding modern library space
with a comparatively compact ground level footprint. Its 2023 conceptual construction estimate was
approximately $20.6 million. Option two on the right of the screen places more of the addition
along a plaza edge and creates a pedestrian passage or peseo between building areas.
Public feedback led to the design team to reduce its visual impact by setting portions back
from the sidewalk and stepping back the second floor, while maintaining connections between
roof decks. Its 2023 conceptual construction estimate was approximately $23 million.
These images are massing and general space use studies. It's not a final architectural design.
The estimates are conceptual, hard construction costs used to compare scale, and generally
do not include any of the soft cost I-
I mentioned previously. If the city council directs further study, the program site constraints, phasing, and cost would all need to be updated and refined.
Any project requiring a lengthy closure of the library creates a secondary issue. How do we continue serving the community during construction? A least facility of at least 7,000 square feet provides the most complete continuity of services, including study, programming, and staff functions. Portable and
And mobile service combinations can maintain core borrowing and information services but
with less public space and limited programming.
This year one estimates, these one year estimates range, library's current annual operating
budget of about 2.95 million.
Much of the differences start up costs including relocation, temporary facilities or vehicles,
technology and storage.
These are preliminary service models.
A detailed relocation plan would return to the City Council at a future date if a project
requiring closure advances. As a reminder, these costs would be in addition to any of
the construction costs I've mentioned previously.
The library's original financing illustrates
why today's funding discussion is so different. Before the current library was developed,
a 1955 library bond failed by a vote of approximately 68% to 32%. And state and federal grant
request were unsuccessful. The city and school district later formed a joint powers authority
and issued approximately $950,000 in released revenue bonds which did not require voter approval.
The financing worked for the city because the city transferred five other services to Los Angeles
County but retained the local property tax capacity that had previously paid for those services.
That capacity was then available to make the annual lease payments.
Proposition 13 changed that framework in 1978 by limiting local property tax rates and
ending the city's ability to create or retain payment capacity in the same manner.
The city can no longer transfer a service and redirect its former property tax rate
to a new capital project.
Point Powers' authorities and least revenue bonds remain legal financing tools, but they
only provide borrowed capital.
They do not create the revenue needed to repay the debt.
Today, a significant new revenue source generally requires voter approval under Propositions 13 to 18 and 26, or the city must identify an existing revenue stream that can support those payments.
The city has pursued outside funding for the library for decades.
Earlier state and federal efforts were unsuccessful or involved programs that no longer exist.
In 2023, the city requested $8 million through the state's building forward program for
structural waterproofing, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work.
The application was competitive, but was not selected in a program that prioritized disadvantaged
communities.
That figure, again, was based on estimates that were identified by the 2023 MHP report.
Staff is currently working with Senator Perez on a potential fiscal year 2026-2027 state
budget allocation.
Initial discussions have centered on approximately $10 million, generally reflecting an updated version
of that critical maintenance scope.
All of these actions are in line with previous direction provided by the City Council to pursue
all available funding opportunities.
The City Council direction will help staff finalize that request.
An appropriation is not guaranteed, I want to be clear about that, and pursuing it doesn't
prevent us from seeking other state, county, or federal funding opportunities.
Moving on to the second facility and tonight's presentation, the Corporate Yard, the operating
base for public works at a facility whose limitations affect how efficiently we can provide
and maintain our streets, park, trees, vehicles, and public buildings.
The Corporate Yard was built around 1965, but that effort to establish it began years earlier.
In 1960, the City Council identified relocation and construction of a new corporation yard as a priority project,
recognizing the need for a permanent operational base.
From 1961 through 1963, the City evaluated several locations, including the San Jose Reservoir area,
improvements at the earlier Sierra Madre and Lorraine site, and the property next to the Santa Fe Railroad.
The process included engineering studies, property negotiations, planning commission
and city council hearings, and substantial public testimony about the location, its
access, screening, landscaping, and neighborhood impacts.
The city council approved the railroad adjacent site in 1963, architects subsequently prepared
a two phase plan and construction bids were received in 1964.
4. The current yard subsequently opened at approximately this location and was expanded
through a small adjoining property purchase in 1966. The city revisited major expansion
again in the 1980s. By 1988 the proposed program had grown to more than 32,000 square feet
of buildings plus covered vehicle storage and fueling facilities. 1989 concept carried an
estimated cost of $3.2 million contemplated phase construction, but it did not advance
to completion.
That history shows that the need for a functional, adequately-sized corporate yard is long-standing,
although most residents do not visit this particular facility.
It is the operational hub for staff, vehicles, equipment, materials, daily maintenance, and
emergency response throughout Clandora.
The existing site houses the facilities, streets, and fleet divisions, and buildings and
work areas developed for a much smaller and less complex operation.
The challenge is not only the age of these buildings.
The site must also accommodate vehicle movement, repairs, storage, materials, utilities, employee
needs, and safe staging within this particular area.
The photograph show a facility that has been adapted over six decades.
staff has continued to maintain and repair it, but the original layout limits
circulation, storage and work areas, parking, employee facilities, and coordination
amongst operations. The site itself is approximately 2.8 acres, and not all of
the land is really available for redevelopment. Existing encompasses, including
the flood control channel, utility easements, including a metropolitan water
district infrastructure, limit where buildings, circulation routes, and other
improvements can be placed on the site. The images also show aging finishes and employee spaces
heavily used coverage storage, a deteriorated roof and fascia condition, and a site that must
accommodate a wide range of vehicles and activities within a constrained footprint. Many of these
conditions cannot be solved through isolated roof pavement or interior repairs. The physical layout,
aging infrastructure, easements, and operational demands must be considered together with any redevelopment
plan. The site currently contains about 8,270 square feet of building area. The city-wide
facility assessment identified approximately 2.12 million dollars in deferred maintenance,
including roofing exterior pavement and building system needs. In addition to all that is housed
there, the yard supports fleet streets, facilities maintenance, material and equipment storage,
and emergency responses. Our plan, moving forward, is to incorporate the
park's landscape maintenance and urban forestry divisions that's be
consolidated at this location as part of the city's broader facility
strategy. Centralization reduces travel between sites and improves coordination
and equipment sharing and places more of the city's field operations where they
can actually work together.
The 2.12 million deferred maintenance figure
your describes repairs to existing assets.
It does not solve the larger operational challenges.
Independent planning work found in adequate offices,
training and employee space, including restrooms,
storage, staging, circulation, and aging utilities.
Renovation would spend significant money
while leaving many of those constraints in place.
IDS therefore concluded that demolition and reconstruction
would be more practical and cost effective over the long term
and trying to modernize the existing arrangement.
The proposed plan replaces approximately 82 or 8300 square feet
with about 18,310 square feet across four purpose-built facilities.
The largest change is the office building,
which would bring facilities, streets, parks, trees,
and landscape staff together and preserve space
for a future traffic management center or alternate EOC function.
The remaining building support the fleet repair, sign, tire storage, wood and metal shop
work.
This is operational space tied directly to maintaining the city's assets.
The preliminary estimate identified in 2024 was $12.6 million.
The current phase estimate is approximately $13.6 million, reflecting sequencing, temporary
operations, utility transitions, and escalation costs.
Design and construction documents have continued to advance since the Kent City Council approved the IDS agreement in November of 24.
The comparison that you see on the screen is not simply about old buildings versus new buildings.
It's an inefficient layout built for 1960s operations compared with a coordinated campus designed for current service levels, regulatory requirements, and future flexibility.
The proposed project is not intended to create new municipal services.
It replaces obsolete facilities so that existing services can be delivered more safely and
efficiently for the future.
Public works cannot shut down while it's operating bases being rebuilt.
Facing plan is designed to keep crews, vehicles, materials, and emergency response functions
available throughout construction.
The first work occurs in the northwest of the built Big Dalton Wash and build site improvement
infrastructure and storage. The new administration building and major utilities then create room
for operations to transition before the remaining buildings are demolished and replaced.
Facing adds roughly a million dollars because the contractor must mobilize and sequence work multiple
times and because temporary operations and utility connections are going to be required. It also
exposes later phases to added escalation. The trade-off is that this additional cost protects
tax continuity of essential city services and may allow funding to be spread over several
years.
Technical record establishes the need, the remaining questions are policy related,
what outcomes should the city pursue, and what sequence, and what funding strategy is realistic.
Either project can't be absorbed in its entirety through the city's ongoing maintenance budget.
Even phased work for one facility would be difficult to accommodate within routine maintenance
or a typical capital improvement program. Attempting to fund phase improvements for
both facilities at the same time would be even less practical.
The library's approximately $3.2 million estimate covers only defined structural strengthening
and waterproofing construction and does not modernize the building.
The corporate yard is currently estimated at $13.6 million and remains subject to escalation
and market conditions. Breaking work into smaller pieces may make annual
expenditures appear more manageable but extending construction over a longer period of time can add design,
mobilization, temporary operation, impacts, escalation and coordination costs.
It can also delay the point at which the city receives the full operational benefit of the
improvements. For the library, the city council must also decide the building's long-term role and
whether it should continue as the emergency operations center.
For the yard, the decision will reshape how public works operates for the next several
decades.
The furl also has some consequences.
Continued water exposure and aging systems at the library continued inefficiencies at the
corporate yard, longer implementation timelines, and likely higher costs for both projects.
The
2024 survey of 600 likely voters found that 45% initial support for a library-only bond and 53% for a broader facilities bond, both well below the two-thirds threshold approval required for any general obligation bond.
staff expects that any workable plan will likely combine sources grants or a state appropriation available one-time funds if directed by the City Council
potential land sale proceeds debt financing capital improvement plan reprioritization phase construction or future revenue measures
workshop number three will evaluate these tools against the priorities established tonight for the library staff needs direction on which scenarios merit further work
Defined repairs, broader modernization, expansion, replacement, or a scope that fully supports continued EOC use.
Repair only should be understood as a project budget of at least approximately four to four and a half million dollar.
Once costs beyond the $3.2 million construction estimate are considered.
Staff would refine that allowance through design.
For the corporate yard, staff is asking whether to continue refining the phased approach,
and update those costs, recognizing that phasing projects, excuse me, that phasing protects
operations but adds cost.
The City Council does not need to select the final financing instrument tonight, but it
does need to identify the outcomes, staff should price and break back to you in September.
Receiving the reports and giving direction tonight does not itself appropriate project
funding or authorized construction. Any future financing plan, design change,
financing action, or construction award will return to this...
The city council for separate consideration for the same reason tonight's action is not a project under sequel. The city has studied these facilities thoroughly, made repairs and improvements over time, pursued outside funding and invested millions of dollars in infrastructure and maintenance. Those efforts matter, but they have not eliminated the underlying challenges. The newest reports give us a clear and more current basis for action. The yard's problem is functional obsolescence that repairs alone
cannot correct. The question is no longer whether needs exist. It is what level of investment the
community is prepared to pursue, how the project should be prioritized, and how to build a responsible
funding roadmap for future generations. We have representatives from MHP and IDS available this evening
to answer any technical questions about the respective evaluations and recommendations if needed.
that concludes staff's presentation
and we are available to answer any questions
or clarify any of the information.
Thank you, Moissess.
Catch your breath.
That's a lot.
There'll be a quiz
in 10 minutes if you need to.
What I want to do is I'll bring it back
for some comments or questions from the council members
and then we'll certainly reach out to the community.
I think it's important to recognize
that we all would agree. Are we in a great spot? No. Is it anyone's fault here?
Maybe not. But to beat on this body, or decades of kicking the bull down the road,
probably isn't going to be a solution tonight. So those folks, our forefathers,
made the choices they did and we can't defend them or support them particularly.
so just look at a positive forward and what's next type of opportunity. I hope we could do that.
So with such, I'll bring it back for comments and I'll let you begin please.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Thank you, Moissess, for the fabulous report. I feel like I've been immersed in this for weeks and
weeks as we've talked about a lot of this stuff.
And I appreciate the community for being here and those of you who are watching online.
This is extremely important and I feel like we're at a fork in the road for our city and
there are some big decisions to be made so I appreciate everybody's involvement in that.
I want to keep my comments to a minimum right now because it's important to me that the
community has an opportunity to give your input and let us know kind of what
you're looking for. I will kind of reiterate what the mayor just said. You know,
I want to be really cautious about blaming anybody. I think, you know, the
report has shown that for five decades, the city past councils past staff have
not just ignored the problem.
I think there was a concerted effort made to resolve
some of the issues, like the library specifically
in terms of leaking and structural issues.
Unfortunately, it didn't work, it didn't work again,
and it didn't work again, and here we are.
So I don't think it's a lack of trying,
but I do think at some point we have to look at everything
and say, you know, do we make another stab at the same problem or do we just start a new?
So that's, you know, part of the bigger picture discussion that I think we need to have.
But like I said, I think it's important not to get into the blame game
and just, you know, let's look at what we have in front of us and decide kind of the path that we want to go forward.
So I think we have a lot of good options and then
Additionally, I think it's going to be important to figure out how to pay for all of this. That's you know the big elephant in the room
So I'll pass it along because I do want to hear from the community
Thank you, Shana
Karen
Some mental reaching for the microphone. So I was like oh, yeah, no, thank you
No, I would agree with everything that's been said so far
Thank you to everyone that's shown up tonight and those watching online.
This has been a reoccurring issue of trying to figure out how to fix this building
in 2021 when we wanted to look at creative ways to fix it and expand by building the shade structure
that looking at that shade structure is what led us to find out. There were more problems. So we
We continue to look at that and try to solve some of that and it's obvious that our public
workshop is just a little old and so no offense to anyone or anything but it is time for
us to give it a facelift.
So look forward to hearing what the community has to say to add to all of that and see how
we can move this forward. Thank you Karen Randall.
Mayor thank you and I want to say thank you
to staff and voices you covered a lot of years and a lot of ground and an untold amount of
chatter back and forth. So thank you you know did a great job and I also want to thank Gary
and frog and the members of frog that are here. You've heard a lot of this and
you toured a lot of this and we're only here partly because of the effort that
you that you made and the year of your life that you gave and the the
challenges that you were up against and maybe the friends that you that you
even lost. But thank you for the work that you that you've done. So I came on
this this council in 2015 and the first three or four years we were trying to
figure out how to keep our lights on because there was a deficit. Adam has talked
talked about that. Adam's been here seven, eight years, probably seems like 20 years or so.
And so we had to take a number of years to turn the ship because we were at a deficit.
it. We probably didn't know it as well as, as we really became to, you know, see it.
And but after that, we then begin to talk about this. And as Roy says, as said, we have
been talking about this for years, and I applaud the council that I'm a part of now, and
really last year Gary was there, that we were one of the first groups to just say what
are we going to do, and it's a challenging job, as all of you know.
So, four months ago or so, when I made a motion that we have these work workshops, that
was seconded by Michael, yes, Michael.
Some of you guys think that Michael and I don't like each other.
And we are honest men, I can tell you that, and we don't agree on everything, but we
agree on most things.
And after that was approved by a five-o vote, I got calls and chatter like, what are you
doing?
Are you trying to look for a fight?
do you really think you're gonna solve this? Are you trying to split us? And to each
of those I said no. I really feel that we have a city that can sit down and be
civil and rational and transparent. I remember a coffee that I had with
Mr. Barron and he hammered that point home and I think I said like you've got my word we're
going to be transparent and everything and if this is not a transparent expression of city
welcoming every one of us here I you know don't know what it is I would hope that we could put
swords down and put our hearts and our hands and our heads to try to solve some of the
big audacious goals and problems that our city has. We can do that. We can do it better
without beating each other up. And Workshop 2 is a heavy one. We got two big, big things
And I want to say thank you to each one of you for taking your night to be here.
As you've heard, we have talked about this. We've had study sessions, we've had workshops.
Staff has continued to work hard. And I really am a man full of hope thinking that we can get this done.
Is it going to be done just overnight? No, but I really do think that there's energy. There's
data, there's facts that we can agree on. At least I hope that you can.
And there's a sense of willingness on a large number of people's minds and hearts to come
and give this problem fixed and so thank you for you know being here thank you
for allowing us to hear what's in your mind and in your heart we we are only
here because you've asked us to be here we don't claim to be the smartest
people here but we want to hear what you are saying and that can be done in a
civil way without the bantering and the attacks that have happened for many, many months.
So thank you for, you know, doing that.
And again, staff, thank you for giving a thorough, factual, honest assessment of everything
that we have looked at.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mendel.
I'm going to take a departure and go a little out of order and make sense in a moment
I promise you. I'm going to go next. I had a couple of questions regarding the library water intrusion
issue. Well, there's been many different attempts and band-aids and glue and battle and things
like that.
In my count, there's only been one serious redo of the deck area to try to cover the
of mass of it? Is that accurate?
Sure. Good evening, everyone, and Mayor, thanks for the question. So the historical record
that we've had showed there have been other more significant efforts to repair, especially
with cracking shortly after the opening in the 70s, and there was evidence in some of the
pictures from the rehab that staff had done other things. Post 2003 and 2004, there were also
several efforts to coat or resurface the plaza in an effort to put some water coating.
And all the instances, based on what we can see largely from library board meeting notes
that there was water intrusion in the winter of post work being done.
The total in your packet this evening there is a list of what we could find publicly, but
that we do know from talking with employees that have been here previously, as well as inferences in meeting minutes that more significant work had been done over the years like the epoxy if you saw, but we can't see, but we don't have a complete historical record.
That's accurate.
Great. Great. Thank you. So if we were to go out and put an X on the ground and saying the leak is here, that's not possible because nobody's found it specifically. That's correct. That's correct.
Okay. That's. Thank you.
15 to the corporate yard is an opportunity.
The recommendation, I had a question coming in, but I think the recommendation is that
trying to reuse or repurpose, refurbish a couple of the buildings to smaller sites while
possible is not really a great direction, is that correct?
Okay.
So even if we were to update them and refurbish in the things, the end result may not be the
total result.
okay very good. Some of the if you remember yeah this one's all old enough for the
member of the 1971 earthquake. After that the highways folks went and put
steel wraps around all the concrete bridge girders to try to hold. So if they
did do something silly they'd land on the on the steel wrap. Might that be an
option and some in our 4-steel car-
Allums and footings, an alternative to extra concrete and around it. It seems to work on the outside world, but maybe it's an inside option. That is definitely an option. In fact, the work done in 2003 and 2004 did that exactly in the pillars downstairs. If you actually, you can actually see the original width of the pillars plus the extension of the fiber reinforcement that occurred at that time. So it's about two inches.
is it's actually very visible once your downstairs.
All right, great.
Thank you.
Those are all the questions I have at this point.
And I'm going to invite Mr. Allerost to speak.
And I think he has extra peace to add to it.
So Michael, what I didn't say, and probably this is not
the work, no.
But Michael and I have spent probably three or four hours
going through all of the dollars and cents, because you have asked us, where's all the money going?
And then Michael and I spent four hours with these two guys. And yes, Michael and I did
did that. And it was good and insightful and honest. And we'll save our outcome until
a couple of months from now when we have our third workshop. But I just want you to know
that there's been a lot of work on all of our parts to try to lean in and fix this.
My
hat's off to you, Moissess. You did two and a half decades and less than an hour.
That's pretty amazing and we didn't fall asleep.
This has been an ongoing issue for obviously for all of us.
And I leaned into this greatly in January when this really came to the forefront with the frog committee's work and our discussions
of what we wanted to do moving forward to fix these issues.
and I had put together a small group of talented people that, because we're not experts up here,
we have to rely on staff, we have to rely on outside folks, but we still have to do our due diligence
as council members. And so I have former City Manager, a former library director, engineers
that worked on this with hand calculations for engineering, the old fashioned way.
we have people who maintain this contractors and so on and so forth to get a
really understanding of what we're really dealing with here and you know we
can read all the information that they've been able to get out and they took
out a storage and they've been digitizing all this and going through blueprints
but it's until you have a group of people that you can rely on to decipher some of
this stuff because we're not experts. It leaves a lot to be desired. I'm gonna go
backwards is a little bit to the corporate yard. I took a tour of it yesterday, and those pictures
that you saw up there were amazing. They're great compared to what is in reality. When you see
reality, it's like I can't believe we have people working here. It's been disrepair. It hasn't really
been maintained. We have vehicles strewn all over the place. We need to get removed. We have
context boxes that are there for storage, and that needs to get addressed.
It's just a whole litany of issues that we have to address, and this is a Keshe 22 situation.
We have our desires and dreams, what we want, but we don't have the funds.
So that is a huge, huge issue that hopefully we can address or at least get down that road
in our third workshop.
According to this building here, we had Michael Matthews and I had a really good conversation
along with the rest of the team.
Let's put together about just the issues with the library here.
We have this decking out here when it was redone, it was completely torn up completely.
They put a whole new substructure lightweight concrete.
They put a water system in there so that it would keep the water from intruding down.
and it actually located the water kind of migrated over here to the
silo here with the building in St. Downe. But for the first two to three years we
didn't have any real issues and it was on its supposed to be on a maintenance
program to reseal this on a regular basis because it aggregates things move and
UV and things of that nature and it was not being maintained so that's an issue.
We also have an issue with hydrology on the north side of the building here.
Well the stairs are, the water sinks down and it just sits there and it goes down
and the water pressure pushes into the walls and then we have an issue.
So we have to work on drainage issue on the on the north east and on northwest side
where the stairs are to deal with that.
All of our windows, structures and systems are failing.
Water is leaking through there.
We have dirt that's piled up on the west side.
There shouldn't be piled up there.
One time they had put to fix some of these issues,
they caught a lot of the areas in the walls.
And that's still holding true and still doing a fairly good job
what it's supposed to be doing.
But there are more that has to be done.
We have, as they mentioned, we have some plumbing issues.
We have electrical, which is completely outdated.
and also re-envisioned the library as well.
So again, there are so many issues
and they've encapsulated quite a few
with the presentation this evening,
but we have a lot of work to do.
And I'm hoping that if anything that comes out
of these meetings here, that everyone understands
and we bring everyone along with us,
so that when the decision is made,
that everyone is in agreement,
they might not necessarily like it,
But we're somewhat in agreement and we fully are transparent in communicating through this process.
So at this point, I'd like to bring up Michael Matthews to give his report.
Since he's more of the contractor and he knows more about about this one.
Tech old standpoint, Michael could you please?
For all the people at home, they can hear you this.
Thank you Adam.
And I'm going to try not to be the red headed stepchild of this boring hot air now because
there's so much love in this room.
And I'm here because I got drafted in January.
And I couldn't say no.
So I've been in a lot of conversations with people that have a lot of experience and knowledge
and ideas and have been trying to put them together.
Real quickly, Michael Matthews, my wife and I have been residents of the city for over 40 years,
both have businesses.
In fact, Andy's going to celebrate her 41st year this year in town here with her business.
But we've been members of the Library Friends Foundation for 20 some odd years,
is intimately involved with.
And so both C and I are very specifically focused on having
a library and having this library.
So that being said, I've been a contractor for 30 some years,
probably bring some experience to this process.
And hopefully so.
Well, real quickly, Mary, you talked a question about the plaza.
It wasn't designed originally to be a plaza, it was supposed to be a second story.
We don't know what happened, probably we'll never know.
But it was never designed to be a waterproof surface.
And that's why we've been fighting it all these years because it's in a huge experience
to try to put anything on it that will last for any length of time and protect or the building below.
That has caused the problems we have with structure mostly.
Concrete, John, you could probably verify concrete cracks, it happens.
It's just what the nature of the beast, it never really cures over its lifetime.
So it's always in some form of changing.
You add water to that, gets in there, water can cause big problems.
You get into the metal.
If you're so unlucky, it could do serious damage.
But the companies that did the study for us back from 2022
22 is probably the first really comprehensive thing.
MHP did 23, they just updated it last week.
They never showed any significant changes over that period of time, which is a good thing.
In 30 some odd years of being a contractor, I've worked on numerous buildings that had far worst structural issues that need to be repaired.
It's part of the business.
So, everything that you showed, I have no problem with, not surprised, you can expect
that type of thing.
On top of it, it took the opportunity to pull out this stench in here because this
building qualified as our EOC with the studies that were done.
and we didn't have to do anything special in,
met all those standards on its own.
So we have a good basis to go forward if we choose.
So, it's not possible to do long-term waterproofing.
I had a company come out that I work with that is one of the premier waterproofing companies
in Southern California used them for 25 years.
years and they took a look at it for me and they said, listen, we can waterproof this.
We can probably give you a 10-year warranty.
Part of that would require every couple of years being inspected and probably have some
resurfacing.
So that's in play, but we're talking a million dollars.
And do we really want to put ourselves back into the same process of 50 years every so often
a million dollars. Probably not. So my idea was let's get rid of the issue. Let's get the water off
of that surface and do so with a patio cover. So that started a fun little process of designing,
coming up with concepts, drinking about how that could work. The issues would be long-term structure
obviously not impossible because there was a really originally designed to have a fully used
second story anyway so I believe there's hope for something like that but then we can use it not
worry about the waterproofing of the existing surface and we can use it year round for many different
purposes, stylize it, the match, everything that we have going on here as far as this building
and the city hall and so forth, and make something that last long term. The question is,
how do we fund it, and how much will it cost? Well, I've been playing out quite a few different
scenarios. I think $10 million would probably do it. I actually had a meeting with Adam and
Moises and Mendel and we sat around the table and we saw all came up with the same number
from different directions so it seemed like a good possibility. So there's a lot of things
that have to be done though and I think $10 million budget we could do probably some of the dream
part and some of the stuff in these would be done.
So with that, I'm going to leave it a little bit loose.
Like I said, I brought some images here.
I have a scale drawing that we had made up based on the structure.
And see what you think.
We'd love to play it out.
And I don't think I have anything else.
Thank you, Michael.
So back a few months back, Senator Sasha Perez had a small
business Saturday walk and I had an opportunity, one of the the
restaurateurs shops here in Calm brought up the library as we're walking around
and what a great jewel it was for our city and it was unprompted. That
triggered a conversation about getting some of our tax dollars back to
Glendora and we had a wonderful conversation and working with her
representative for the district Jack Arden sitting in the back there. She was
amenable to put this on next year's ask for the budget and we have the city of
Irlanda, the city of Azusa. They've received some funds as well from the
state of California for their libraries so I didn't think was so far out of the
way to ask for us as well because that seems to be the number to get us in the
right side. So if I can ask Jack to come on up just for a moment and give us a
status, kind of where we are with that ask, because at the end of the day it's, we don't
have the money, you know, all this is for not, we have to find it and hopefully in a third
meeting we'll be able to find it. If I wouldn't mind really quick, my sense would you just
mind giving a brief overview on the official ask really quick that we went over in the presentation?
Not to put Jack in a tough spot right here, so give him a little bit of an out.
Sure, sure. So as I mentioned in the presentation,
I'll take a step back and then kind of present it the forward.
So we submitted an application to the state for a grant program,
specifically designed and aimed towards libraries at the building forward grant.
So the Susie example, the Irma Dale example, both of those cities.
We received funding through that grant program and ours was ultimately $8 million and it had
smatching requirements. We intended to expand more as part of that project, but $8 million was
the state grant portion of it. So using that as a basis kind of of where we're at today,
we estimated that $10 million would be able to address kind of those core critical issues
that we had application so following or the the budgetary request to the
senator following your conversations with the senator I had had a couple of
opportunities to meet with Jack and kind of present with him the information
get his feedback about the what needs to be included in that one more request and
so he's got a draft of that available we shared with Jack that we would be
having this workshop and we wanted to make sure that we would fully identify what
the council's desire and direction would be following the workshop.
Our goal is to work with Jack, formalize that request and start navigating the process
with the senator's office here locally as well as her staff and Sacramento.
Well, thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak.
I do want to say thank you to Moissess.
I was given a tour of the library as well, I was able to see the damages first hand.
I also got to see some updates, sort of what was done to fix the building in the meantime.
And I thought that was a great view of what's going on and just how serious the damage has been.
So our office has been working with the city.
Where the budget request stands is that we need to eat the formal request.
So after today, as I understand, the city is going to put together the request in a formal letter,
Which the draft has been produced and it's been shared with me once that formal letters done
The capital team looks at it and we're able to sort of take a look and see what we can do
This would be going into if it's if we're able to get this done it would be a next year's budget
The budgets are always
Sort of contentious as as you probably all know there's big fights over that so
That's at the end of the day sort of at the discretion of the governor
governor, which we'll have a new one next year. So our office is more than happy to advocate
on behalf of Lundora, to fight for Lundora. As you said, the senator has been briefed.
I've seen the damages. I've met with Moises. I personally think it's a great budget request.
I would love to be able to do this, but it does fundamentally come down to Sacramento
I know at the end of the day, the senator will advocate.
And once we're able to get that budget request
and we can sit down with the capital team,
that's what we can do.
It does come down to Sacramento,
but I do want to also state that those funds
would be opened up after June 15th of next year.
So that's, I mean, if that works, the council,
then we're happy to sort of take a look at that.
But any budget request would be in the next year as opposed to this year.
The budget this year is already finalized, it's already done.
The governor put that balance budget forward.
There's also wasn't a ton of money for the individual communities in there.
So we are looking at next year, that's sort of the idea.
I can't give you any promises, but I can't give you the promise that I'm going to work on this, the center of work on this and we'll see what we can go from there.
our office is listening. So, once this meeting is done, then I'll be able to
connect Moises and a legislative director to see where it needs to go from
there. But I think the city's done a great job. Adam Moises, I think they've
done a great work on this.
Well, Jack, I think if you go up there with your Hawaiian
shirt and lobby for us, you'll get us the money.
There, that's good. I'm good, thank
you. Thank you, Michael, Michael and Jack. Appreciate that very much. Okay, it's now our turn to listen
and I'd love to do so. I hope that great ideas out there and time to be honest and tell us
what you'll support and what kind of things you might want to do. We've had six months of
keyboard warriors, a pining on things, on social media. I hope they're in the room and we'll share ideas versus just going home and smashing with a copy cup in your hand afterwards.
So let's hear from everybody and we can take off and begin.
I do have one yellow card, the gentleman that did fill it out. So I'll let him go first.
Mr. Kratowski, Michael.
Welcome this way.
So for those of you who present at the first workshop,
one rule of engagement, I will give you the microphone
as long as you promise to give it back.
Okay?
No arm wrestling.
All right.
Welcome, Michael.
Thank you, I'll keep it brief.
I was really gonna ask about the library structure
more largely, but it sounds like there's been a lot
of stuff going on about that.
So my question now is about the emergency operation center,
and does that 10 million or a shade structure,
or not to chase trucks or break canopy,
hope address that.
This is something that I'd heard you mention
in previous meetings over the last couple of years,
but I'd love to know more about the Emergency Operations Center,
what it does, where it can go, where restrictions are,
and how we can fix it.
Thank you.
Great question.
Moissas, do you mind talking about the two to 400,000,
some of the initial seismic and then options
if the city were to move it and how that relates
It's to the corporate yard.
Sure.
So based on the reports and the work that MHP did,
we're from a structural perspective,
we're fairly close to what the EOC standard is.
So that's good news.
As Mr. Matthews mentioned, that's the good news.
The structure is in no imminent threat of falling over.
We've got some stuff to do for sure,
but we're in a pretty good spot.
It does identify some very specific improvements,
primarily to this floor and some of the supporting beams
that I mentioned to the roof structure above us
and some supporting sheer wall construction.
In addition to that work,
which is included into $3.2 million figure,
we have to do some equally,
we have to make some improvements
to some of the building systems.
To make those EOC level ready,
the engineers estimated that the cost would be
an additional two to $400,000.
So, we could be talking upwards of $3.6 million to make it EOC ready, this building EOC ready.
So, not infeasible and closer to it, frankly, then what we originally thought when the investigative work happens.
So, emergency operation center just briefly is what it describes in the event of an emergency, whether it's large or small,
There's a team of staff members that are plucked from city operations who basically come to this building into this room and set up a control area for us to plan and respond to an emergency.
The most recent time we activated the emergency was some of the fires that we've had on our foothills.
We've had two in recent memory. One happened with kind of on the border.
Sandi and this about, I'd say about a what a month ago. And then there was one about last year that we were monitoring very, very closely.
Anytime we see smoke coming from the hills anywhere from any direction, we pay attention to that stuff because we want to get ahead of it.
We also meet, we have a dedicated emergency operation center manager. She helps coordinate all of our activities.
And we actually practice emergency scenarios, realistic, real world scenarios that could happen in our community,
whether it's a fire in the foothills that we have a reservoir break, we have flooding, we have emergencies at Big Dalton.
How do we vacate children when programming is there? So we game plan those scenarios so that if and when something happens,
that we're in better position and more informed to make the decisions that need to be made in that particular moment in time to be responsive.
So that team is multidisciplinary. We have every single staff every every department
and division in the city reflected in that and so this kind this would be effectively
our brain operation center in those scenarios.
I guess my question would be then is
it more like the 10 million for the structure and then another 3 million for EOC or is
that all one night? I know we talked a lot about the individual
breakdowns from construction, not including soft costs. We didn't talk about a specific
figure for the electrical and mechanical. You know, we had previously talked about, you know,
8 million for the grant, 10 million was a figure that's not inclusive of some of the modernization
efforts that would be on the ground floor. You know, I talk just briefly. I'm sure other people
have the same question about like what 5 million buys you, what 10 million buys you, what 15 million
and buys you a lot less than you think, unfortunately, but so just let's throw the figures out and just put some context to it, you know, I just mentioned the 3.6 million kind of estimated between whether proofing whatever that means structural improvements and making the facility EOC ready.
We've also know that we have about $7 million worth of outstanding capital investments just to the
ongoing maintenance expenses over the next 20 years for this building. So that's a figure that's out there.
Under the umbrella, if we were successful to secure the $10 million, I would envision that we'd be able to do a lot of that sort of thing
with that amount of money. Anything that we get in terms of revenue is going to be a positive factor and a positive influence in the project.
If a shade structure of some sort is something that the council prioritizes, then we'll figure out a way to incorporate that under the program.
That's a good problem to have. If I've got $10 million in my pocket, I'd love to have that conversation again in a year's time about how we go about making all of these things happen.
But ultimately, we're going to have to make some choices and prioritize ultimately what is most important to the council.
So I think, you know, assuming a project like that, I don't know what your construction estimate.
You have that I envision maybe two million, three million, some more thereabouts.
Yeah, there we go.
We'll
go here then here if that's okay with you.
So hi, I'm Mike Antonesi, resident of nine years here in Glendora.
Great presentation, Moises.
Thank you for your work on this.
And even with the frog committee advising us
on some of the directions.
I was, as I spoke last week, I think I was able to go to all of the facilities and take
a look at these with the rest of the committee.
And I echo Michael's voice in that those were great pictures, and don't reflect at all.
The reality of what our employees, our employees that we pay each week go to, go through
in the job responsibilities, they have a building that doesn't have adequate restrooms,
doesn't have adequate washing bathing facilities, the equipment there dates back into the 60s.
The building is totally just obsolete and reeks replacement.
just screams replacement, so interestingly when I got involved in initially I thought that the library was the most consequential change that we needed to do.
I would love to see us prioritize the facility that's going to be there for our employees to manage our city.
So I'd like to kind of flip that coin for a quick moment.
And concerning the library, was any of the soft costs, none of the soft costs having
to do with reimagining the library was including that, right, because as we were speaking, I'm
sorry.
That's correct.
That is correct, yeah.
And that is a number because the library, one of the most important thing that our committees
discussed and the library committees have said told us is that this is 2026, that 1972,
and libraries look quite different when they are built.
I mean, we can go down the street in Pomona, I believe it was,
that did a modern up-to-date library concept, which is digital,
which has work rooms, which has modern printers that could be used,
and other things that would make us a first-class library
as opposed to just fixing a problem that's been around for decades.
Thanks.
Mr. Timmore.
This question goes back to the contractor, Mr. Matthews.
That $10 million sunk into the library extends the economic life of the library for how long?
Hi, my name is Jenny Chen, and I have a lot of questions.
So, first things I think thank you for the presentation is really well done and my first question is what is the cost of doing nothing?
It sounds like there is a cost related to that and can we talk about like how much is cost the taxpayer money for not doing anything at all?
Second thing we talked a lot about the $10 million that is coming from the state.
but it doesn't sound like it is very likely to happen.
And someone tell me, like, what is the likelihood to happen? And what is the limitation? Is it like something that, oh, when you submit the proposal of $10 million? You can only do things that it listed in the proposal, or it's like, oh, $10 million. Have at it. Do anything that you want. My final question is. That is last time I was here. There was people telling saying that they don't see the value of having
library. So can someone here tell me what is the economic benefit of these modernization
project? Because I think that is a lack of understanding of such important infrastructure.
In terms of cost escalation, which I think what we're talking about, we saw estimates, I think,
in 1990, when they talked about expanding the current footprint to 45,000 square feet and
doing some of the fixes and I think the total cost was like three and a half million dollars.
And so here we're talking something, you know, four to five times that for a similar
size project, if not ten times that for a larger expansion.
The library was built and the land purchased and designed in the late 1970s for like 1.15
million.
And that includes just to give everyone just sort of an idea of just how expensive things
are gotten. In terms of the library, it is one of, it's the top rated public service
that we have. I think people are here tonight largely because of the conversation, but also
because they understand the importance of the library. Mayor, if the council wants to
comment on the library itself, from a staff perspective, the library is very important.
It plays a large part in our public safety role, too, a safe place for people to go, a place
access to information. So it does play a vital role in our operations and what says I don't want to you want to comment any of the other information quickly? Yeah, just.
I don't know that I can answer this more precisely, but you know what is the cost of doing nothing? Well, I don't think we will do nothing.
I think the record shows that the city time and time again has evaluated and considered
options for the for the library and has made investments.
That doesn't mean we don't we've stopped maintaining the building.
We still do the best job that we possibly can within the structure that we currently have
available with the systems that we currently have available.
And so what we've done, you know, is try to address things very piecemeal.
We have some of the savings that I mentioned as part of the presentation about the organizational
changes that we've made have been re-invested in our city operation that
includes the creation of a facilities division that is responsible for
maintaining all of our buildings we have a five-person crew that does that on a
rotating basis so we will our commitment to you is that we will continue doing our
job in trying to maintain the building as best we possibly can. As to your
question about how likely the $10 million ask is is that that one's a
That's a little bit more esoteric to be able to answer that question.
I can tell you at the previous agency with which I worked where my job,
primary job, one of my primary job responsibilities was advocating for that
municipality in Sacramento. I was successful at getting
several of these budget requests through working with our elected officials.
Not every request gets funded, not every request is 10 million dollars,
but that's part of the process that we're going to have to engage with our
elected officials and their staff members not just to help them understand why it's important
for our community and put kind of a value beyond the dollars and cents to what the request
is and hopefully provide all the support that they need working with our legislative team
and Sacramento to be able to support their request. So I'm not going to say that it's unlikely,
it is going to be a challenge but that's just part of the process for these sorts of things and by
the way we've made these types of asks before not just at the state level and federal level
and have been successful at securing funding.
So the $5 million we received for the people movement project,
and from Congresswoman Chu, that was through the federal funding,
and most recently secured $1.25 million for improvements
at Sandberg, working with Congressmen in the SNAROS office.
So that's part of our job responsibility
and the work that we're going to continue to do
and kind of advocating for the city more broadly.
As to the economic benefit of modernization,
I think that's an open question
because I think we have to define what modernization means.
If you look through some of the workshop materials
in the Phase 2 document that's attached to the staff report,
you see a lot of the things that are popping up
at what I would consider more modern facilities,
so maker spaces, areas where you have audiovisual higher-end,
audiovisual equipment, recording studios,
books, digital information available more readily to their residents.
So I think it's an amalgamation of things
that will help address those areas above and beyond
kind of the space improvements that we would anticipate moving forward.
Thank you. I believe Shana would like to add something to this.
Yeah, I wanted to kind of piggyback onto Jenny's question and just kind of the whole discussion,
not necessarily to offer an answer, but maybe just kind of more food for thought.
But first of all, I appreciate Michael always being the squeaky wheel and moving the ball forward
with the Senator's office on that money, but I want to also give credit where credit
is due.
That staff is putting a ton of time and effort into that, into making that happen.
And there's also relationships that Karen has with the Senator's team and that she's been
involved with. So it's a big effort with a lot of people working really hard on behalf
of the city. So just want to make sure everybody understands that. But Jenny had asked,
you know, what is the economic benefit of the library for the city? And it just kind
of sparked a thought. I want to make sure that we understand that there's also a social
benefit to having the library. You know, it's not just economics. It's, I can't even remember
the term off the top of my head like a third space in a community I think is what they call it.
You know I mean that is extremely important it's one of those things that is hard
to quantify in a community but is so incredibly important and I think in a community like Lendora.
So much of what happens in our city is structured around our library so you know we have to
to keep that in mind as we're making these really big decisions.
Thank you.
And to chime in on that, I think this body's value of the library is huge.
And the things that this library does as a Lendora Public Library,
not a county library system, the programming, the staffing, the passion,
that goes into it shows tremendous when you look at communities around us that may not have
this robust of a program, I think that shows terrifically as well.
It's significant and we have a lot of program participants that come from out of the city
just to participate here because of the value they get. So it's hard to measure but the visual of
but you definitely see it.
Mendel and then I think Marilyn Sparks has a point.
Yeah, I really appreciate you kind of just asking.
So where are we?
And social media is a wonderful thing
and we've been accused of ditching this place,
of scrubbing this place.
And I want to be very clear that the five of us
have never voiced that opinion. The library is something very important to us. And we want to keep
it. You're absolutely right. This is taking another shape, another form because of the world
that we're in. And the soft costs are going to be as equally as key to this place as the hard cost.
And but I want to be very clear that what you've read or even heard of us saying the library is is only here.
That is true. You know that that there's a lot of stuff here, but but we're not.
We haven't ever talked about just saying bye bye and I want to be very blunt about that.
Marilyn, welcome.
Hello, my name is Marilyn Sparks. I've been a resident here since 1995.
My children both received books when they were born at Foothill Presbyterian, courtesy
of the Glendora Public Library. So we have two books that are 129 years old and 127 years
And the Glendora Library has been a big part of my children's youth and just their lives.
They're fond memories.
But I also stand here as the new president of the Glendora Public Library Friends Foundation.
And I wanted to expand on the councilwoman's comment or insight about being a third space for youth.
According to the library hub analysis of libraries and crime, safe spaces for youth are found
through the libraries.
They provide after-school and summer programs that keep children and teens in constructive
environments instead of at-risk settings.
Long-term literacy impact, better childhood literacy and education outcomes complete with
stronger job prospects and lower adult incarceration rates.
And this is why we have to fight for our library.
We must figure out a way to fund keeping it strong, keeping it a safe place both physically
emotionally for our children.
Thank you.
Thank you, Marilyn.
I have a question about protocol.
Is it okay to talk to some of the frog people that are here?
or does it all have to go to, I mean, here's my question, I guess. I mean, the first
I heard about this was the presentation that Gary gave, I don't know how long it was,
at the City Council, and everything was pretty much laid out that we knew. And the assessment
of that community group was that the best idea was at least to ask the citizens of Glendora
if they were willing to maybe pay for the funding for the library.
So I assumed that there would be a ballot measure and then we could all talk about it and
decide if that was something we were going to do.
But then all of a sudden there was a big group that said, no, we don't even want it on
the ballot.
So I guess my question is this, is there just no way that we can put some this question
before Glendorans or to see are we willing to invest in the library?
Yes or no?
I mean, I'm asking because I know you guys did a lot of work on this, do you just think
that's dead in the world?
I mean, we're not talking about where they'll vote for it.
They may not.
I mean, none of us like to pay taxes for God's sakes.
But is there just no chance of even putting it before Glendora people?
And I say this because there were two young women sitting here.
And they came because they wanted to speak, but it just got long and they left.
So I do think that there are young people and they have parents and grandparents.
So it may not pass. There's a good chance it won't.
But is there just no way we can even get it on the ballot in this town?
that's my question. Well, Terry, if I can start the answer to that, the
Citizens Initiative group, as you might be aware, attempted to do a
ballot measure and it did not get traction, so therefore they withdrew the
opportunity knowing that it would not meet the deadlines and get to a
vulnerable cause. So in lieu of that, this format was created to try to
opportunity and learn from the residents in an open forum. What could they
support? What would they support? For us to bring our ears and listen, what would
you like? Obviously the first attempt from the Citizens Initiative group with a
The grander scale wasn't going to be successful.
For the city to put together a on a ballot, we could say, yes, we're going to do that and do it tomorrow.
The pass rate is much higher.
So therefore, it's a strategy thing.
If it wasn't going to make success in a citizen's initiative, it probably wouldn't have great success.
therefore, if not that, what? We're working on the what? So tonight's idea, pardon?
Yeah, so working on what the idea could become from the output from this gathering.
And I've counted about 60 people in a community of 50,000.
Okay.
Take it from what it is.
You're all voters, not all 60 or 50,000 are, but there's still people that say,
well, I didn't know. Where is it? Or how do I, how do I get heard?
Or we'd love to listen. I was visiting with a gentleman in the park,
Sunday night at the concerts. A viable community member.
So that's why I think given if we had a number in a direction
Maybe we can come up with tonight. I think people would put up something. Wow, okay. It's only
half a million dollars each. Everybody ready? Okay. It's not an easy, easy choice or an easy
hurdle. If Gary wants to respond, I'd welcome it, but that's the starting answer.
Those of you who don't know my name is Gary Boyer and I sat as the chair of the Fraud Committee and I think it's important for everybody to understand the Fraud Committee was not a committee that was put together to try to pass a tax initiative.
We were a committee that was put together to try to address the facilities issues in the city of Glendora.
And we were talking about a lot of different ideas, a lot of different options.
We got no traction until we started talking about a tax initiative.
And we started talking about that.
People got angry about it.
People, a lot of things came out.
There was a lot of interaction that happened.
But it was just one of the many things that has been discussed and is continuing to be discussed.
And so the Fraud Committee is still meeting and we're still addressing different ideas.
But the whole thing about it is we as a community and I appreciate the fact that the initiative
here tonight is to try to get directions from the council as far as what the next steps
might be.
But I just like to be clear that the City Council that in 1970 and the City staff at that
time, they did the best they could with what they had available to them.
The City Council in 1980 and the staff in 1980 did the best with what they had available
to them, 1990 and 2000 and 2010 and 2020.
We as a community need to make a decision as to what we are going to do and what we want
the future of Glendor to look like.
And so that's what the Fraud Committee has been studying, that's what we've been working
on and that's what we've been talking to the community about, that's what we're going
to continue to talk to the community about.
So it's not really about a ballot initiative, it's about trying to figure out a way that we as a community
can give these guys some direction and support
so they can give these guys some direction to actually do the job that we expect to be done.
So that's why this conversation is so important that we need to keep moving forward.
So thanks.
Thank you, Gary.
Okay, we have two more speakers over here.
Hi, my name is Krista Granger.
I guess I'm a little confused with the ballot and even Terry's question,
because one of the options, at least that was still on the presentation,
was a new library.
Because my concern is, from reading the materials and what I've followed is
a structure, the peseo, the deck.
It feels like we're throwing good money at a situation that's not going to get resolved
with the structure that has had problems from day one almost.
So, you know, and maybe I've come into this a little late in terms of not being part
of any prior workshops or whatnot, but it almost sounds as if that's not on the table anymore.
And I know it seems like we've had we have other facilities that have issues because I agree the public workshop needs to be taken care of I've also heard the police station has issues but we're not talking about that in this meeting at all.
So I'm just a little unsure of, you know my option if I had to vote would be let's build and start over because, you know, 10 years from now my kids are going to be spending money to fix the same thing.
we're trying to fix today. And if the library is one of the biggest, you know, community services
we have, I feel like, you know, how do we help get that? And if frog committee wasn't started
as an initiative, maybe there's a different way to do it to help make improvements and tweaks
from where we might have gone awry, but to help educate people and get out there for them to realize
that we do have some real structural issues. And unfortunately, they're not going to get fixed
with a band aid and it seems like we're going to have to put money behind our structures
and it's not always the prettiest thing to do but to figure out how to just do it better
because it sounds like we need more square footage.
I like the other deck, the other options seem great because we get more square footage.
Just putting a kind of a cover over it doesn't help us add more services in the library.
So all that to say I'm just not sure where you guys want to go or what you want to hear from us because I'm starting to get the feeling that actually building new structure isn't something that the city is wanting to hear or something that we could do.
Thank you. I think that we're here tonight in step two as an alternative to a
grander scope that apparently there was not an appetite for. So we're in the
same boat. If we what will you as a community support and give us direction to
do? If it's great and start over, great. How would you support funding that?
Not going to just come through grants and gifts, even if it said,
the Michael Matthews Memorial Library up there, not memorializing him.
Michael, it's only 125 mil, that's a chip.
The Valentine Library, yes,
With all due respect to Sandy, thank you very much.
But that's a big ask, so we're with you.
If not this, what and how.
So we're trying to determine that as the grandiose option apparently didn't get traction.
Please.
If I can just add on to that, too.
A new library isn't off the table for me, I'll just make that clear.
I think that the scope of the project that as I understand it the Fraud Committee might have been looking at was much larger.
Today's conversation is about the library and the corporate yard.
So I feel like it's different. It's a much different dollar figure as well.
So I'm open to anything, you know, just for me personally, I share what your concern is.
I mean, as somebody with young kids in the community, like I'll be here for a long time.
My kids will be here for a long time, so I'm looking well, well into the future.
And I don't want 2026 to be just another cog in the wheel of five decades of things that we've done here
that haven't necessarily worked, that future generations are going to be throwing good
money after bad, trying to fix. So, you know, as much as I, you know, I'm a conservative,
I want to save money, you know, I also want to make sure that things are done right. So,
that the money that we do spend is spent well. So, anyways, to answer your question, I'm
open to all options based on, you know, the community feedback and what other people want.
I'm Connie Winn. I've lived in Glendora since 1991 and I think we've talked a lot about the library tonight and I'm thinking the workshop really is more about structure and I 100% agree we should have a library, but we cannot really expect Glendora to have a library the scale of Pomona when their tax base is 150,000 people.
and we're only 50,000 people, I just don't think that's very realistic, but I
would like to see that if we can repair the building, the structure for 12,
million, 15 million is, I would like to see that done first because it will
continue to deteriorate and that will ultimately cost us more money to if we
let it deteriorate more to repair it at a later date and then see the public
works yard prior twice a second and both of those things approved by the
council. Thank you. Michael has a question on his way to Mr. Berrin. Go ahead.
We got a lot of Michael's here tonight. It's not a question. It's you know we're all
here to go. It's catch 22. We would love to have the best of the best of
possible. We did the survey as Adam mentioned well before we had started doing
some of these cancer designs and everything and the appetite for the community
wasn't there. Two-thirds vote just wasn't there and for us to go back out there
and think we're going to be able to do that again. In my book it's probably not
going to happen if the community comes out and wants to do it fine. It's up to
the community but we have to work with what we have and what we have is we have an
opportunity for some state money, whether this or something else or some federal
money, and we need to do the best we can with the civilis we have, the
monies that we have, and it's not necessarily a band-aid, it's fixing a wrong
that was done at the conception of this building here, and I think that that's
something we can do. I think we all want a library, whether it's what we have
right now or something quite different and that can be envisioned, but we have to
fixed the underlying structure first. This building gets utilized so much. This
Bidwell form, it's always used one way or another. We're here this evening. We
don't have any other space like this. They can accommodate these folks. And we
have to do something. Whatever that something is, we need to take action. And again,
as was mentioned here tonight, it's no fault that anybody in the past is
just a matter of economics. We'll only work with what we have. We heard
loud and clear that the folks out there want us to work within our means and not burden
necessary the public for quite some time. So this is our option. Unless somebody else
comes up with a great idea, I'm all listening. That's what we're here for this evening. So
bottom line is we have to work within our means because that was the mandate that we have
up here.
Thank you, Michael. Mr. Baron. Thank you. Just want to say thank you to
to the council for the approach that you all have taken
and for committing and coming through with your promise
to me to have this kind of interchange between the council
and staff and the public.
And I think, I think, so I want to say thank you personally,
but I just want to commend the council.
And I love you two guys hugging, you know,
that's fantastic.
And Michael basically took my sentiment away from me, but basically this community at
this point in time as evidenced by all those wag posters does not have an appetite to fund
$50 million or $100 million in the city.
We got to realize facts or facts.
That's just the fact.
I also heard something positive in terms of Mr. Matthew's
that the analysis that was done by one of the vendors for
the city said that over the last three years,
I think it was there was no increase in the structural
deterioration of the library, and that the water intrusion, I'm going to trust Mr. Matthews
in terms of the context that he has in the construction industry and his experience
that that is the, at least worth looking at as an option, because if that could be done
and you can take care of some of the other things that you mentioned and it's a $15 million,
$17 million, maybe $17 million, a solution, we keep the EOC designation and just at the
last workshop there was an allocation of close to $12 million.
Well, I don't know maybe we're going to get another $5 to $8 million extra money if the staff
continues and the council, so the council continues to do the kind of due diligence on the expenditure
of money. So I don't know if that's going to be repeated in the near future or it's a one-time
gosh where did this money come from? I don't know but we got it. So I think that's
worth pursuing Mr. Matthew's proposal and looking at that. And I think it's important to identify
if we do have to prioritize, do we start working on the library first or on the corporate yard?
because the corporate yard just really does sound like it's in bad shape.
So, I think you could get support for that from the community.
From the Valentine Baron Library, okay, Mr. Lane.
I think, you know, I was a part of the community input meeting for the ballot measure with Gary.
And I appreciate Gary Paul pulling the ballot measure.
as now we're having the discussion in the tens of millions of dollars versus the hundreds
of millions of dollars, okay?
If the economy goes down, we still owe the taxes, okay?
And that's really what was my big push for it at the end of the day.
I'm not a part of any organization, whether it be WAG or Save Glendor schools or anyone
else out there, just kind of rogue, always kind of been that way, right?
So, when Michael referred my name, I'm on the American Concrete Institute Board of Directors
for something.
California. I'm also involved with ACI in San Diego and ACI in Las Vegas. And as you all know, there's a lot of concrete up in Las Vegas. All right, work with all those guys. The
fiber reinforcement that you're talking about that's going to be going in the concrete. I sell that. So I know exactly what you're talking about. Do I have the answer for what's going on a library? No, I don't. I won't. I'm not that guy. I'm not an engineer. But I can
Provide someone that I would know that would be able to do that at the end of it. There's concrete suppliers in this room right now, okay?
Even though he's pulled the ballot measure, I'm still here.
Does that make a shut the library down? I'd never said that. As a matter of fact, Terry,
I think I told you in the meeting that no one on that panel up there was having a discussion of shutting the library down or intended to.
Adam, you mentioned it last week in the City Council meeting that no one intends to shut the library down.
library down. Can it be improved upon? Yes, absolutely. My home is 73 years old. When we bought it,
it was 1,250 square feet. When we found out number three baby was along the way and that the
little 1,250 square foot house wasn't going to work, we decided to add on a 63 year old house
that I decided to add on a thousand square feet.
Is it doable?
Yes.
Do I still have the maintenance of that house?
Yes.
I still have to put on a roof.
We didn't redo the kitchen.
We didn't redo a bathroom.
It's still not done yet.
Even 12 years later after we finished it,
we still want to do that.
But eventually one day we'll get there
to where we can redo the kitchen
and my wife will be really happy.
And the kids will be really happy
that they have a shower to step into
instead of a bathtub, right? Of course, okay? We all want those things, but we all have to live within our means as well, okay?
So, Mint, I'm going to provide some solutions here tonight because you're like, you got to provide some solutions. That's why I'm here.
Does it make sense, Moises, to move the public workshard up to the equestrian center that's not surrounded by homes,
whereas the current public workshard would, would that reduce the costs to take that public workshard up to the equestrian center?
It's about the same square footage, right, acreage, about the same.
There's only one house right there.
That way we could at least reduce our cost of the phasing of the contracting side of it,
and then sell that asset off to a developer who could go and do that, okay?
And then we would get the additional property tax revenue from that now, okay?
That's number one.
As far as we aren't talking about any of the other issues that were brought up on the frog
ballot measures. Well, with the police station, okay, where we've got a lot of officers now.
Those officers aren't all on duty at the same time. They're all at different times.
Mike brought up a great idea about perhaps doing a police substation somewhere else, right,
throughout the city.
I'm actually all for that as I've waited at the train tracks.
If there's
So having a substation south of the Metrolink now would be an excellent idea to be able to take care of people below the train tracks versus up because they're all leaving from this area, if they aren't, if there is an emergency, they're all leaving from this area, they get stopped at the train tracks, that's going to be an issue.
Okay? So police type station. So that also takes care of the burden of relocating police officers and all the employees to a new unit, okay?
Keep that in mind, something to think of at the end of the day.
The roof is repairable. The difference is all of these things are have to be done within the city's means.
At a maybe you can give us an idea of how much expected tax revenue we intend to get on
the new properties that are being developed in the 2200 acre or 2200 units is what's required.
Does that include the WICOM units as well that are going to be developed and all that.
So what how many units are really going to be developed and how much property tax revenue
are going to be able to do something with that.
And can we earmark some of that money here in the vision plan here in the station plan for these projects like a mellow
Roos tax or something like that, but how much revenue we expected to generate out of homeless properties?
So really great question. I think on the equation property. There's some deed restrictions as well as
There's a large easement for LA County flood that doesn't allow anything to be built in that area. It's actually a property that the city's looked at before
But we can think as part of workshop three that we'll look at one of those ideas, which is land sales.
In terms of the public workshop, you have quite a bit of cleanup that has to occur in any one of those yards.
When you have development, something likely the school districts will have to go through as they look at land to.
So in terms of property tax and it's a really good question.
A lot of people make an assumption that the vast majority of your property tax goes to the city and it does not.
So of $100 million in assessed valuation of projects, so let's say there's a large multi-family project, let's say it's assessed valuation of $100 million.
Their base prop 131% is $1 million of that the city would receive 10% about a little less actually on average for $100,000.
So for every $100 million in property development, the city would receive about $100,000 in general fund revenue.
With additional housing or other services that are required, that money would go into several other categories typically as relates to providing additional street maintenance and so on and so forth.
But it is one of the questions that we get and it's one of I think one of the harder parts that people when they look at is I think they're surprised just how little money the cities actually get from property tax.
It sounds like a lot, but the vast majority of the money actually goes to the county.
The second most is to the state of California for something called ERAF,
which is your educational revenue augmentation fund and
an educational revenue fund.
The local school districts receive about 17 to 18% of your total 1% followed by the city.
And then it falls off pretty drastically after that.
So I wish the city got more money from some of that development is a great idea.
It comes up all the time and I wish it was more.
But it is worth noting that as some of the development in and around relating to some of the state's requirements for additional housing bypassing any city rules and can be built by right may generate some additional base property tax whether or not that is significant is to be determined at this point.
The City Council has had as part of the one time funding workshop, and really quick, I appreciate you talking about the one time funding, I wish 12 million would appear more, but the city did lay out in the one time funding an opportunity we think of about $8 million that will be brought in from development deals for related to the school sites for a possible rezoning of that a community benefits, so the city would get money back for some one time funding.
So part of the city's 12 million that they spent may actually sort of use some of that funding in advance and we would reimburse ourselves for some of those costs.
So could the city have additional one time money in the future?
Maybe would it happen overnight?
No, have we predicated and budgeted for and estimated some of those development sites coming in?
Yes, and that's the answer to that question is yes.
So workshop three will include some of the landswops, really appreciate that recommendation, especially from a staff perspective.
If it is something that we have considered previously.
Adam, before we go off of this, I want you to address something that John brought up,
because I think there's a misunderstanding here and I want to make sure everybody knows this.
John referenced the 2200 and I'll take your word for it.
I don't remember off the top of my head, but I assume you're referring to the six cycle arena numbers.
If you can explain Adam to the community, those are not
set numbers that are being built.
Those were just, we had to allocate those, we had to zone for those.
That's not in the pipeline, if you can explain that.
Yeah, that's a great club view.
So the state likes to tell the city how many net new units it can build.
Or have to zone to build or has the capacity to build.
Certain housing has certain density requirements for
the state to determine that there could be some affordable component built there.
The most recent rena cycle, the city was required to zone for an additional 2200 units above and beyond what we have, the capacity, or that we currently have.
And so that was largely done. Actually, we didn't have to zone for the entire 2200 because we already had some capacity along Route 66.
The city council spread out some of the increased development along Arrow Highway in Route 66, some of the major corridors that can handle some of the additional traffic.
To date, not even 10% of those units have been through entitlement for permitting.
I think one of the things that drives cities crazy is the state required something like
3 million new homes to be zoned by cities, which is more homes than it exists like in all of Orange County.
So whether or not there's even a capacity to build those homes in the state of California or
city's infrastructure just can handle some of those as anyone's best guess at this point.
But it is that process, the 2,200 homes as pursuant to Reena is a strictly zoning process.
We do report every year on the city's progress to building those.
The most recent one, Moises, do you recall when the most recent housing update came to council with our progress on that 2,200 was it two months ago?
About a couple months ago, so we'd happy to provide that information.
I just want to make sure everyone understands that there aren't 2,200 homes in the pipeline.
Some of those, the majority may never get built, so we're not, we can't.
We got one more comment from the chief, that's okay, Mayor.
Great, yeah.
Chief, welcome.
Thank you.
Thanks for having me.
By the way, this chief of police, not chief of who are we used.
I was responding to emails, so I didn't hear the whole question, but there was talk about
substation and there was the one thing I wanted to address was that maybe the belief that
the train line that goes through the center of our city is affecting police department
services and you're not going to have a police officer in an emergency so if there are any
firemen in the room I apologize to you right now we are not the fire department so and I'll
explain that I'll explain that our police officers do not sit at the police station and respond
on to calls from the police station.
That's essentially what firemen do.
They sit in the firehouse when they get a call, they deploy.
So we have about 100 employees at the police department
and two-thirds of those employees are always in the field.
So at any one time, we have 24-7 deployment.
There is not a time, any time,
where we don't have police services in the field,
north of the tracks, south of the tracks.
Our police officers with all the technology in their car,
most times when they work a 12-hour shift,
They leave the police department and sometimes they never come back to the police station until their shift is over so
We have ways around the train and we always have staff deployed in the field so that we're able to help people
Whatever part of the city there is so I didn't want
People to have that misconception that we come from the police station if the train tracks are in our way. We're not going to be there
We have a minimum deployment of not only police officers, but community service officers our community preservation folks
Basically, the only people that get stuck in the police station most of the time are administration that includes me, are dispatchers and are detectives, and the rest of the 2-thirds of the police department are field people that are in the field 24-7-365 in four different sectors in the city, so we don't have a problem with not being able to get to somebody in an emergency.
Thank you and before you go, John, thank you for some solutions, great eye openers and fun things to explore.
The Equestrian Center, the city yard does have a lot of easement things to explore, but great ideas, thank you.
Yes, sir.
Hi, my name is Dwight Richards.
I was an employee with Fairplex for 36 years and 20 of those years, I was their chief operating officer.
So, in some similarities, I feel the pain that the city feels right now.
We had 500 acres and 60 plus buildings, most of them built in the 1930s, some built in the 1950s.
And we ran into some similar situations where we needed improvements to the buildings, but we had no way to raise the funds.
If we raised the ticket price to that was our way of taxing our customer, we would get nobody to come through the gate.
So we couldn't raise the price, and we couldn't just go out and
get more loans because we were pretty much tapped out from the finance standpoint.
So my point in that, all of that is that we learned how to make do with the buildings we had and how to improve them.
They needed roofs, they needed all kinds of things.
And we, in some cases, would take buildings down, but in most cases, we would keep the value of those buildings, and I think there's definitely value to this building in this structure.
So I think, you know, heading down the road of improving the library or fixing the problems and perhaps maybe mitigating some of the rain, things, whether it be with the coverage, those things should be looked at.
And I know the city's been looking at that.
With regards to the Facilities Yard, that was a trip down memory lane for me because your Facilities Yard looks exactly like Paraplex's Facilities Yard.
They are old barns, they are not air-conditioned or 70 plus guys.
Bye.
These work and gals worked in those buildings and they're terrible. And if there's one regret I had in my tenure with Fairplex was that we never really did fix the facilities yard. And the reason I say that is we were highly inefficient. We could have been much more efficient in the way we deployed in the way we serviced and the way we would save money effectively with its own problems, because we got to put a new exhibit in the fairer.
and that's much more important.
And we get that one-time bang for that one year,
but then our facilities are just kept degrading.
So what we did determine in my history
and when we started looking at replacement
of the facilities yard, which would be almost identical
the size is what you're talking about.
We looked at the Claremont College's consortium.
They have a beautiful facility is made with a butler building
and they were able to do it, as I recall,
for, this is a few years back, but between 5 and 10 million, they did a great job.
So I would invite you to take a look at that if you haven't, but an excellent example
of how to do a facilities for this type of operation.
So as far as how we did funding, we did a lot of funding when I can bring those topics towards
the next discussion, but effectively we ended up using other people's money to build things
like the conference center we we had to we had to go out and do what you're doing
go out and talk to the to the local representatives I took numerous trips
back to DC Sacramento and the county administration building to try to get
funds to put together that 30 million dollar project so so you're you're
heading down the right way as far as getting those funds that's a good way to go
So thank you.
Thanks, Mr. Richards.
OK, Michael has a comment.
But I end in, and Tomoko has a comment.
But I'd like to do something, or go to Michael.
I have not seen these drawings in the concepts.
I don't know if anybody else in the room has.
I think we need to take a couple of minutes
and get to enjoy them and see what their idea is in the vision.
and then that may spur some more ideas or questions.
Well, I want to see him before we finish a conversation.
Mayor, did you want to do that now or do you want to do the comment
by the council member and Tomoko?
Let's do Tomoko, come back to Michael and take a minute
and then we'll enjoy the picture.
It's on.
I just want to address Terry's comment earlier.
I was part of the frog committee, vice chair.
One of the reasons why I think we scrapped the parcel tax.
My opinion, I'm speaking as Tomoko Toll and not as part of the frog.
After the meeting that we had with the rest of the community,
Mark Louera had made a comment.
It just seemed like this parcel tax was the only thing that's being showed down our
throats that there was nothing else being discussed.
And that's, that wasn't the case.
For a year we got together, we talked about developing the South Hills,
more property taxes, that sort of thing.
but we did not do a good job messaging that to the community.
There was a lot of research that was done.
And to me, that drove home the point.
We really need to expand to allow more people to speak,
and we listened, and I had to convince some of the other folks
to take the parcel tax off.
Not everybody wanted to remove the parcel tax.
A lot of folks wanted to continue on with that.
But whether or not we would get traction is another thing.
But it sounds like now we're at this point because Council did listen and they wanted
to do these workshops to allow the rest of the community to have more input, which is
exactly the right thing.
It is exactly the right thing.
I wanted the Cadillac that was presented.
I wanted the $125 million construction.
It was beautiful, but we're not going to have that is what it sounds like, right?
I do, it's a good pivot now, David.
I want to see the, maybe this is the way we should be headed.
Can we afford a $10 million?
I'm not going to call it a bandaid.
I'm sure it's going to be beautiful
because Michael knows what he's doing.
So I would like to see it, too.
Thank you.
Dr. Alamos.
Really quick, I want to address Mr. Rich's question.
We did look at our team look at the Butler building.
In fact, our water yard up on Sarah moderate is a butler building and staff kind of back
in the day was able to make some certain things happen.
Maybe not necessarily the way they would do it today, but they were able to make it happen
for a very reasonable price, I believe it was about 5,000 square feet.
So we looked at it for this one, for the complex, for the drawings that we had, and it's actually
turned out to be more than conventional construction.
So it was great try. We went down that road and it looks like a first
watch it wasn't going to be economical to do so. Great call because we have the
same idea. Thank you. Great, thank you. Let's take a couple of minutes. Enjoy
the artist rendering and some plans and might put Mr. Matthews back on the
question and answer table. He's up for that. He's got nowhere to go so he's good.
Thank you. Take a break.
Okay.
After looking at some of the plans and the renditions and things,
I think we're at a point if we have questions about those specifically, let's ask the question
and then bring it back for some recommendations. I'll start. I have a question and I primed Mr.
I'm a fan of the idea, I'm a fan of the roof and the cover, and this is degrading it
by my question, I'm sure, but it looks like a beautiful umbrella when an umbrella
keeps me dry.
When it solves the water problem, or do we think it will by putting a canopy on and creating
a beautiful community space. That's a win-win. Do we think we'll solve the water intrusion issue
in addressing?
Yeah. Okay. So that was the intent is to ensure that this roof covered to the
exterior of the existing plaza so that we can control the water from that vantage point. It also
So required that it be built high enough that we could overlap, we can't connect to this building.
That's not structurally correct.
But we can overlap this roof enough that any rainfall is caught in this structure and doesn't make it down onto the plaza.
So that's the intent that we're looking at right now.
So wind and lateral rain and things would have a middle rain?
Well, it's going to be open a little bit on the side, but we're not going to have the capacity water wise that we've been having with this issue out here.
If you walk out here right now, there are literally dozens hundreds of cracks that run through it, mostly having to do with the way the lightweight concrete is designed.
And so that's a problem in the water proofing world.
You can't put solid across when you have interruptions in the concrete of some sort already
designed into it for relieving pressures from heat and that type of stuff.
Okay.
Thank you.
Shana, you had a question?
I do.
Adam or Moises, do we know definitively where the water is coming from?
I like this, this is beautiful, first of all, I like the style, but my concern is, you
know, to use the umbrella analogy, like umbrellas are fantastic, and if I'm standing under
my big golf umbrella, my head is dry, but my feet are wet.
So I want to make sure that something like this actually solves the problem.
So do we have studies that indicate definitively that this water that we're talking about is coming from the middle of the plaza and not on the outsides?
Because I want to I just want to make sure that like we're it's getting solved because I think for five decades everybody thought they were solving this problem and I don't want to be just another thing in that.
I think what what Mr. Matthews is going to say, this would solve one element of the water portion out here.
I think there was also mention that they would talk about water proofing.
Council member talked about some of the other things we obviously have.
Dirt on the side and other things like that and I'll turn it over to you Michael.
If you want to talk about the specific aim of this and then we can talk about other water proofing.
Thank you. So just to expand on what I was talking about the condition of this right here, back when I first got involved with this process, we had had a weekend of rain.
I came over here to look and wrap my head around some of the issues and try to start to formulate an idea where we go.
So there are weep holes that were designed into the north edge that go towards the city hall
and there's some also in the steps that go there.
This was probably four days after rain.
There was a constant drip coming out of those or a stream actually out of those.
That means the entire deck has loaded to a certain effect through the cracks that exist right now
And the water proofer I had out here a couple of weeks ago to look at it, he reiterated.
Your issue is this has failed because there's all these spider cracks running through the whole top.
So that's where it mostly comes from.
We do have some probably some exterior wall issues still, do we still have in the north side?
And that may require digging out water proofing and then back filling again.
Does this include water proofing and, like, under the process?
So the intent would be to get away from worrying about any water proofing on the plaza whatsoever.
We don't need to go to that extent.
Once we now have put a roof over it that will eliminate the majority of any water on top of it.
Now, what about the load that it could bear?
I know that there's some issues right now with the weight that it could support.
Does that, does your design take into account the load?
Well, not to that extent at this moment.
That's really up to the decision where we go next.
And then we expend the efforts to have that study done.
We need to design the structure and these would be designed along with the existing structure that we have and make sure that we can accommodate that.
I feel that there is an answer in there. I just can't tell you definitively right now what that looks like.
So we're at like concept stage.
Concept stage.
Actually, if I can add to the conversation because I think the issue, when you look at
the plaza, as Mr. Matthews alluded to, it's actually, it has several layers below it.
So it's designed, so the top layer is tile, and so there's cracks between the tile because
it's about, the water is supposed to infiltrate, it's supposed to collect below it and move
it off to the side and then out, the holes with the water will come out.
So it's tile, there's the light concrete, there's some metal sheaving in the light concrete
to help what was done in 2003, 2004 to help it prevent cracks below it is the weather-proofing
membrane, which is a polymer or, you know, has a wave-saving plastic material.
And then there is concrete, which is essentially the ceiling of the floor below us.
So there's multiple levels below that plaza area.
Yeah, so it was designed basically for the water to infiltrate push it off to the site and then out into kind of a receptacle areas away from the building.
There's actually, and if I just may add, there's actually quite a bit when we went through and in the library staff identified some additional surveys that were done in 83 and 88, 1983 and 1988.
You want to talk a little bit about there, there's something that has not been tested that we've talked to the council about is the space between city hall basement.
a voice us in the library and and their thought that there could be some legacy water damage or intrusion in that occasion to we had been operating under the assumption that the wall of the library touches kind of the footing of city hall so that there was no space between the two buildings the reality is that there is space there.
and below it is dirt and so if water is being infiltrated and being pushed in
that direction it likely that it's infiltrating that area so the question
then becomes well where is that water going? Is it just being retained in
that space in that soil or is it actually dissipating off to the sides? Well a good
indication of what might be happening is the fact that it's actually seeping
through the walls where we've had to waterproof the walls at least on the
inside to be able to keep the water from coming out more recently along the
Glendora Avenue frontage where we have that beautiful landscape. We had that
same very issue where the water from the landscaping was actually seeping
through the wall and damaging the carpet inside and the bookshelves and
damaging books as well. So there's some things that we need to do in addition to
that to make the basically waterproof the building from the sides so it'll be
part of the concept that we would have to explore a little bit further.
Comment over here next, Mr. Matthews.
What was the estimate again for this rendering, Michael?
It's going to take a little bit more. So this is concept. I put a figure of $10 million on that, but that's with a lot of caveats because part of it is we have to fix the fixture structure underneath, get it out of play entirely.
And then we have to put that structure and that's new structure together into a cohesive.
So I would anticipate that $10 million is going to take care of fair amount of things on our list, including this.
The goal would be is at the same time handle all the issues that the library has.
And if we can get a $10 million fund running, I bet Adam and his staff would be very intuitive in finding some additional dollars to help finish up.
I was asking just to put that in relation to the deck and the Paseo that had already been proposed that would add extra square footage because it seems that we still need more square footage.
And then we don't know about if there's going to be weight issues, you know, Shauna's question because with the deck from what I read is the additional footings could actually take away space.
usable space from circulation, which I don't know that that's always positive when we've
already got a smaller library, so I was just trying to kind of wrap my head around what's
really going on with it, so thank you.
Just for clarity related to the footings, the footings are actually below ground.
So we would have to basically cut into the four of the library, dig a little bit and expand
the size of the footings to be able to accommodate it.
So technically, it won't necessarily impact the space above ground level.
I think that meant, yeah, depending on the work that we need to do to shore up some of the walls
and that sort of thing, it may require us to widen the wall or do a shear what's called a shear wall.
So it may impact some areas, but it won't impact all of the areas there.
It's possible, but I don't think it's to the level that you might think.
sure it
probably is comparison to those tables stacked against that wall if that yeah as a total if I may
one of the original studies that we have the plaza is supposed to be able to hold I believe at
him 18 semi trucks the weight of it
it may well it's actually supposed to be able to hold three rows of
We have F-150 stacked on top of each other.
We limit it because of some of the deficiencies to 1,000 people at an event.
We could have 2,000, about 2,500 people just stand still out there.
But when you have an event, music and dancing movement, we've limited it to 500 to 1,000 people because of those deficiencies.
The assessments, the previous work in 2003 and
for aim to fix a lot of that work.
Some of the underlying issues from the 1988 report still
exists today, the 2026 report that we talked about
talks about or explains some of the other improvements
including in this building, a shear wall in here,
to align with some of the work previously done,
as well as some anchoring and some roof repairs,
as well as strengthening and enlarging of the footings,
it could be that if council has a path that they wanna,
incorporate some of the patio structure or covering there that those
footings need to be even larger than they are but that would require some
additional analysis. The only other comment I would add is we set up a page on
our website where every single document that we possess relative to the library
has been posted so if anyone that can't fall asleep tonight please feel free to
go on to that website, it shows all of it, we published as much of it that we could,
but it's the engineering studies, it's down to permits for bathroom renovations, from
dating back from the 1960s all the way to present day.
Mayor, we have a comment back here?
Yes, please.
I've kind of a financing kind of a process question.
It sounds like the design looks great, maybe $10 million maybe a little bit more.
the public works yard 10 million to 15 and the numbers we've heard tonight is
that we have a question for 10 maybe 8 million of one-time funds in the future so
there's still a gap so if you have to come to the citizens what does that cost
how long does it take and I guess that's more of a question for staff but to put
something on a ballot in the year to know what's it cost and what would
What would that look like if you had to do it?
I'm an optimist, but when pessimism sneaks
and I'm just curious.
Sure, I think that's a great question.
But there's a lot of variables, right?
So we first have to make a decision
as to what it is that we want to do
so that we have a precise dollar figure as to what
that will cost, right?
If we move forward with a shade structure,
if we do the structural work, if we do some of the MEP improvements
to the building, we need to look at somewhere
we're between $2,000,000 and $1,000,000.
With some level of modernization,
now you're talking about roughly $15 million for easy math.
Let's say $15 million for the corp year, that's $30 million.
Then we start deducting what we're able to secure
through state budget allocations or federal budget allocations
and then whatever the delta is related to that.
So I think backing into that number,
I don't have that number off the top of my head,
but it's something that we would we could possibly calculate kind of the share what that looks like.
Okay. I want to thank you all for your engagement. It's been remarkable. I think now it needs to come
back and have some needed discussion and some ideas. I've got a couple ideas but I want to see what
the rest of the colleagues want to do or think about doing. We need to get some direction to staff.
Can we come up with some direction,
can we?
Yes. I'm willing to make a motion, but my, well, first of all, I just want to say thank you
again for being here. Your civil way of expressing thoughts has been great, encouraging.
and affirming. And so thank you for that. Michael, thank you for everything that you've
done.
I told Michael in front of her
team here that I that I could support this if it didn't
leak. And because I attempted to support that leakage problem, and it's never worked.
But thank you for all of the expertise and the ideas that you've had. My ideas would
be to direct staff to continue to refine the plans for library and for the corp yard.
And to continue to pursue grant funding from both the state, the federal government, and
to report back by November the 10th with an update.
November the 10th is the only meeting
that we have that month.
And I don't think that we'll know anything
from the state as per Jack,
but we might know a little bit of inside baseball
from our senator in terms of what she's hearing
and the conversations that she's had.
So to answer your question, that would be my sense of instructing you to do.
I would second that.
Well, I can make that.
Can I get one piece of clear?
That's Kathleen's fault.
Yeah.
Can I get one piece of clarification on the further refinement part in mayor?
Maybe that's part of the commentaries.
When we talk about further refinement in order to get that further refinement, some
any comments or general direction the council has about what's included in that refinement
is it that we want to look at repairs to this facility, is it we want to look at something
different like a new facility, is it to keep the current square footage, is it incorporation
of shade structures? Are we talking about only some of the structural improvements?
Are we talking about mechanical electrical plumbing? Are we talking about space renovations?
I think any additional details would help us with that refinement.
My thought would be to instruct Michael to come back, refine what he has done.
He just said that he didn't just say this, but I'm interpreting what he said
that he's got some hanging chads here with some of his experts and I would like to have
as close of a guess from him and from the architect that's working with our corp yard
as to what the money is.
Now, I would leave the electrical, the pumping,
the plumbing, the lighting, all of those things
that you just said to staff, because that's not
in my lane to think about, although I
see what you're wanting, and I would affirm that.
But keep the house that we have, improve it, don't add to it, you know, some of those thoughts, but try to refine what Michael has shown us here, and then the architect that I think has done drawings for our, you know, corp, corp yard, and see if that's, if that's really
the most efficient building and ancillary stuff that we that we need there maybe that can
be cut down by by a fourth you know I don't know but but have us some sense by 1110 as to what
what the new envisioned projects look like and then what is the best cost that you're thinking
and I'm only speaking for me, so I'll be quiet.
Michael, second.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely, absolutely.
I'm trying to do that.
Okay, Karen?
Yeah, I guess to back up a little bit that, you know,
when my 2005 Ford freestyle was approaching 200,000 miles
and needed repairs, I had that choice.
Do I go ahead and you know make repairs and still I'm stuck with my old car or do I bite the bullet have a car payment and have a newer car
It sounds like from the feedback we've got tonight that there isn't quite that appetite except for a few folks to
plunge in and buy that new building even though I
Feel like that would be a better approach looking into the future
but if we're staying with this building, I would like this building to not only fix
those repairs beginning with the structural and then the leakage and see I love
the idea because in 2021 we had this dream of this cover and we're looking at
that but then ran into the structural issues. So if this can be done, one of the
concerns that I have and the library of the future is having more community space.
And Mr. Matthews, you know very well that it's a little warm at on that plaza in in July.
So is this beautiful canopy going to provide a community space that has heating, air conditioning
can be used all different times.
So that's my only concern that I love this and it does allow for more community space that
Glendora desperately needs, but just trying to think what else can we do to add some more
community space? So maybe this is it, but maybe it needs to be something else. I would like to see
at reconfiguring the building as it is now downstairs, to be a space that is the library of the future,
that if we're going to stay here, how can we make it more usable that just fixing
see what we have.
We have and say, okay, we're done, that I don't think that's fair to future generations. I think that we need to not only fix it and make it not leak and be structurally sound, but we need to do those basic infrastructure of plumbing, heating, air conditioning, all that good stuff, but also look at its use and what we want to see happen. So to me, that is important.
But yeah, sure, let's make it not leak, but we need to look farther than just that as to what we want to have happen in this space.
So if that beautiful design right there and those AI photos, that looks great. I want to have a party out there.
But is that going to serve us in the best way possible and meet all those needs?
So that would be my question.
If it could do some of that stuff, great,
then that's a great start and it helps with the rain issue.
But I want to look at what those functions are going to be
and how we could address that.
So that would be my hope for the library.
The corporate yard, I appreciated that Mr. Lane had some ideas.
I don't think everyone understands possibly that our corporate yard
Not only has all those buildings and facilities. It's also where our fuel tanks are so trying to move those is a little trickier than
Yeah, let's just move shop and go down the street because there's cleanup of the old site
Whether or not folks right off of Glendor amount road want those fuel tanks because there are homes there
Yeah, maybe there's hillside on one side, but there's homes on other sides
So there's a lot to that so I think staying where it currently is more centralized in the city for all of our city vehicles and workers to get to is a good location.
So looking at phasing those repairs that we've talked about because workshop three, that's why when you said November 10th, I'm like well what just happened to workshop three and funding did you just throw that out the window?
Because to me, having more of those conversations at workshop 3 about funding and how if we do the phasing and look at these things that need to be done to the library, how can we look at the funding to make that happen.
And I just want to reiterate what Chief Randazzo said for anybody listening and having any
other ideas that our police officers are 10-8, they're not sitting in the station, that
they are out on the streets patrolling.
And so if you need them any time of day, they are south of the tracks, north of the tracks,
to the east of the west, they're all over so that people can be assured that they are
available. So that's it. Thank you. Thank you, Karen. Shana. Thank you. I concur with everything, Karen.
Just said, and I'll expand on that a little bit as well. I really like these drawings, but I wonder
a couple things. Like, could we go a little further with this? Like, are we restricted to just talking
about a shade structure. Why aren't we discussing enclosing the patio out here and making it a second
story, expanding the square footage of the building to get that some of the things that a library
of the future might need. It would help mitigate the leaking. We could talk about redoing the structural
part and then maybe moving the concept of an open-air patio with the cover or something so
like the parking lot and then moving the parking lot across the street with a parking structure.
I mean so it's like a hybrid concept of what this is versus what you know the frog had talked
about and you know some of the visioning that was done you know so maybe it's not as expensive.
if it's not $125 million, but maybe it's somewhere in between.
And then in terms of funding, I would personally like staff to come back with some options
on public-private partnerships because, you know, a library needs a coffee shop.
And so if Starbucks wants to pay us to sit in, you know, with a coffee shop in a library
or a cafe or something, like if we can generate some income to help pay for this or
or what are options in terms of, you know, I like the idea of Glendora owning our library.
I don't want the county in here any more than they need to be, you know, but maybe some
housing on top or below, I don't know, I want to options on the funding of this because
I think the project can get better if there's other funds coming in.
So I don't want to say, like, oh, I do really like this and good job, Michael.
I almost think it could be a little bit better within our little area right here.
And not as expensive and not all a burden on taxpayers.
So I think there is some kind of refining of things to do.
So, you know, I like your motion, but I personally want staff to bring back some ideas
before I commit to like exactly what I want because I want to know, you know, what
somebody can bring to the table, I guess.
Gary, was there an appetite when you were doing, you know, when you were discussing
with the community, I mean, you were talking about like $125 million,
Would there have been an appetite at $50 million or $60 million?
It was
just, no.
I wonder if there is an appetite for something less.
That number was out there, and I don't know why that even came from.
But it's a scary number, and I get it.
I wonder if there is an appetite for less.
I believe the $125 million was the concept of the entire campus revisit or city hall, plaza area, police department, 50,000 foot library with community space maker space.
And I would just add on that front that's exactly correct mayor and in that project the library portion
For that new facility was like 43 million 44 million and the
MHP analysis and visioning was like 41 and some change so those two were pretty consistent for an expanded library
There's a couple of things as Council debates for consideration amongst your conversation
and direction to staff this evening is, if we're going to go out and get some additional
structural analysis done based on an expanded facility, we're likely going to need some authorization
this evening in the form of a purchase order and come back with Council with an amended agreement
it for MHP or some of our other vendors and the things we're talking
tonight are worthwhile. The library and public works corporate yard are
incredibly important to operations in the city. These types of soft costs, as
we've talked about this evening, are expensive. It's not a cheap endeavor. And so
doing the analysis to get a better update on something, what a comprehensive
patio cover really sort of in closing, but not really of the facility is,
is going to cost money. I think we were just briefly talking would encourage use the current vendor we had since they did all the current structural assessments anyway.
It's probably a much cheaper endeavor to get some of those updates.
Happy to work with anyone to get updates or intentions, but also at the same time too as it relates to alternatives.
You know, it is possible for staff to come back and talk at workshop three, what a more comprehensive public, public, private partnership.
I would only say that some, there's a library in Santa Cruz, is that correct?
It has a housing component in some commercial with a library, but it's a smaller library than was there before.
So if the goal is for an expansion, I think we are talking about things now in the 20-ish
million range when we talk about the comprehensive updates and changes, and not that that's a
bad number, it's just a larger number.
And so as you give staff direction, any sort of ideas you would like us to come back with,
For example, what does, what's a better cost estimate with a comprehensive proposal to fix the structural issues look at a patio structure, water proofing modernization efforts, we can do that we can come back, I don't know about the November date, but we can press as hard as we can.
But we can, for Workshop 3, when we talk about amounts, if Council gives us direction,
we can ballpark some of these costs and talk about funding alternatives for those, and
we can provide additional information and examples of what a private public partnership
looks like.
It could be as simple as trying to offset some of the costs with some revenue by having a
commercial space.
That was something envisioned as part of the Civic Center process, right?
There was a commercial kitchen space down below in the first floor.
It could also be as complex of land ownership changes in building and you get something in return for providing land to a developer.
So those can be very detailed.
It can be intense in the details and options and so but we are happy to provide that level of information.
But I think mayor first and foremost, if we can get some more specific directions, we can do a much better job of providing you with those are just know that some of these will comes with the price tag and and visiting exercises is one thing actual structural analysis assumptions or is another set altogether.
I just, you know, for me, it is, it's important that whatever we do, we're not only resolving
an issue in terms of water intrusion and structural issues, but that we are taking into account
that there is a big portion of this community who's going to be here for many decades into
the future.
And whatever we spend now, I want it to be a smart spend into the future.
I mean, you know, if we're going to be doing a lot of this work, you know, it might be a slightly bigger price tag, but if we can extend the life of the building in that process, that's important to me, and I think that's probably important to a big portion of the community.
So, you know, I don't know what the appetite is for everybody else or what, you know, we want to have staff come back with, but that's important to me.
I appreciate that. I would just throw out mayor if the council desires to, once there was some coal lessing around an option, we could also, once we have an idea of what that looks like, we could also do additional polling of the community, it's never a bad time, you know, to do some of that scientifically valid polling, whether it is type of facility or different things like that.
that we're happy to look at that option too.
Thank you.
I can chime in just a minute.
My thoughts, I support the big vision thing,
so if that didn't make it for the futures.
I think that maintaining this facility
is the option that seems to be in the appetite
that the community has shared in what we've heard.
so far over the last six months, excuse me, so I certainly can embrace fixing the patio
if it's a guarantee that we're going to not get water indoors. The canopy option is,
I'm a fan, updating the building with all the mechanical things. If you're going to go there,
you might as well make it right. Don't leave stuff to be done. That's crazy.
And finish those projects to make it usable space, then with the library staff's creativity,
they might be able to make maker spaces and tomorrow's library out of what's there, moving
shelving around.
And gee, if they're not having to evacuate space for water intrusions and the waterfall features,
they might have more space for those creative new things.
So I'd love to see that if it involves some structural obviously,
some structural assessment to see if this kind of a vision is practical
and then we need to budget for that and do so.
The corporate yard, if I think it's a good way,
is the move, an idea, the equestrian site was brought up,
But I think I know there's enough county and federal landowners on that thing that involve flood control that that's probably not really ours to play with.
Oh, that would be difficult, but the corporate yard where it is, I think we need to face that and go after it through the program.
as we say and if there's a talk about fuel tanks, today's world you don't
put fuel tanks in the ground. You put them above ground for our type of fleet
service and you have whales come in and refill them as needed so that you don't
have that ground issue. That's just the fleet stuff.
Corporate, we can't ignore that. I think we need to move on that, phase it, host a little more, but get going on it and go with the library as little tweaks to the plan. But I think we need to give that direction so that you guys have something. The future vision and sizing and things, that's neat, that's fun. But I don't think the community has that community has that appetite. Even if you pull them, I don't see it.
I don't feel it, I help Michael.
David, I agree with everything you just said.
I want to go back with the comment about closing off the patio.
That was made open for our loads, and then we have a problem with the substructure underneath.
So that's really not an option.
I'm not a fan of a P3, it's just not something I would ever want to go to.
I've been involved with them before, and I don't think it's wise for our city for a P3.
But with everything that David had mentioned going forward, I think it's a wise move.
We have to work within our means.
We've heard that not only this tonight, but also throughout the situation with the parcel
tax and things of that nature that, you know, the committee wants us to work within our
means.
I believe that we should go off and go get whatever grants we can, whether it's state,
federal, county, whatever it is.
I think we should work down that road.
But I think David, I think you encapsulate it well to piggyback on what Mendel just said.
I think that's the direction that we should be going.
So just to make sure that we're hearing right,
or at least I'm hearing right, Valerie,
Moises, feel free to jump in here at any time,
that-
Let me clarify, three public,
E3 public private partnership.
That's correct.
E3, can you expand on your, the concern with it?
Just, I'm curious what your-
is the complexity and it's the ownership,
it's taking space away from the footprint of the library
and it could expand and cost.
And I don't think that's what the public would want.
They want us to work within our means,
within this, they want us to own the library,
they want it for themselves.
I don't think they want to have it complicated
with other commercial entities within the footprint.
Like a coffee shop?
Oh, I think so.
We can put a coffee shop down there
in the friends room if you want, right now.
just just so make sure I'm hearing correctly on the rehab. The comprehensive and I would I guess I would call it more of a renovation project than rehab but
taking a look at all the structural assessments identified in the 2026 report identified look at any of the any instructional assessments not mentioned in 26 that are also included in the 23 MHP report.
look at updated analysis for what a patio structure looks like. Look at costs associated
or the additional strengthening if necessary needed with that, especially as it relates
to the footings down below. Take a look at, I assume some of the visioning exercises both
from the Civic Center and the 2023 MHP report, which talks about the type of activities
that users want to see in a modern library and look at the existing footprint and figure
out how to modernize some of that stuff as well, is that what we're also hearing?
Yes.
Okay.
So, and if all those things, when we get that analysis, our goal is to come out then with
a dollar figure goes without saying waterproofing and moving of land and getting some assertions
and looking at what guarantees would cost us if we did some of that stuff.
Some of that stuff, if we're in the $20-ish million range, that's an okay thing.
You think it would push up?
I do not know.
But I do think-
I'm hoping to stay in the 12th, the 12th, the 12th, but-
I hope a lot.
I know.
Yeah, I know.
I don't know.
I'm just saying, we start adding some of these things on there.
Okay.
I mean, just as a point of reference, the deck, which is kind of the addition of a second story for construction of a second floor above the plaza plus the plaza, but it was estimated at approximately $20.5 million.
That we kind of know as a baseline.
That was a closed in building.
That's correct.
Plus the deck on top of that.
That's great.
Yeah, I would hope that we'd be inside of that somewhere a whole bunch, okay?
Okay, so not a new facilities that we're here on a big clear.
Okay, perfect.
Don't want to lose that picture.
Corporate yard.
You want us to look at additional phasing opportunities, you want to look, you want us to
identify in that phase one, what the greatest needs are within phase one.
Do you want us to?
I think phase one is you identified, has to fix the infrastructure underground stuff before we can build anything.
So stabilize that and make the footprint right.
So is the request more to come because I think we know what that costs, right?
Or two.
Yeah. So is that that becomes the goal then and in in workshop three, we talk about funding and bring that that known entity forward?
or is it a change to that phase structure that was presented to me?
Well, I think you've identified that saving a couple of the buildings is not a benefit.
Well, that's new.
I would, you know, if there's an appetite for anybody else,
I know Michael doesn't like the idea of a public private partnership.
I would like those options discussed as far as funding.
I want to understand.
And not that we move forward with that, but I want to understand what that looks like financially in terms of workshop three
Would you like us to provide some information on in a in a general overview on what a public partner private partnership is?
I probably have some value.
Sure.
We can do that.
Hey, someone clap tonight.
That's a win.
I'll take that all night long.
She's like it's time to go.
Okay, here's the hard question.
Do we have enough information to have made a motion?
that's right sir.
Oh boy. I said 1110 because I knew what you were going to say. Yes. I'm not sure we can get back. We will do our very best. Honestly councilmember. And then we're kicking the can like down the road. And it won't be done.
that we talk about this?
No, I think trying to get something back
by November's an important aspect.
I think trying to get some ballpark figures
is an important part.
When we say talking about money
is can we get some authorization
with MHP to move forward?
Yes, yes.
Okay, we'll come back with a formal agreement,
you know, amendment, but can we start
in the 50-hundred grand range to get some of this stuff moving forward?
You need approval now because we're not going to meet so yes please I move we do that okay second it but is your a dollar like up up to up to a hundred grand you're asking for a structural assessments for an additional second story and everything else up to envisioning and drawings Michael Michael used to build whole houses. Yeah, no kidding all over the place. Yeah, I would rather ask for the authority and not spend the money
Then be sure and kind of start spending money above and beyond what we're we're getting people they're going to write that this is possible that this is what that we're getting updated cost estimates from a professional estimator we're getting drawings done engineering
engineering
guarantees about structural load and capacity for an essential city facility.
That would include a cover.
Yes, for 100 grand.
I don't know. We honestly don't know. We talked about 50 to 100 grand as an outside, but this is part of the soft cost that are not. I mean.
Well, I don't think you're that you're going to get a let's just call it a bit for a second floor and a parking structure across the street. No.
So, we want to make sure that when we go back and provide this direction, that they're
looking at all their structural load calculations for the existing deficiencies and taking
everything that we talked about this evening, including a substantial, and I'll call it a
patio structure, not enclosure, but that's a large structure, significant structure.
And there may be other load concerns that they have, depending on how that is, that how
that is anchored, whether it's on the, you know, on the sides or whether we're using the
existing footings down below, we already know those are undersized for the current load
capacity that we have now. So yes, personally, I, I think that you should double that
bid that amount. Okay. There's a hundred grand is not going to buy by you a lot of expertise.
We're trying to, I know, I mean, I admire what you're trying to do, but I'm just in a real
world there. And these experts are all going to be spent in the next month. So you just need
to be able to get through to the next calendar. Okay. All right. Well, that's not till
August. It's a month. Okay. August 20. Okay. Okay. That's fine. I'd like to ask Mr. Matthews
he has a comment or that.
We're
looking at changes to the current capacity. I just in terms
of from the public side some of the work that's undertaken if we ask them to move forward they'll
start expending money now so it's not necessarily the bid in the quotes and I agree with you that's
how they would normally go this is just to get started the initial weird dark until the second
meeting in August so in order not to move for you know we want to move forward obviously you know
on some expenditures but yeah we agree with a lot of that and this is a long way away from drawings
But if staff is going to come back with updated dollar estimates, and I'm not even saying we'll spend the $100,000.
But we want to make sure that we are okay.
You have that direction.
Perfect. Thank you.
Okay.
Anything else you need from us?
American Express Card. I'm just platinum or whatever.
Okay. Wow. What a great job.
Thank you, everyone.
one and thank you colleagues and staff productive evening thank you with that
will adjourn at nine thirty eight good evening and thank you very much