[0:00] Good evening, everybody. At this time, please silence your cell phone via vices, proceedings are being recorded for those physically present, the council chamber, who desire to address the city council during the meeting. Please complete the request to speak form, available on the front entrance of the council chambers and present to the city clerk.

[0:16] Speaker's physically present and participate in VIE Zoom. We'll be called upon in the appropriate time and each person allow three minutes of speaking time

[0:24] and it calls meeting order convened

[0:26] City of Grant Terrace on Tuesday October 8, 2024, 6 p.m.

[0:31] The invocation began by a pastor Jason from Lingwood Church and

[0:35] The Pledge of Allegiance Council of Women's Review. You have somebody want to do the Pledge of Allegiance. I do. I have Emma Savino representing homeschool children today

[0:43] Okay, so, she'll do that right after the invocation, so can I have you right please stand

[0:48] Pastor Jason, please come to a podium.

[0:58] Hey, man, if we can just bow our heads in this prayer.

[1:01] Heavenly Father, we come to you this evening in the name of Jesus and Father, we just invite

[1:05] you in this place tonight.

[1:07] We pray and ask for your presence and your glory to fill this room.

[1:11] We pray and ask for your wisdom and your guidance as decisions are made.

[1:15] We pray for our city leaders that you would guide them and lead them in every decision.

[1:20] We pray for our city and it's people that you would protect and bless them.

[1:26] We pray for provision for everyone in need that they may have everything they need, Father.

[1:31] We pray that tonight that your will will be done and that you and your long father will

[1:36] get the glory and all the honor.

[1:39] We ask you this in your precious name.

[1:43] Amen.

[1:43] Thank you.

[2:14] Thank you.

[2:25] I'm sure you're working on your role call.

[2:29] Councilmember Sabina.

[2:31] Councilmember Henderson.

[2:33] Present.

[2:34] Councilmember Allen.

[2:35] Present.

[2:36] Mayor Protoam Wilson.

[2:37] I am here.

[2:38] Mayor Hussie.

[2:39] Present.

[2:40] Mayor you have a call.

[2:41] Thank you.

[2:42] Recording have additions are removal of the items from the agenda do we have any?

[2:48] No additions or deletions.

[2:50] Okay.

[2:51] Mr. Mayor.

[2:52] Yes.

[2:52] Councilman.

[2:52] Cool items.

[2:53] Two.

[2:55] And four.

[3:01] On the consent calendar.

[3:03] We'll begin.

[3:10] Sorry for that.

[3:13] I made a mistake on which item we were on.

[3:16] All right.

[3:17] Public comment.

[3:18] The Supreme for the members of the public to come in.

[3:20] I don't have any items on a parent on the regular agenda because of restrictions containing

[3:23] California law.

[3:24] The City Council may not discuss or act on any item, not on the agenda by may briefly

[3:28] respond to statements made.

[3:30] I'll ask questions for clarification as a mayor may also request a brief response from

[3:34] staff.

[3:35] Questions raised during the public comment are may request the matter be a agenda for future

[3:39] meetings.

[3:40] Adam City Clerk.

[3:44] First one is Shedbal.

[3:47] Mr. Bull.

[3:51] Good evening.

[3:52] everybody could even leave the mayor City Council and staff.

[3:57] I've recently asked my name is Chad Bull.

[4:01] I recently asked the residents of Grand Terrace,

[4:03] what do they want from City Council and what?

[4:05] I just wanted to share this information.

[4:08] So, based on that poll,

[4:09] based on the information that the residents of Grand Terrace

[4:12] stated, they want a community center,

[4:15] not just the senior center, but an actual community center.

[4:18] They're going to offer basic skills trainings

[4:20] like back when I taught the electrical safety class from a pair, back we had the

[4:24] Rex Center. They would like the Veterans Health Program, knitting, sewing,

[4:29] craft classes, basically skills that people could learn. They would like to provide

[4:33] a home for the Boy Scouts and the Cubs Scouts and Expand Youth Programs.

[4:38] Encourage volunteers. We have a vast amount of talent in our city,

[4:41] which is just we tap into that. Another item is people who have said that they want a

[4:46] park, the provided a dedication, recreation space for skaters, or if the city can't do it,

[4:55] then help a local business get there. I had someone complaining about building permits in the

[5:01] cost of those, so I wanted to say about dealing with the prices there, and a lot more flexibility

[5:09] with like, say, metal storage buildings and so on and so forth. Several people have been

[5:16] I haven't had a long conversation with them,

[5:18] but sidewalks do Michigan Preston.

[5:22] Empty, Phil empty buildings with businesses,

[5:24] to track new businesses and revitalize unused space.

[5:28] Think of we have that going on with the video store now.

[5:34] Public safety, hire more officers

[5:36] and create citizens patrol, neighborhood watch programs,

[5:40] people would like to abolish fireworks.

[5:42] They just say it's just not safe and too much of a hassle

[5:45] and too much of a challenge.

[5:47] Bring back Halloween.

[5:49] This is an interesting one.

[5:51] It said, bring back Halloween back to Richard Rollins Park.

[5:54] Someone said that Halloween is not a car show.

[5:57] Trunker treat is great.

[5:59] Make it a social event with local businesses in support.

[6:02] Organize to a costume test.

[6:04] We'll costume contests with businesses that don't need stuff.

[6:08] If the city doesn't host a Halloween event, then strongly support terrorist view

[6:14] all festival.

[6:18] Better city communication. One of the things that I have seen quite a few times

[6:22] now is that people just don't get the information across. Whether they're going to the city

[6:29] website, kind of confusing, kind of challenging, or Facebook, which we all know that can be

[6:36] unique to say the least. Approved in the communication, clean up the city's presence, and what

[6:43] about the electric sign on Canalum Out Vernon.

[6:45] We spent a lot of money to get that sucker up a long time ago

[6:48] and it has not worked since then.

[6:51] A lot of the technologies come about,

[6:53] maybe we can do something about that.

[6:55] Architecture can consistency.

[6:58] Address would happen soon to the Barton Plan

[7:00] and cohesiveness in the city's architect.

[7:03] Water conservation rebates.

[7:04] A lot of people are starting to talk about that

[7:06] as we have been dealing with not so much rain this year.

[7:11] Offer rebates for homeowners who switch to water-conserving landscapes.

[7:17] Inspire this is someone that said to me a couple of times.

[7:22] Inspired landlords to actually care.

[7:24] To actually fix things that are there.

[7:27] We have some landlords out there that just the business owners are having to really fight

[7:32] to get them to fix things.

[7:34] So those are just some of the words in the community and thought I would share.

[7:38] Thank you.

[7:40] Thank you Mr. Boyd on. One thing for the community to come to the council meetings. We do have things in the works.

[7:50] And they could be informed about it, you know, the community center. We're working on that.

[7:55] The best thing to do is come to council meetings. Voice your opinion on the, and then also,

[8:01] I only come up with a complaint, come up with a solution. How are you going to do it?

[8:05] are going to be the person that volunteers, the help get it done,

[8:09] are you one other people to do it for you?

[8:11] So that's the best way.

[8:12] And I know this season's got a lot of volunteers.

[8:15] So thank you for bringing that attention to.

[8:19] I'm seeing Clark.

[8:22] Clint Bosner?

[8:28] Hi there, Council.

[8:29] My name is Clint Bosner.

[8:31] I'm a resident here in Granteria,

[8:33] I've bought my first house in March of last year

[8:37] on Vivian Avenue, right across from the school.

[8:42] And it's been a long time.

[8:44] I've been most at home, most for the last 18 months,

[8:47] trying to get my house fixed.

[8:49] I'm two weeks away from completion, trying to get it done.

[8:53] And when I woke up today, I went over to my house

[8:56] to get everything.

[8:57] I noticed that there was a speed clock thing

[9:00] that's been stalled right outside of my gate.

[9:05] And, as a little armed by it, I wasn't notified, anything, I just kind of showed up.

[9:11] I went by the city manager's office, Mr. Blow is today, and he said that this council

[9:16] here was kind of responsible for deciding to do that around town.

[9:22] And I understand, I have a fortune up this last year to become a father.

[9:26] I have a 18-month-old daughter, you know, safety is important.

[9:32] and I understand the science.

[9:35] Two kind of experiment with the sign today,

[9:37] the sign is 25 miles an hour.

[9:40] It has one, mine faces towards,

[9:42] so Vivian, but Vivian, I'm on, is right by the coolest act there.

[9:50] So it's good, it's the only effective street

[9:52] that would make that sign worth anything,

[9:55] would be car hard.

[9:56] I went down car hard today and it's impossible

[10:00] to make the turn at a speed of over 30 miles an hour you likely end up in Mr.

[10:06] Jimonis from Yard if you did. I stopped the sign. I have a V8 3.6 liter with a chip.

[10:15] I'm up to about 360 horsepower. I'm a truck. I floored it. It's been the wheels.

[10:19] It did four times. I tried to see if I could get red over 25 miles an hour by

[10:22] time I had the sign. Best I got to was 22. So unless someone has a vehicle that's

[10:29] and be, you know, sports car, we're not even going to be able to effectively get a reading

[10:34] over 25.

[10:36] You could go to the end and drag race your car down, but I don't think there's likely to

[10:41] be, you know, high hope that our competent shares of the department would catch them

[10:45] if they're drag racing on our street, and I'm sure the residents would call.

[10:48] So I don't want to just, like you mentioned earlier, I don't want to just present a problem,

[10:52] I want to present a solution.

[10:54] I, you know, I did notice that my vehicle, I could get it over 30 miles an hour.

[10:59] Once I passed the Vivienne Street, kind of where the school is.

[11:03] So I was thinking, you know, if it's possible to potentially relocate it to a place that

[11:07] could, you know, better the community, off of, you know, my property there, and maybe cross

[11:12] the street.

[11:14] Or if we could remove it completely, because I, you know, I know they're expensive, and

[11:19] And there's probably other places in Granteurs that could use the sign and create more safety

[11:24] in our public.

[11:26] So I guess I'm out of time, but, you know, thank you for hearing it, and if it is possible

[11:32] to me with you guys later, or outside of this, I can greatly appreciate it.

[11:36] Okay.

[11:37] City Manager, are those signs placed, do we do a survey when they're a place to make sure we're

[11:43] getting the max effective right now?

[11:45] place by recommendation of the city engineer and work with the sheriff's department as well.

[11:51] So the idea is to have both directions entering and leaving the schools because of the highest

[11:57] danger areas. And as we've had multiple, no, sir, your time is there.

[12:03] We've had multiple requests from the residents here in these chambers. We've heard this

[12:07] over and over that we'd like some control. That's where we're meeting that request and

[12:12] I've seen the what are residents of Ascore, okay?

[12:16] And then one word of advice, I want to be seen

[12:21] that you did excessive speed and everything

[12:23] with the sheriff right there, you know?

[12:25] You know, when you light up the tires, that's it.

[12:27] I mean, you know, if you want to, you know,

[12:29] put yourself guilty and stuff, but.

[12:32] Yeah, light your tires up, I'm sure your neighbors

[12:36] aren't very happy with you right now, so.

[12:39] But no, we do do it, so we do put these signs

[12:42] And we have heard for the last couple of years

[12:44] about people speeding up and down streets.

[12:47] And no signs are going almost everywhere in the city.

[12:50] So unfortunately, I don't know, went from your place.

[12:53] You look at the draw.

[12:54] I have no idea that's what we pay these engineers for.

[12:58] Pay them a lot of money for it.

[13:00] They do other surveys on that.

[13:01] I don't think they light up the tires,

[13:03] but they do other surveys.

[13:05] But I mean, we can look into it.

[13:07] But if that's the place, the engineers recommended it.

[13:10] I mean, I want to put stuff signs in some places

[13:12] an engineer say no, and we can't do it because of the liability risk.

[13:24] Yeah, it doesn't matter if every occupant on the streets or we go back and forth, but

[13:28] it's what the city does.

[13:29] Why I appreciate you coming out and voicing your concern to them.

[13:32] And like I said, that's what the engineers say and that's what's going

[13:58] to happen.

[13:59] Maybe they're slowing down now.

[14:06] Well, you know what?

[14:06] I'm going to have you.

[14:07] I'm going to have you email me, you're address, and I'm going to come by.

[14:10] I'm not going to be speeding though.

[14:15] So you clerk could we have?

[14:17] Cindy Bidney?

[14:32] Hi. Good evening. I wanted to talk about the housing element. I realized

[14:38] that you're talking about, and you took it off the contract. I wanted, since it's

[14:43] scary enough again, I'd like to bring up a couple of issues about the housing element and

[14:48] transparency. And one of the biggest things brought up about the housing element is that

[14:54] the public doesn't understand how it affects them.

[15:00] I think there needs to be more done with educating the public and making things really clear, because it is going to affect them.

[15:09] I had a question about the regional housing needs number, and if J.C. Wallace is a part of that number, has it been included?

[15:25] And I also wanted to talk about allowing a higher density housing in a small town to meet the requirements of the regional housing needs assessment, which is RHNA and everything,

[15:41] can bring a variety of drawbacks depending on the community's specific characteristics and resources.

[15:48] here are some concerns, strain on the infrastructure. We're a very small town and we don't

[15:54] have enough money for our infrastructure and we're proposing to increase the density. Again,

[16:01] I don't like that idea. I didn't like it in the first place. Grant Harris is a small community

[16:07] and we like it. Impact on community character. There we go. Environment and environmental concerns

[16:15] public opposition and social transitions, affordable housing and economic challenges, school

[16:22] and public service overload, traffic and transportation increase,

[16:31] challenges with zoning

[16:32] and planning, definitely mismatch and local employment opportunities, long-term maintenance

[16:38] and upkeep. I'd just like you to consider all of those, and I'll give this to you, which will

[16:46] elaborate what I'm talking about, and you don't have to listen to me, Mayor. Thank you.

[16:52] Well, thank you, Ms. Bailey. I'm just going to, I'm sorry.

[17:03] Southern California, Associate Governor, we're not the only city that's doing that. You're not the only

[17:07] with the same concerns that's brought numerous times it's what the state and you guys already know

[17:11] what the state's mandating, high density and everywhere, affordable housing, affordable housing

[17:17] is a means sectionage. It means people that try to get affordable housing you might be $4,000,000,

[17:22] $5,000 a month and so you could if you want we could talk about but we're at the same thing

[17:31] The state mandates a lot of the high-density housing.

[17:35] Mr. Mayor, if I might.

[17:41] This is for the response to this business comments and for the benefit of the audience.

[17:47] There's an item on our consent calendar that approves an agreement with Michael Baker International

[17:54] for an update of our housing element.

[17:56] What's important about that document, that agenda item,

[17:59] is it has attached to it the letter from the State Department of Housing and Community

[18:04] Development, requesting certain changes to the city of grand terrace housing

[18:10] element, a extensive letter, their significant requirements, and it's important that the

[18:17] community understands that these, as they may are indicated, these are requirements

[18:21] imposed by the State of California, it's not something that the city of grand terrace has

[18:26] opposed within our corporate boundaries.

[18:30] So I would encourage you to get a copy of the letter,

[18:32] understand the letter if you don't contact staff,

[18:36] so that you can have the appropriate consultation,

[18:39] but it's truly important for the community to understand

[18:43] what the city, excuse me, the state is imposing upon the city.

[18:47] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[18:48] Thank you, Councillor Henderson.

[18:52] Okay, who's next?

[18:53] Bobby Forbes.

[18:54] Ms. Forbes.

[19:00] Good evening. Thank you. I was already going to come and speak about a new clock on Grand Terrace Road for the speed.

[19:09] And then my nephew Clinton called me this afternoon to tell me about the sign that showed up next to his gate on his property at Vivienda.

[19:16] I went by and looked at it as well when it when I came around the corner from Carhart it wouldn't even register me because I was driving just the normal speed.

[19:24] But I think it should be my personal opinion, and I know that you have your person that does the surveys.

[19:30] It should probably be over in the land 50 feet from his house on this Colton Unified School District property where they toured the barn down.

[19:38] Then people have enough time to accelerate and see what speed they're going.

[19:42] The one on Grand Terrace Road, just north of Barton Road, which is the road that I travel ten times a day sometimes.

[19:48] The fastest it will clock me is 17 because I barely have my foot on the pedal coming from Barton Road.

[19:53] it's so close to Barton Road, it seems like it too

[19:56] should probably be another hundred feet down the road

[19:59] when people are actually driving at that point

[20:01] and accelerating.

[20:03] So I haven't been anywhere else in town

[20:04] to see where there might be other new signs put up,

[20:07] but those are the two that I feel are in the wrong location,

[20:10] just my opinion, and if I don't share it,

[20:13] then you don't know how I feel.

[20:15] I know that there was an incident last week

[20:17] with a burglary, and it is my understanding

[20:20] through the great sign that the burglary was from JCW

[20:24] I've been taking pictures of them urinating in the bushes, pan handling, I call the sheriff when I do this.

[20:30] I don't get the full picture of them urinating in the bushes of course, but that's what they're doing.

[20:36] And so I realize that these people are allowed to come out on the street, but if they're being taught how to act in public,

[20:43] there should be somebody with them teaching them how to act in public.

[20:46] I have a problem with this. Last night I had to call the sheriff as I was leaving my office.

[20:51] there was somebody a homeless man that turns out and I just saw him a few minutes ago as I was

[20:55] on my way here. 25 feet behind me in the dark, half dressed with his bags. I called the sheriff,

[21:02] the sheriff's deputy was kind enough to call me back. He did spot him up by the Chevron by the time

[21:06] that he got into town. But we need another deputy. I'm pushing for that bill to pass it November

[21:12] ballot. I appreciate when the deputies come out when I call. Thank you very much. But we have a

[21:19] with JC Wallace more than what the general public sees.

[21:23] I see it every single day.

[21:26] Some of you do.

[21:28] That woman lied to us.

[21:30] She's lied to us more than once.

[21:32] I hope that the city is addressing it,

[21:34] but I know that no one from the Sheriff's Department is coming and saying,

[21:37] look, we're talking to them once a week now.

[21:39] Something's wrong there.

[21:41] Please address it.

[21:42] Thank you.

[21:43] Thank you.

[21:44] All

[21:46] right.

[21:46] No more public comment.

[21:48] No more? Okay.

[21:49] If you want to close public comment, thank you everybody for your insight.

[21:58] Special recognition, Friends of Blue Mountain.

[22:03] So I'm going to introduce the Friends of Blue Mountain representative, and ask them to

[22:06] come forward to lecture a few words, who's speaking for the Friends of Blue Mountain?

[22:11] Anybody?

[22:13] Mr. Kid.

[22:22] Well, Dennis Kid, President of the Friends of the Blue Mountain,

[22:26] started board of directors right here, and we just donated two parcels

[22:36] towing 10.6 acres to kind of get the ball roll on for the Blue Mountain Park.

[22:46] And so that's our goal to have a park on the Blue Mountain.

[22:52] Well, we really appreciate Mr. Kid and especially all the hard work

[22:56] numerous years you guys have been doing, they get that going, and it's gonna happen one day,

[23:04] you know, it's gonna be there, future generations to enjoy, besides just the donkeys enjoying it,

[23:09] but yeah, it's gonna,

[23:12] it's gonna be there, and you know, it's, unfortunately, the slow-wheel

[23:16] progress, you know how it goes for, and with all the surveys and the liabilities and everything,

[23:24] But you know, we really appreciate you donating to the city, but just one question, is there

[23:29] gold in that mountain?

[23:30] It's gold?

[23:32] Yeah.

[23:33] I don't know.

[23:34] I don't know.

[23:40] Before we, I read the certificate, I'd like to give my fellow council members a chance to

[23:45] recognize you and say a few words of the April 10th.

[23:50] Thank you, Mayor.

[23:52] Dennis, we've known each other for a long time.

[23:54] Yes, we have.

[23:54] And you know that I've been a big supporter of the blue mountain.

[23:59] Yes.

[24:00] And of course, I live right below it.

[24:04] So I really appreciate all the effort you put into it.

[24:07] You know, it's that old deal that it takes a bulldog with big teeth to hang in there.

[24:15] And I'm sure that what your efforts have provided is a legacy.

[24:22] And that's a great thing. Now you feel free if you want to donate any more property.

[24:28] Okay. Okay. All right.

[24:30] There will take the avocado ranch, too.

[24:32] Yeah, yes, exactly.

[24:34] And as you being the number one farmer in our in our small city.

[24:42] Sure, appreciate your efforts that way.

[24:43] I mean, we've known each other since 1977,

[24:46] 7, 7, 7, 6, some of the directions, so it's been a long fabulous road, so thank you.

[24:54] Thank you.

[24:55] Thank you for your effort.

[25:00] Councilman.

[25:02] Thank you.

[25:03] Thank you, Dennis, for your generosity and I know your heart was in it, because you and

[25:08] I've talked a lot over the years, and I know you love this city, and I know you love

[25:12] this, this, that mountain.

[25:15] And so, and thank you for, it will be a legacy for generations to come.

[25:20] Oh, good.

[25:24] One other question, when you bought that mountain, how much was it back in a mule or something?

[25:31] I mean, I'm sure the rates went up a long time ago.

[25:35] Oh, I don't know.

[25:37] I just kind of came along with the growth.

[25:41] What was your dream from the beginning to have a hiking trail when you first bought that parcel?

[25:47] What did you want with that life?

[25:49] Well, no, I just say it came with the grove.

[25:54] Oh, I can't let the grove, but this ten-and-a-breakers,

[25:58] the friends with my purchase, that's all.

[26:01] So how is your grove doing?

[26:03] Well, it doesn't like this hot weather.

[26:10] Well, we really appreciate it in the album.

[26:13] Thank you again, and anybody else?

[26:16] Oh, OK.

[26:17] City Manager, you want to say something to Mr. Kid here?

[26:21] I've just done it since been a pleasure and working with somebody like you that really, really cares about the community.

[26:27] Doesn't just talk about it. It puts as money where his mouth is, puts his effort into it.

[26:32] Thank you. It has been a pleasure doing. We can't do this.

[26:36] I know Canada says we're in a big supporter through the years of New Mountain Park.

[26:42] So thank you, Canada.

[26:44] Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

[26:46] In my wife and I've been big supporters of the Blue Mountain, we've made a couple of contributions

[26:52] over the years.

[26:54] I usually see Dennis when I do see him at the orchard when I'm taking my walk, and so

[26:59] at my Blue Mountain, T-shirt, the walk that the friends developed over the years, and very,

[27:08] very helpful with the development of that will occur on that mountain, and it could not

[27:14] we've heard without your assistance and the assistance of your board that are here tonight.

[27:18] I appreciate that very much.

[27:20] Thank you.

[27:21] Thank you.

[27:23] All right, sir.

[27:24] Well, we have anybody else.

[27:25] We have a certificate for you.

[27:27] Appreciation.

[27:27] A certificate is probably present to the Friends of Blue Mountain.

[27:30] An appreciation for your generosity.

[27:32] Donation of the land.

[27:33] To the City of Grand Tares.

[27:35] We express our sincere gratitude for your contribution and support of the community.

[27:39] And they call it a life for all the residents.

[27:41] presented at the eight day of October, 2024,

[27:44] signed by myself, and my fellow council members.

[27:47] So, and we also got some pins for you

[27:49] that you can hand out, and I think you get out

[27:52] of a ticket for it, right?

[27:53] One free ticket pass, but we want you to have it now.

[27:59] It's gold from Blue Mountain.

[28:00] Oh, okay.

[28:01] Oh, okay.

[28:03] Oh, okay.

[28:04] But we'd like to have you come up here, sir.

[28:06] We'll give you the certificate, and then take a picture.

[28:08] and your other colleagues will like the joiners.

[30:13] What would Dennis' contribution and the city, what we're doing and other people are contributing. So one day, you know, that trail will be open every day. I know I have some people saying, I want the trail open. I have some people saying they want the trail open, but it will be nice. Instead of once a year, but it's a good recreational thing. And we thank you again, Dennis. God bless.

[30:39] Okay, the consent counter, the following consent counter items are expected to be routine, non-controversive,

[30:44] active upon the City Council at one time without discussion. Any council members, staff members,

[30:49] this may request, remove the item. Council members, handers to one at number two and four for discussion.

[30:55] Does anybody else want to remove anything for discussion?

[31:02] Okay, do I have a motion for one, three, five, six and seven?

[31:08] I'll move up one, three, five, six, and seven.

[31:11] Second, I have a first and a second.

[31:15] Do we have any public comment on any of these?

[31:18] No, sir.

[31:19] Okay. Please vote.

[31:23] Motion passes unanimously.

[31:25] Okay, Councillor Handerson, item two.

[31:28] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[31:29] I have a couple questions regarding the check register.

[31:32] The first involves a $25,000 payment to Ralph Anderson

[31:36] and associate for the City Clerk recruitment.

[31:39] And I just want to ask the manager, it's this payment in advance of the services provided by Ralph Anderson.

[31:45] Yes, and we're done. We're done with the recruitment as well.

[31:49] It's done.

[31:50] Okay. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

[31:52] My second question is the payment of approximately $455,000 for unfunded accrued liability.

[32:01] the rate plan.

[32:04] Is there a, I'm sorry, director Clayton is there a balance that we're paying on, and is this one of those regular payments that typically occurs?

[32:17] This is, this is one of the payments that we do annually every year.

[32:21] And it fluctuates depending on what the, what Calbers as a whole has done for the year.

[32:26] So sometimes it goes up, sometimes it goes down,

[32:29] this year unfortunately it went up,

[32:30] but it isn't annual payment.

[32:32] Do we have an outstanding balance

[32:33] on our unfunded crude liability?

[32:35] We do.

[32:36] In that amount, yes?

[32:37] I do not have that with me, but I can get it to you.

[32:39] OK, thank you, man, appreciate it.

[32:41] It is in the millions, and the multiple of millions.

[32:47] So I'm trying to remember, we discussed this about a year.

[32:49] I'm trying to remember what it was.

[32:51] Six and a half, five and a half, something like that.

[32:55] It's a significant number.

[32:56] That's right. Okay. Thank you. This is City Manager.

[33:02] So you have a, you want to make a motion for two, and was that for two and four or was that just for two?

[33:08] That was just for two. Okay. So you go ahead and you want, you have a question on number four.

[33:12] We'll do them both at the same time.

[33:15] Yes. Yeah. In reading through the entire staff report, the state's letter indicates that since about 2021,

[33:24] one, the city has been working to get its housing element approved.

[33:32] And when you read the letter from the state, housing can be developed in the carpet, it

[33:38] almost seems at least to my way of looking at it that we're almost starting from scratch all

[33:44] over again.

[33:44] Is that a fair assessment?

[33:47] I believe with the Michael Baker team doing their first draft, which we submitted

[33:52] in May and got the comment letter in July, that was almost a complete

[33:56] re-boot and for transparency for the public and the Council I included that working draft is an exhibit

[34:02] to the request for this item tonight so you can see how much effort Michael Baker had to put

[34:07] into that first draft that they took at it.

[34:15] Thank you for that. Is there light at the end of the

[34:19] tunnel? I agree with the staff recommendation and I don't have any problems with the appropriating

[34:25] the funds for the continued work on Michael Baker, but I was more than a bit concerned reading

[34:32] the state ACD letter. It's almost as though some of those issues are very difficult for

[34:39] a city like Grant Harris to accomplish. And so my concern of course is appropriating an additional

[34:46] $39,000 for a total of $375,000. And then you report back to us three, four, five, six months

[34:55] from now that the target has moved once again.

[34:59] So is Michael Baker having appropriate consultations

[35:02] in your opinion with the state HVD staff

[35:04] to hopefully prevent that from occurring?

[35:08] Yes, I have full confidence in the Michael Baker team,

[35:11] that they've shown to me that they're fully committed

[35:14] to helping the grand terrace get across the finish line.

[35:18] In fact, one of their key team members Hannah had come up

[35:21] from San Diego tonight, just in case any members

[35:24] of the Council and any specifics, but we have had a lot of progress in almost bi-weekly

[35:29] communications with our state representative as we move forward and I believe things

[35:34] are looking very optimistic here with the next and hopefully final reiteration of the

[35:40] housing element, which we would have to bring back for adoption before we submit it.

[35:46] Hannah is here, should anybody want to speak directly with Michael Baker team for a really

[35:50] good insight based fall of the count to what's happening?

[35:52] So, and to add to that, Michael Baker is doing multiple different housing elements for different cities.

[36:00] So, they're not just kind of winging it for us. They are highly experienced and capable.

[36:05] And our biggest concern which matches yours is that HCD seems to be moving the goalposts as we submit.

[36:13] So, our fear is also that we'll fill these very challenging requirements for city art size.

[36:20] I'm almost, in some cases, I think I'm almost impossible, but we fulfill them and then we come

[36:27] back with the state with new or additional requirements.

[36:31] And on the long run, this has been now not just for us, but for hundreds of cities in the

[36:37] state and going through this cycle, the next housing element cycle is going to be coming up,

[36:43] which we should be starting working on right about now, but we have not completed the last

[36:47] housing element cycle, and so it's going to be very interesting how HCD in the state

[36:53] handles the newest iteration, one most of the cities in the state, don't have housing

[36:59] element yet.

[37:01] Thank you for that, Mr. City Manager and Director Hutter.

[37:08] Paragraphs, I think it's three and four on the first page of the letter from HCD,

[37:17] struck

[37:17] me as being kind of like a guillotine over the head of the city of Grant Harris, and setting

[37:25] the stage for potential disapproval of the next submission or finding us out of compliance

[37:35] with our general plan because the housing element is no longer pertinent. I saw a letter from

[37:43] another jurisdiction, I want to say the city of Norwalk, but I could be wrong. It

[37:47] had virtually that same language in the letter before a CD came down on that particular community.

[37:54] So I want to make clear to my colleagues and to the community at large that our staff has

[38:00] been extremely diligent in pursuing and improved housing elements. It's been extraordinarily

[38:06] difficult. We've talked about different staff people, different administrations being involved,

[38:12] but the current staff, the current city manager, the current director, and the current consultant

[38:16] have done really good work on behalf of the city and I just want to didn't want to leave

[38:22] the wrong impression with my comments about the housing element, because it has the city

[38:27] manager indicated, hundreds of cities in this state face this prospect, but we've been

[38:33] at it since 2021 and based upon the language in the letter submitted to the city, ACD could

[38:44] take any appropriate action, any action that deemed appropriate with the warning that's included

[38:49] in that letter.

[38:51] So I wish to staff and Michael Baker well, I'm confident that they can overcome the

[38:57] adversity outlined in the letter from the State ACD, but it's something that we, it's

[39:03] the council and the community have to monitor because not having to prove housing element has

[39:10] a major impact on this community and any other community that doesn't have to prove

[39:13] So thank you for that, Mr. Mayor, I'm ready to recommend approval for item number four.

[39:23] Okay, the Mayor, Pro Tem has a personal statement.

[39:26] Thank you, Mayor.

[39:28] As most of the people in its audience as well as the General of Citizens, you know,

[39:32] I have no love for the State bureaucracy.

[39:36] I am second tired of the way we are hammered for things that they don't fund.

[39:45] There seems to be a boy that's afloat where the state of California makes a lot of paperwork

[39:52] and a lot of newspaper mileage out of the idea of affordable housing and then when it

[39:59] really comes down to the brass tax they back out of it for the funding mechanisms and leave

[40:04] to the locals, and blame it on the locals.

[40:08] We are not Silicon Valley, and we never will be,

[40:12] and we are a more rural community.

[40:15] And I agree with Bobby's comments

[40:20] about density and so on.

[40:23] I think that I would, in fact, I know that I would volunteer

[40:28] my time to head up to Sacramento as an representative of these

[40:32] people and express our desire that they start having a real plan and with that real plan

[40:41] is met that we stop at that point and then if we want to make some changes, normal changes

[40:48] that have to do with time, then that's fine. But over 50 years worth of being in the development

[40:57] industry. I've seen it on both sides of the table. And this is a standard play that happens.

[41:04] You know, if you don't particularly care for the way things are going in an area, what they'll

[41:10] do is they'll move the goalposts just like they've talked about. And every time we get close to

[41:15] those goalposts, then the rules change. And that is only coming from the governor himself.

[41:22] And, you know, his approval of his and his cronies, approval of good old senator Weeners, you know, projections and his bills have proven that they couldn't care less about Southern California and our lifestyles and our well-being.

[41:43] So I would be happy to go out there and have a little discussion face to face with those folks.

[41:49] because I think what we're doing is we're stuck in a bureaucracy, and somebody needs to just put their foot right in the middle of it, and that's what we do.

[41:59] That's what we're here for.

[42:01] So I would be glad to do that.

[42:03] Thank you.

[42:05] Councillor Allen?

[42:10] You're pretty upset, aren't you?

[42:12] I got you there.

[42:13] I understand because it's annoying as hell.

[42:17] Whenever they do that all every time we try to meet and become compliant.

[42:21] and so my question is to my colleague, Council Member Henderson, or any of you actually, what

[42:31] are we gaining by meeting, having improved HCD, or what are we giving up by not having?

[42:37] There are some cities you mentioned Norwalk and some other cities who were saying, we've

[42:42] had enough, we'll fund ourselves, what are we losing, what would we lose measure, I think,

[42:47] I mean look what we're into with Michael Baker already, almost 400,000 by the time this

[42:51] is over, we may be in for half a mill. What are we, what are we going to gain? Are we going

[42:57] to gain half a mill from the state? Because no, we're going to be right back in it doing

[43:02] the next cycle. We're already behind. We're two years out of compliance. We're already

[43:07] behind. So what if we just said, we're not doing it? Hold, we lose measure. I, funds,

[43:13] would we lose? There would be, would we go to jail? Some funds that we would not qualify

[43:20] That led her indicated the threshold requirements for certain state grants and other funding

[43:26] sources to have improved housing element.

[43:29] More importantly, from my perspective, from a development perspective and our vision 2030 perspective,

[43:35] if the state determined that our housing element was out of compliance, it can then

[43:42] follow suit and indicate that our general plan is out of compliance.

[43:45] And as a former planning commissioner and former chair of the planning commission, you folks have adopted consistency resolutions and motions over the years that the project that you're recommending approval or are approving is consistent with the general plan.

[44:06] You can't make those consistency findings if our housing element is out of compliance with state law, which subsequently makes our general plan out of compliance.

[44:20] The net effect of that is to prevent development from occurring in the city of Grant Harris because the planning commission can't make the consistency findings that it is in compliance with and consistent with the general plan.

[44:32] So, the state holds that hammer, and it's a big one, over the heads of cities because

[44:40] it's the only element of the general plan that receives state review and approval, and

[44:45] that's important that the city council and the community take that with you.

[44:49] There are six or seven or eight elements in the general plan, only one, the housing element

[44:54] is approved by the state.

[44:55] So we risk, we risk the builders' remedy.

[45:00] I mean, so we're trying to get some development done, thank you for that.

[45:06] Yeah, so there are several consequences to not having a compliant housing element, and I understand

[45:12] what you're saying that you've been non-compliant for a couple years, now you're asking what

[45:16] else can come. So because we've been meeting pretty consistently our team and staff with HCD,

[45:22] they've been able to be a little bit more lenient with penalties that they're putting upon

[45:26] the city because they understand that there's a good faith effort going on towards reaching

[45:29] a compliant housing element, but potential and allowed consequences to non-compliance include

[45:36] disqualification from state funding, a carryover of the unit allocation to the next

[45:41] cycle. You could be fined and there could be further penalties in litigation. The state

[45:48] could take over local control and you could lose your local control. And then as you brought

[45:53] up there is the the builders remedy which would essentially mean that the city would be in

[45:58] able to deny projects even if they're inconsistent with the general plan or zoning if they are

[46:05] in some portion affordable.

[46:07] So a couple of those consequences the city has already been dealing with for a couple

[46:11] years but there are a couple of consequences including fines and loss of local control

[46:16] that the state has the ability to enact if they don't think that the city is making a good

[46:21] faith effort towards compliance.

[46:24] Okay, well thanks for helping me out with that.

[46:26] One of the things also we had a resident, Ms. Bidney,

[46:30] that stood up here and asked a question.

[46:32] And I think what she was getting at, what's important for the bottom line for the residents

[46:37] who have the properties that are being affected for rezoning.

[46:41] Are they finding out that their properties are being rezoned

[46:44] from one level to a different level?

[46:48] And what the effect of that is going to be on their properties,

[46:50] I think it's great that what she pointed out that, you know, the residents need to be more

[46:58] involved.

[46:58] We need to be more involved in getting the work to the residents and more of those community

[47:03] outreach efforts.

[47:09] This is, I know, you mentioned being a planning, and I remember when I first found a planning

[47:15] initial learning about the housing element and it was so confusing and frustrating and it's

[47:20] changing and continuing to do that, you know, and so it's just, it makes you want to throw

[47:27] up your hands and almost give up on it, you know, like some cities seem to be doing, but

[47:31] I understand the consequences and what she's saying and I don't want to, I'm not saying

[47:35] we should do that.

[47:36] I was only asking, you know, what is it, what are the actual consequences, you know,

[47:41] because we're in, you know, this is causing this a lot.

[47:51] I

[47:56] think that we've spent too much time not only sitting in this project, but as Mayor

[48:05] Perthheim stated, we need to be up in Sacramento.

[48:11] There's no reason that we don't have the lobbying in place that we don't have a voice

[48:20] and that we're not present to advocate.

[48:22] I mean, it's been very clear that state government can take, can move forward in doing whatever they want in our communities.

[48:35] And at the end of the day, yes, we do need to educate the public, but the public needs to understand that the governance, that we are under state ruling and how we govern, and we can lose funding and being able to do anything.

[48:52] and what happens in your backyards, we will lose that control.

[48:57] And so what is our progress?

[49:01] You stated that we have had progress.

[49:03] Like, what is that percentage?

[49:04] Is there a number on that?

[49:08] So the initial contract that Michael Baker had with the city was to address revisions requested

[49:15] by HCD in a letter that was in response to a draft made by a prior consultant.

[49:20] So, HCD deemed that that draft was incomplete and not in compliance, so the draft that we submitted back to the city for review in December 2023 included as Scott said, a pretty full overhaul of the housing element, we added a fair housing chapter, which is a newer requirement to the housing element.

[49:42] So, and we resimitted that draft to HDD in May of 2024.

[49:49] The letter that HDD sent back in July of 2024 was included with the agenda.

[49:57] Given all the HDD letters that our team has reviewed with the several housing elements that we've been working on,

[50:04] this HDD letter is, we are under the impression that we're towards the end of the line,

[50:10] especially because we've been given the opportunity to meet with our HD reviewer on a bi-weekly basis which is in an obligation of theirs.

[50:19] It's a kindness that they're offering us to work with us towards compliance and we've been given the impression that this is essentially the end of our revisions.

[50:29] And we're hoping that our response to this letter will be the last round of revisions as HD continues to work with us on these preliminary comments.

[50:35] Can we move them from an assumption to an answer of where we are?

[50:43] Sorry, can you declare?

[50:44] MCD does not give us a

[50:47] They don't even give us a do this and then we'll do that

[50:50] They give generality general as you read in the letter

[50:55] Attentations and then we shoot in the dark and we hope we hit it

[50:58] So the statement that we don't know where the target is. So you're asking

[51:01] Am I 80% of the target?

[51:04] I don't know

[51:04] Yeah, to clarify, we can't give a number of percent done because HDD is unable to give

[51:10] that answer to us, but what we have been doing in these meetings with HDD is based on

[51:14] this letter we've gone through and we're able to propose potential revisions in response

[51:19] to each of their comments and then they're able to work with us on, yes, if you do this, this

[51:25] revision that you propose, we'll consider that compliant and we'll consider that response

[51:29] to this comment or if you do this, that will be somewhat compliant, but here's this

[51:34] their piece of data or information that we want you to include.

[51:37] So that's kind of what our conversations are, as we can't give you

[51:40] an official, yes, we're this percent done, but we haven't

[51:43] at least in understanding with HD of what approach to the revisions

[51:49] is likely to reach compliance or conditional compliance.

[51:51] Can you tell us how many contracts you've brought to a completion?

[51:56] Well, I would have to go through my notes on number of completion,

[52:00] but we've worked on over two dozen housing elements in the sixth cycle

[52:03] And we're, any, I don't know, the number, that's the compliance, we're in the midst of several of these projects.

[52:13] Okay, thank you.

[52:21] So I have a question for you, Councilman.

[52:23] Woman, some of you know.

[52:25] So you mentioned, you've got a discussion there a little bit about, you know, going Sacramento

[52:31] and having our voices heard and it sounded like a great, like a great reason for a lobbying effort.

[52:38] And I mean, we're members of Cal Cities, do you think the Cal Cities is representing us effectively

[52:43] out there?

[52:44] Because we spend a lot of money being a member of Cal Cities, and they're the ones that are supposed

[52:48] to be speaking for us up there.

[52:51] And do you feel like they're being effective?

[52:53] Because I'm wondering.

[52:55] Cal Cities, they do what they do.

[52:58] My statement isn't regarding Cal Cities.

[53:00] My statement is regarding grand terrace and ensuring that our contracts and the work that we are doing

[53:07] is represented in Sacramento.

[53:09] So my statement isn't in reference to a blanket of what is needed in the Inland Empire,

[53:15] because we are very different from Grand Terrace to Colton to San Bernardino to the high desert.

[53:22] So the Inland Empire is, the needs are very different.

[53:25] My statement is directly regarding Grand Terrace being having their face and a voice in Sacramento.

[53:37] Yeah, right me too and I mean we have we were members of Calcities there's supposed to represent

[53:42] But we could go up on our own too. That's what you're also talking about. We've done that

[53:45] I'm stating that our individual needs need to be addressed outside of the lobbying and the great efforts that Calcities are ready does

[53:55] Okay, my statement was never in reference to Calcities. My statement. Okay, I just wanted to make sure I was wondering about it

[54:01] I wanted to just point out about that.

[54:04] I apologize.

[54:06] It's very appropriate.

[54:07] That's a bit.

[54:08] That's what Henderson.

[54:09] Thank you, Ms. Mayor.

[54:11] My colleagues will require a real recall

[54:14] that a while back on their suggested items for the agenda I had.

[54:21] Listed legislative advocacy as a request,

[54:25] regarding our forward-looking programs.

[54:28] And I'm given to understand that a recommended program will be forthcoming to the council

[54:36] regarding the city of Grant Harris, legislative advocacy program, and so I believe what

[54:41] Ms. Sabino is referring to and Mr. Allen for that matter. We should have an opportunity

[54:47] to sink our teeth into the proposed program and the not too distant future. Thank you, Mr.

[54:52] Mayor.

[54:52] Okay, let me close this up here.

[54:57] So on Cal City is also on Skag, a set of California Associated Government.

[55:03] If we didn't have a voice with them, we'll be walked over on everything.

[55:10] That's the power of the city's combined to get together on that.

[55:14] Now, with Skag, what Mayor Protem said, the lawyers went up to the governor and asked,

[55:23] what can we do for affordable housing and all that, and asked for money, and the governor

[55:27] said, no.

[55:28] He didn't have any solution to anything.

[55:30] They put these things together without solutions.

[55:33] They want the developers to figure it out.

[55:35] So the lawyers for Skag are fighting this as we speak.

[55:39] So, that's a big voice that's why I went to last in Los Angeles for that meeting.

[55:45] So, there's stuff in the works, but I'll tell you how you fight this.

[55:53] Vote for the right person. Vote for the people who are going to be working for the people.

[56:00] And maybe don't keep voting the same ones that have been in there for decades.

[56:06] So, that's up to you guys.

[56:07] All right, so we have a motion by Councilmember Henderson for item two and four to have a second.

[56:14] Second.

[56:15] I have a motion in the second, please vote.

[56:20] Motion passes unanimously.

[56:22] Thank you.

[56:24] All right, public hearing update to facility use fees presented by this

[56:28] Tillman City Management.

[56:30] Analyst.

[56:47] Good evening, City Councilmember.

[56:48] She need a Tillman Senior Management Analyst.

[56:51] I will be presenting an update on our facility use fees,

[56:54] which support both goals, goal number one, ensure our fiscal viability and goal number four development of successful partnerships.

[57:04] To provide some context, City Council established, City Council established part policies and fee structures in 1994 and 2002,

[57:16] and in 2012 we developed a comprehensive facility use policy to enhance the management of our city facilities.

[57:23] More recently, in 2017, we entered into a licensing agreement with Colton Unified School District

[57:30] for shared use of Terres Hills Middle School's pool and soccer fields.

[57:36] It's important to note that only our three local teams, the Grand Terres Community soccer

[57:41] club, Grand Terres Titans, and Grand Terres Little League have ever been granted access to

[57:47] the field's own by the school district.

[57:49] The revised facility use agreement aims to clarify responsibilities of applicants using

[57:56] city facilities. Our goal is to ensure that we maintain our facilities properly while also providing

[58:01] accessible options for our community members. The new fee structure is designed to balance

[58:07] affordability for nonprofits with cost recovery for the city.

[58:14] Under the new fee structure,

[58:16] Non-profits and community-based groups will pay a one-time registration fee of $10, allowing

[58:21] them to schedule events at the Senior Center and Community Room, booking times will be available

[58:27] Monday through Thursday from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and on Fridays from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. excluding

[58:34] 5 p.m. to 10 p.m. on Fridays, as well as all day Saturday and Sunday. If organizations wish to

[58:42] events outside of these times, they will incur a fee based on resident rates to ensure fair access to our community members.

[58:53] In addition to the fee registration fee, we're introducing a cleaning fee of $32 per hour

[59:01] for events held in our indoor facilities, including park shelters with a maximum charge of two hours.

[59:07] staff call-out fee of $50 per hour with a minimum of two hours is intended for situations

[59:14] where the individual who reserve the facility needs assistance or in-case of emergency,

[59:20] covering the cost of our on-call maintenance personnel.

[59:26] The revised agreement includes a price-seemed structure specifically for teams wishing to reserve

[59:32] our parks.

[59:33] They can schedule up to 32 hours of field use within the same fiscal year for flat fee of $800,

[59:39] which includes our three excludes, our three local teams as they have their own fee structure.

[59:46] Detailed on the facility rental fee sheet.

[59:50] However, if these local teams schedule practices outside of their season,

[59:54] they'll be charged $50 per hour instead of their per player fee.

[59:58] Additionally, the city may be...

[1:00:00] And as your retain the authority to grant exceptions based on unique circumstances or community needs.

[1:00:07] Adoption of the revised facility use agreement structure is to establish our recommendation, excuse me, is the adoption of the revised facility use agreement,

[1:00:16] fee structure to establish clear guidelines for facility users and share the city recovers its costs and maintains accessibility for local nonprofits, community groups and sports related organizations.

[1:00:28] And I'm open to any questions.

[1:00:35] Okay, Councillor Allen, go ahead.

[1:00:38] Thanks, Mayor.

[1:00:39] Thanks, Mr. Tillman.

[1:00:40] I'd like to ask you to go back to the booking

[1:00:43] Times, please.

[1:00:45] At the beginning.

[1:00:48] And the second bullet comment,

[1:00:50] it's not quite clear to me about the hours of operation

[1:00:54] when it's going to be open and who it's open to.

[1:00:57] Will the facility be available Friday evening until 10 p.m.

[1:01:01] That's correct.

[1:01:04] So what we're saying is it's not available.

[1:01:08] It's only available to residents.

[1:01:10] Is that what you're saying it from Friday evening and Saturday and Sunday?

[1:01:14] That's correct.

[1:01:15] We're leaving those evening times on the weekends.

[1:01:19] So Friday evening and then Saturday and Sunday

[1:01:22] to give that opportunity to our residents

[1:01:24] to be able to rent the facilities.

[1:01:26] But like a private event, maybe or something like that.

[1:01:28] That's correct.

[1:01:28] But these organizations can book those times as well,

[1:01:32] but it will be at the residence rate.

[1:01:36] Okay, so it would be available to the sports team

[1:01:40] or whatever on those times.

[1:01:42] Okay, I got you.

[1:01:43] I just want to make sure I answer that.

[1:01:45] Because thanks.

[1:01:47] Any other questions?

[1:01:50] I do want to clarify the one bullet point.

[1:01:53] This is a one time fee.

[1:01:55] That would be an annual one time, one time annual fee.

[1:01:58] That's correct.

[1:01:59] not a one-time in the history of the University.

[1:02:04] They're not like to forever stamps.

[1:02:06] It's not a forever stamp, though.

[1:02:09] Do any public comment?

[1:02:11] No, sir.

[1:02:12] Okay, no public comment.

[1:02:14] And of course, no deliberation.

[1:02:15] Anybody have anything you want to say?

[1:02:19] Do you have a motion for this?

[1:02:22] So moved.

[1:02:23] I'm a second.

[1:02:25] Second.

[1:02:26] We have a motion a second, please vote.

[1:02:30] Motion passes unanimously.

[1:02:34] Thank you, Miss Philan.

[1:02:37] Item nine introduction.

[1:02:38] First, read an ordinance.

[1:02:39] Number 360.

[1:02:40] Your bill.

[1:02:41] There is charters.

[1:02:43] Chapters of the city of Grantters.

[1:02:44] The principal called.

[1:02:45] I'm sorry.

[1:02:51] Now, let's see if I hear the city attorney 50 dollars an hour, too.

[1:02:54] Is that

[1:02:57] one time fee, right?

[1:02:58] One fine.

[1:03:01] All right.

[1:03:01] Good evening, Mayor.

[1:03:02] City Council.

[1:03:02] I'll be presenting on this first item.

[1:03:04] This item seeks to amend the municipal code by repealing various chapters that are effectively

[1:03:10] out of date.

[1:03:13] This supports council goal number five to engage in proactive communication by providing current

[1:03:18] information regarding the city's policies.

[1:03:23] So staff has gone through the municipal code.

[1:03:26] It's first round and there will be future rounds, which city manager will speak to in a bit.

[1:03:30] But we identified several chapters and sections that are out of date, no longer consistent with the city.

[1:03:41] Structure of the city lifestyle at this point, many of these code sections were brought in when we incorporated many years ago,

[1:03:52] and so they were brought in from the county. So they were applicable back then,

[1:03:55] but they may no longer be applicable today.

[1:03:58] So that's just an overview right there on the screen.

[1:04:02] So we have also identified in addition to chapters

[1:04:06] in the longer being relevant.

[1:04:08] Some have been superseded by federal or state law.

[1:04:14] So I'll give you an overview of some of the chapters.

[1:04:17] Chapter 2.4, training of law enforcement officers.

[1:04:20] You know, provides regulations for training.

[1:04:23] Well, we contract with the sheriffs for their sure personnel.

[1:04:26] It is a responsibility of the sheriffs to do the training of their employees not the city that is the function of an independent contractor system that we have with this county sheriffs

[1:04:39] So they would handle the training that chapter again would no longer be applicable. If we were to have our own police department on the road and that would maybe be something we can consider

[1:04:47] But whether we put in the code that would be a whole different monster

[1:04:51] So this would be one revision that we're making to remove this chapter

[1:04:56] Some other chapters, chapter 2.2.0, the community redevelopment agency, as you know, the city did have a redevelopment agency at one point, but the state repealed that law and made all the community redevelopment agencies go away across the state and we dissolved ours a few years back.

[1:05:17] So this statute and this chapter no longer applies chapter 2.28 an emergency organization formed a disaster

[1:05:25] Council in case of emergencies we do have authority elsewhere that would address that matter

[1:05:32] and specifically the federal emergency management agency requires the city to follow the incident command center.

[1:05:40] Some other chapters regarding various animals, apiaries, hogs, commercial canals, livestock,

[1:05:50] riding academies, these were more consistent with the pure rural community, we are now

[1:05:56] more of an urbanized environment.

[1:05:58] So many of these chapters are no longer applicable.

[1:06:02] I will note that some of these are also addressed in the zoning code as well and so staff will

[1:06:08] going through the zoning code to also make that consistent. Several of these items would be

[1:06:14] subject to a conditional use permit where we could impose specific conditions on the use

[1:06:20] depending on the size of the property in the nature of the property location. We could

[1:06:24] be able to regulate the impacts that way versus straight provisions in our code that mandate items

[1:06:30] that we at this point don't need.

[1:06:35] Some other chapters, 8.16 regarding aircraft takeoff

[1:06:39] landings. We do not have an airport. So no longer needed regulation of ambulances. Again,

[1:06:47] that would be a matter that we do not regulate as a different agency abandoned orchards.

[1:06:55] Again, managing consequences of abandoned neglected orchards. Again, I'm not aware of any

[1:07:00] orchards and staff, isn't aware of any either. So each of these would be relevant to take

[1:07:07] out of the code.

[1:07:10] Chapter 926 sent that a drug sale and use prohibited, again, now understand a federal law.

[1:07:17] Those that matters are regulated through state of federal law versus the city having different

[1:07:22] cities regulate it on the case by case based city by city basis.

[1:07:26] That is no longer the case.

[1:07:28] The state and federal governments will regulate those issues.

[1:07:33] So that provides a summary of what the ordinance would do.

[1:07:36] I'll turn it over to the city manager to provide some additional information on where staff will be going next.

[1:07:45] Thank you, Mr. City Attorney.

[1:07:48] So just especially in the animal component, because these are ordinances that were enacted for commercial agricultural purposes,

[1:07:56] which, you know, we were a rural community and that was, those are important things to address.

[1:08:01] But we're still not a truly urban community.

[1:08:04] So there are, and as Adrian brought up, there are still some activities that would make sense with the CUP.

[1:08:13] Maybe there is somebody that's a private dog breeder, maybe not writing a huge kennel operation.

[1:08:19] I've had some questions about hobbyists that want to keep a, you know, we don't allow a chicken.

[1:08:25] I want to keep a chicken. I want to keep a money rabbit.

[1:08:27] And if you have three acres and you want to have a horse, it probably doesn't impinge on your neighbors.

[1:08:34] So as we go forward, we'll bring back both the animal control coordinates in this.

[1:08:40] I'm looking at some zoning pieces so that we can address these hobbyist activities.

[1:08:46] I mean, my master, my master is bigger than your goat. I can have my master if you can't have a goat.

[1:08:52] So, those type of things will have to find some balances at other communities typically do,

[1:08:57] you know, for so many square feet, you can have this kind of animal or for a lot

[1:09:01] size, you can have or distances from other residents, so we'll define that as we go forward.

[1:09:06] But we really wanted to take out kind of these really redundant, you know, commercial agricultural

[1:09:12] things and we want to put back things that still keep this as a, you know, kind of the

[1:09:22] But we're not a big city and we're still a small community and we want to retain that flavor, especially in some of our large lot areas. So thank you.

[1:09:31] So with that, I will note that for the record that the this ordinance is exempt from sequence is just purely administrative updates to our code and the recommendation would be to introduce the ordinance by

[1:09:47] from the city attorney to read the title of the ordinance,

[1:09:50] we're reading of, and introduce the ordinance.

[1:09:53] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:09:54] Thank you.

[1:09:55] Do we have a public comment on this?

[1:09:58] No, sir.

[1:10:00] No, Council, have any questions?

[1:10:06] What's that?

[1:10:07] I think Mayor Proton.

[1:10:09] Just a quick question.

[1:10:10] Isn't this just a hangover from the county?

[1:10:12] Yeah.

[1:10:13] Yes, I agree.

[1:10:13] In other words, they basically took the county code and blueprinted it

[1:10:18] and said, OK, this is now going to be

[1:10:20] city of Granterra, some will identity as necessary, and then it just never happened.

[1:10:26] Correct.

[1:10:26] You basically county kept making amendments to whatever they were doing, but we just got

[1:10:31] a dropped on our table, and I still got a copy of this thing, and yes, that's never

[1:10:37] revised or updated.

[1:10:39] So I appreciate all your work in relation to this, and I think it's a high time that we

[1:10:44] clean up our mess.

[1:10:46] So thank you.

[1:10:47] And as a quick follow-up, you're absolutely correct, I mean,

[1:10:49] And my other two cities that I work with, they have the exact same situation and we're in the process of updating those codes as well, so that is consistent.

[1:11:00] Any other questions or comments? Council.

[1:11:03] No, could we have a motion?

[1:11:10] I'll make a motion on the second.

[1:11:12] First, second city attorney, Warner.

[1:11:15] Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:11:16] The title of the ordinance is follows an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Tares, California.

[1:11:23] Repealing Chapter 2.20 Community Redevelopment Agency Chapter 2.28 Emergency Organization.

[1:11:32] Chapter 2.40 Training of Law Enforcement Officers of Title 2 Administration and Personnel.

[1:11:39] Chapter 6.16 Hogs.

[1:11:41] Chapter 6.24 livestock.

[1:11:43] Chapter 6.12 APARIES, Chapter 6.2, Commercial canals, and Chapter 6.28,

[1:11:52] Riding Academies of Title VI, Animals, Chapter 8.16, Aircraft takeoff in landings,

[1:11:59] Chapter 8.24, ambulances, and Chapter 8.72, abandoned orchards of Title 8, Health and Safety,

[1:12:07] and chapter 9.26, synthetic drugs,

[1:12:11] sale and use prohibited of Title IX,

[1:12:15] public peace, morals and welfare,

[1:12:17] of the Grand Terrorist Municipal Code,

[1:12:19] to streamline the municipal code

[1:12:20] and remove provisions no longer necessary.

[1:12:23] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:12:25] Thank you, have a first and a second, please vote.

[1:12:30] Motion passes unanimously.

[1:12:33] Thank you.

[1:12:34] Item 9 introduction of first reading ordinance number 360,

[1:12:37] repeal various chapters of the city grand terrace municipal code.

[1:12:43] That's the one we just did.

[1:12:45] So we're going to the next one.

[1:12:46] I'm sorry.

[1:12:47] No worries.

[1:12:49] I thought I looked familiar.

[1:12:51] I could do it again.

[1:12:52] Yeah, I'm going to do it again.

[1:12:53] Is it a free one?

[1:12:55] Yes.

[1:12:56] All right.

[1:12:57] Item 10.

[1:12:59] Introduction of First Reordance.

[1:13:00] Number 361 adds section 9.05.040.

[1:13:05] Seasors of Evidence of Session, excuse me, 9.05.050, and Palment to the Grantears Municipal Code.

[1:13:15] Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:13:16] And for this item, I'm going to invite my colleague, Keo, to present as she has worked on the staff report and preparing the ordinance.

[1:13:24] So I thought I'd bring her to introduce you to her and have a present.

[1:13:35] Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

[1:13:36] My name, as Adrian mentioned, is GAO and I am an associate attorney at the State Attorney's Office,

[1:13:43] Alisharan Winder.

[1:13:45] The first item that I will be presenting tonight is an ordinance adding two sections,

[1:13:51] a seizure of evidence and impelment to the existing regulations for sidewalk vendors in chapter 9.05.

[1:14:00] So, this item supports City Council goal number two, maintain public safety as it provides guidance

[1:14:06] on enforcement of unlicensed and permitted sidewalk vendors, which endangers the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and visitors of the city.

[1:14:19] The existing sidewalk vendor ordinance was adopted as an urgency ordinance on December 11, 2018, in response to Senate bill number 946,

[1:14:28] which preempted local governments from prohibiting sidewalk vendors and limiting the scope of local regulation.

[1:14:34] The ordinance was also introduced as a regular ordinance in the same meeting.

[1:14:39] Then on January 1st, 2019, SB 946 went into effect.

[1:14:44] And on January 8th, 2019, the regular ordinance was adopted.

[1:14:53] The current regulations for sidewalk vendors provides operational requirements,

[1:14:57] such as permitting and license.

[1:15:00] Rear requirements, time limitations, prohibiting unattended stands and storage stands overnight on public property, such as street sidewalks or parks, and requirements for disposal of trash, prohibiting any additional equipment, such as a table, which has not been described in the application.

[1:15:18] Distance requirements, such as 50 feet from a fire hydrant or 25 feet from a transit stop and location restrictions, such as prohibiting operations on streets without sidewalks.

[1:15:31] Any violation of these regulations are punishable by an increasing amount of administrative fines.

[1:15:37] So violations of regulations other than failure to possess a valid permit would incur fines starting with a hundred dollars

[1:15:46] for the first violation, $200 for the second, $500 for the third, and then,

[1:15:52] a decision of sidewalk spending permit for the term of that permit at the fourth

[1:15:56] violation.

[1:15:57] Violations for regulations for vending without a license or permit would encourage

[1:16:01] fine-starting that are a little bit higher at $250 for the first violation, $500

[1:16:07] for the second, and then an amount not exceeding at $1,000 for each additional violation

[1:16:13] within one year of the first violation.

[1:16:18] Since the passage of the City sidewalk bending regulations, there have been concerns related

[1:16:23] to unlicensed and unpermitted sidewalk vendors operating on the public right of way in violation

[1:16:30] of the City's municipal code. These violations raise health, safety, and welfare concerns

[1:16:36] and also create unfair competition for lawful operations. As such, staff and the City Attorney's

[1:16:42] Office believe updated enforcement regulations are necessary in order for the City to

[1:16:47] compliance with its side-walk vendor regulations.

[1:16:53] So the proposed ordinance addresses these concerns by authorizing two methods of enforcement.

[1:16:58] The first method would be the addition of Section 9.05.040, which allows the seizure of evidence.

[1:17:07] Essentially, the section would authorize the seizure of side-walk vendors' items that serve as evidence of a crime or is booked as property after an arrest of a side-walk vendor.

[1:17:16] for violation of any local state or federal laws,

[1:17:21] excluding the sidewalk bending chapter itself.

[1:17:24] This exclusion is aligned with state law,

[1:17:26] which prohibits criminal penalties

[1:17:28] for violations of sidewalk bending regulations.

[1:17:32] The CS items would then be stored in process

[1:17:34] in accordance with the San Bernardino Sheriff's

[1:17:37] Department's procedures.

[1:17:41] The second method of enforcement

[1:17:43] would be, impelment of sidewalk benders items,

[1:17:45] pursuant to California Civil Code, Section 2080.10, and the California Health and Safety Code

[1:17:53] Section 114393.

[1:17:57] Empowerment under the section would be allowed when food is sold without a valid San Bernardino

[1:18:02] County Health Department permit, items are unattended or abandoned, there is no valid

[1:18:08] applicable permit and business license when the sidewalk vendor violates a sidewalk

[1:18:14] offending regulation and then fails to provide ID when the sidewalk vendor fails to remove items

[1:18:20] after being instructed to do so by the city.

[1:18:23] When there is an obstruction of free movement of pedestrians and violations of the Americans

[1:18:28] with disabilities act, when there is a sale of illegal merchandise, when there is an imminent

[1:18:33] and substantial danger or environmental hazard, and then when there is an issuance of three

[1:18:39] or more administrative citations for violations.

[1:18:44] If and when a sidewalk vendors items are impounded, the city will be authorized to dispose of

[1:18:50] perishable items or items that cannot be safely stored.

[1:18:54] The city will be required to store all other items for 30 days if the payment was pursuant

[1:18:59] to section 114393 of the California Health and Safety Code or 60 days if the payment was pursuant

[1:19:07] to section 2080.10 of the California Civil Code.

[1:19:12] The city will be required to provide the person from whom the items are taken, with a receipt and instructions for retrieval of the items.

[1:19:20] The receipt instructions will be given at the time the city official obtained the items or mailed the next business day by first class mail.

[1:19:28] As the city cannot otherwise ascertain the owner, the city manager does a knee shall make reasonable efforts to identify the owner and then shall mail by first class mail.

[1:19:38] I receive an instructions for retrieval of the items.

[1:19:41] There are see and instructions will notify the owner

[1:19:43] that the items must be claimed within the applicable 30

[1:19:47] or 60 days.

[1:19:49] In response, the owner may either retrieve the items,

[1:19:52] authorize and writing another person to retrieve the items,

[1:19:55] or notify the city and writing that they are unable

[1:19:58] to retrieve the items because they are in custody

[1:20:01] and request that the city holds the items.

[1:20:04] In that case, the city may hold the items

[1:20:06] for 10 additional months.

[1:20:09] To retrieve items, the owner will be required to pay an impound fee, which the council may

[1:20:14] adopt by resolution.

[1:20:16] This fee is to reflect the city's personnel, enforcement, investigation, storage, disposal,

[1:20:22] and impound costs.

[1:20:24] The owner may also appeal the impoundment by requesting an administrative hearing.

[1:20:29] The owner will have the right to appeal within 15 calendar days after notice of the action

[1:20:34] or 15 calendar days after the empowerment decision has been mailed to their address.

[1:20:40] The owner must file the written appeal with an appeal fee, as said by resolution of the

[1:20:44] Council, and then the appeal shall be scheduled before hearing officer designated by the

[1:20:49] city manager within 60 days of filing and payment.

[1:20:53] The hearing officer will then review the record and hear the testimony of the appellant.

[1:20:58] After hearing the hearing officer will issue a written decision and their decision shall

[1:21:03] final. If them, Parliament decision is reversed, them pounded items shall be returned, and the

[1:21:10] PL-Fee will be paid back to the Parliament with them 15 business days. If the Parliament decision

[1:21:15] is upheld, a Parliament may retrieve their impounded items in accordance with the typical procedures

[1:21:21] to retrieve these items as previously discussed.

[1:21:30] Staff is recommending that council direct the

[1:21:32] city attorney to read by title only and introduce this proposed ordinance which provides additional

[1:21:37] enforcement mechanisms for violation of sidewalk vendor regulations to protect public health

[1:21:42] safety and welfare.

[1:21:44] Thank you.

[1:21:45] Thank you.

[1:21:46] Councilman Henderson, you have a question.

[1:21:48] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:21:50] I'm not sure I believe it may be under an empowerment, but another action that the city can take.

[1:21:57] You mentioned that if there were three administrative citations of certain action, the enforcement

[1:22:03] action would follow.

[1:22:05] Yes.

[1:22:05] Is that three citations in the same area or just three separate and could be distinct citations?

[1:22:16] I believe there are three separate distinct citations, not tied to the actual location of the citation.

[1:22:22] Okay. Thank you.

[1:22:29] It's one of the questions, I'd like a clarification on this storage setup.

[1:22:35] If I can upend with a tractor, I'll let you homeless people, and then turn around and

[1:22:42] disheart the majority of their materials, why am I storing somebody's break in the law?

[1:22:51] I don't get it.

[1:22:52] I can see a reasonable amount of time applied to that, the idea that they can recover some

[1:22:59] of their articles.

[1:23:00] I mean, obviously they're making their living at that.

[1:23:02] That makes sense, but when they're, you know, repeat offenders, and they go in and do the same

[1:23:09] thing time after times just sounds like a circle, and then to be able to recover their articles

[1:23:17] In that, he says, some kind of a civil liberties union thing that's attached to this, because

[1:23:25] I know there's some activity that way, so far as the homeless dispersion, but I don't understand

[1:23:31] why we should go through the pains and torture of lawbreakers.

[1:23:35] I don't get it.

[1:23:37] Well, at this time, this ordinance is based on, at least, the impoundment section is based

[1:23:45] on the California Health and Safety Code, Section 114-393 and the California Civil Code, Section

[1:23:52] 208-0.10, and I believe that 30 days and the 60 days will flip to actually the 60 days

[1:23:59] and the 30 days respectively come from those state.

[1:24:03] So once again, the state of California steps in and puts a boot in our face and makes us

[1:24:08] do something but doesn't pay for it.

[1:24:12] There we go.

[1:24:15] And Mr. Mayor, if I may, I would add two points.

[1:24:18] Number one is that for the homeless personal property,

[1:24:24] I'm a public right away, that's left there.

[1:24:27] Our recommendation to our clients has always been that if we are

[1:24:31] going to remove them, we still provide notice and do process

[1:24:35] of where their belongings will be stored,

[1:24:38] and we store them for a period of time,

[1:24:41] so that they have the ability to come and recover them.

[1:24:43] That has been a due process requirement, you know, and broader is just a pure issue of due process.

[1:24:51] You know, these individuals like them are not, you know, positive or negative.

[1:24:56] The fact of the matter is that if they have a cart or they have money invested in it,

[1:25:02] at a due process, we have an obligation to at least impound it, find it,

[1:25:07] but give them the opportunity to come back, get it, we have to reasonably store it.

[1:25:11] So it's more of a due process issue.

[1:25:13] Can we limit it to 10 days, rather than 30?

[1:25:18] My thought would be, I'd stay consistent with the state law

[1:25:22] on that one, and I'm not going to do it.

[1:25:25] So, and also with the 10-day, the shorter period,

[1:25:28] we also have to provide them ample notice

[1:25:30] so that they have the ability to appeal

[1:25:34] and the 10-day notice may be too short.

[1:25:37] But I would recommend sticking with the state law on that one.

[1:25:39] Thank you.

[1:25:44] Just a question regarding empowerment and storage of

[1:25:49] The statement in the presentation is that that will be taken care of by our sheriff's department.

[1:25:54] Is that correct?

[1:25:55] That's for the seizure of evidence.

[1:25:57] The empowerment would be city and city officials.

[1:26:02] Thank you.

[1:26:02] If it's a car, we probably call a tow company.

[1:26:05] Okay.

[1:26:06] And they can pay the impound in the tow fees just like regular car.

[1:26:10] Thank you.

[1:26:11] Councillor Allen, you had a question?

[1:26:16] I have a question,

[1:26:19] this city manager, how many people do we have right now that's legally

[1:26:23] can be a street vendor?

[1:26:27] What?

[1:26:31] Do we have a city hall, I know we have to get the county health, and all that, do we have

[1:26:35] a process that they can, the city hall, a checklist, and how to direct them to do the proper

[1:26:40] procedure?

[1:26:41] Yes, we do.

[1:26:42] and we have a, where actually we're finished up developing a checklist when we run across

[1:26:47] them down the street in English and Spanish that says here is how you, not just get out

[1:26:52] of here, we've been done in the past, but also here is how you get yourself right and

[1:26:58] that follow those procedures.

[1:26:59] So it's proper procedures within the laws available for them, it's up to them to do it.

[1:27:06] Then are you other questions?

[1:27:09] Okay.

[1:27:09] Now we have an open to the public to allow public testimony in favor, do we have any public comment?

[1:27:14] No sir.

[1:27:15] This young man right here, he doesn't really, you had a question.

[1:27:19] I'm going to let you ask a question, but you'll fill out the form later.

[1:27:22] Because you're new here, I'm giving you a break.

[1:27:25] You're good?

[1:27:27] All right, so we'll go ahead and close public comment and council deliberate.

[1:27:35] Do you have a motion for this or do you guys want to?

[1:27:38] I'll make a motion to pass to staff recommendation.

[1:27:44] Okay, do I have a second?

[1:27:48] Okay.

[1:27:48] The motion's same for a read.

[1:27:49] Do you want to see it?

[1:27:52] I will do the reading.

[1:27:54] The title of the ordinance is as follows.

[1:27:57] An ordinance of the city council of the city of Grant Harris, California.

[1:28:01] Adding section 9.05.040.

[1:28:04] Seasure of Evidence and Section 9.050.050.050 impoundment to the Grand Terrorist Municipal

[1:28:11] Code to provide additional enforcement mechanisms for violation of sidewalk vendor regulations

[1:28:16] in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare.

[1:28:21] Thank you.

[1:28:22] Have a motion and a second, please vote.

[1:28:27] Motion passes unanimously.

[1:28:28] Okay, item 11, introduction first, we in ordinance number 363 to add chapter 9.36, so the title 9 of the Grand Tourism Municipal Code.

[1:28:40] The second item I will be presenting on tonight is an ordinance to prohibit any un-sanctioned government sponsored relocation of un-house persons into the city.

[1:28:51] This item supports City Council goal number one, ensure our fiscal viability as an

[1:28:57] implements policies to retain city resources for homelessness related issues, and it

[1:29:02] also supports school number five, engage in proactive communication as an implements

[1:29:07] policies and provisions against government-sponsored relocation of unhoused persons into

[1:29:12] the city jurisdiction.

[1:29:16] So this ordinance originates from an incident that occurred in the

[1:29:23] Hanford transferred a disabled unhoused individual

[1:29:27] with a truck full of their possessions from the city of Hanford

[1:29:30] to a homeless shelter parking lot in Santa Cruz.

[1:29:33] These officers had not received authorization

[1:29:35] for this drop-off from either the shelter operator

[1:29:38] or Santa Cruz staff.

[1:29:41] And while this person, a person do,

[1:29:43] was ultimately accepted into the shelter,

[1:29:46] it was discovered that they had no connection

[1:29:49] to the city of Santa Cruz.

[1:29:50] And this person, though, had never been to Santa Cruz, had no friends or family in the area,

[1:29:56] and never requested to be transported to the shelter.

[1:30:00] And Santa Cruz. In response to this incident, the city of Santa Cruz introduced an ordinance to prohibit any unsenctioned

[1:30:09] government-sponsored transportation of un-house persons into the jurisdiction. There was also a concern that surrounding cities and other jurisdictions may engage in this type of

[1:30:20] stepped again in light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in City of Grand

[1:30:24] Tass, V. Johnson, which overruled the Ninth Circuit's precedence and found that

[1:30:29] laws regulating camping did not violate the cruel and unusual punishments clause

[1:30:33] of the 8th Amendment. Following this decision, Governor Gavin Newsom also issued an executive

[1:30:38] order that provided guidance on the removal of homeless encampments on state properties

[1:30:43] and encouraged cities and counties to do the same. So while the city has had no history of

[1:30:49] incidents similar to the city of Santa Cruz, and light of this recent shift in regulating

[1:30:54] campsites or in-campments, city staff and the city attorneys office believe the city may

[1:30:59] also benefit from a similar ordinance, and I will also discuss some more positive impacts

[1:31:05] associated with this ordinance in the next few slides.

[1:31:10] So the proposed ordinance itself prohibits law enforcement officers, agents, or employees

[1:31:15] of a county city, or other governmental entity, from transporting and dropping off an

[1:31:20] individual on public property or private property that is accessible to the public within the city of grand terrace of the individual lacks a fixed regular and adequate night time residents.

[1:31:31] A person will be found to lack a fixed regular and adequate night time residents if that person has a primary night time residents that is on public property or private property not meant for habitation.

[1:31:45] Or lives in a publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living arrangements such as congregate shelters or transitional housing.

[1:31:55] Or is exiting an institution where they have resided for 90 days or less and resided in an emergency shelter or placed not meant for habitation immediately before entering that institution.

[1:32:08] Acceptions will be provided for transporting a person to be treated at a hospital or other medical facility.

[1:32:16] Transporting a person to reside at a facility such as shelter temporary housing or permanent housing.

[1:32:23] When law enforcement officer agent or employee of the government to agency has verified that the individual being transported has already been accepted to reside at the facility.

[1:32:34] Another exception for transporting a person to attend a verified appointment with a governmental or non-profit social service provider

[1:32:42] and exception for any transportation or drop-off activities undertaken by the city itself

[1:32:48] or the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department on behalf of the city within the city

[1:32:53] and lastly an exception for operations of a governmental provider of public transportation such as Omnitrans

[1:33:01] Any violation of this regulation shall be a misdemeanor.

[1:33:10] So some positive impacts related to this ordinance include the preservation of homelessness

[1:33:15] related resources.

[1:33:16] The city has traditionally had a lower unhoused population compared to other cities in San

[1:33:21] Bernadino County and as a result it lacks the resources to provide shelter and services

[1:33:26] to any unhoused individual that has dropped off in the city.

[1:33:29] This ordinance also encourages the appropriate government agencies to provide shelter, care,

[1:33:35] outreach, and other resources to the unhoused population within their own jurisdiction.

[1:33:40] And it also prevents government agencies from engaging in cruel and humane treatment

[1:33:45] of unilaterally relocating unhoused persons.

[1:33:52] Staff is recommending that council direct the city attorney to read by title only and introduce

[1:33:57] this proposed ordinance for hibiting any un-sanctioned government sponsored relocation of

[1:34:02] un-house persons into the city.

[1:34:04] Thank you.

[1:34:06] Thank you.

[1:34:08] Councillor any questions?

[1:34:10] Councillor Mellon.

[1:34:14] Thank you for that report.

[1:34:16] You mentioned that I wanted these slides that showed that it's stated that the transporting

[1:34:23] of an individual dotted on it would result in a misdemeanor.

[1:34:28] But I'd like to know what the penalty would be.

[1:34:34] And if it's a government-sponsored agent or person,

[1:34:37] like you're referring to a police officer,

[1:34:40] I mean, is our city manager or our mayor,

[1:34:44] somebody going to charge them with a misdemeanor for doing that?

[1:34:46] And what would the penalty be?

[1:34:49] It is admittedly a bit of a tricky penalty,

[1:34:53] because this is a novel ordinance.

[1:34:57] It's based on the one drafted by city of Santa Cruz, and the main intent beneath this ordinance is to deter any further actions or preempt actions in which other jurisdictions would attempt to essentially remove and transport and relocate their unhoused population into other jurisdictions.

[1:35:22] And so, the hope behind this ordinance is that it will serve as a deterrence.

[1:35:29] The misdemeanor language is taken straight from the City of Santa Cruz's violation.

[1:35:36] And so, our hope is that in enacting this ordinance, if this is a council that chooses to do so,

[1:35:45] It will serve as more of a deterrent and preempt this type of action from other jurisdictions nearby.

[1:35:55] Okay, thank you for that. I think our most laws and ordinances designed to try to deter the criminal action or something.

[1:36:03] So I appreciate that.

[1:36:05] I did want to come up from a practical standpoint.

[1:36:09] I wouldn't have a problem at all dropping a ticket on some of the city manager and mayors.

[1:36:13] I can dig that.

[1:36:16] Especially for doing something like that.

[1:36:18] It may not have an impact.

[1:36:21] They're not going to go to jail in handcuffs.

[1:36:23] But it would certainly send a very loud public message that these,

[1:36:27] this is not an acceptable behavior.

[1:36:31] So it'd be great to know since we're copying Santa Cruz,

[1:36:33] what Santa Cruz penalty?

[1:36:35] Well, I'll know what our penalty is a little bit more,

[1:36:38] specifically.

[1:36:39] So under our code, any person convicted of a misdemeanor

[1:36:42] under the provisions of this code shall be punished

[1:36:44] by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or imprisonment

[1:36:47] for a term not exceeding six months,

[1:36:51] or both,

[1:36:51] or by both such fine and imprisonment.

[1:36:54] So that would be left to the court.

[1:36:55] The tricky thing here is it would be the publication C.

[1:36:59] That would be the defendant on the misdemeanor.

[1:37:02] So that is tricky.

[1:37:04] And as G pointed out, this is kind of cutting ed,

[1:37:07] this is putting something new out there.

[1:37:10] So there's always risk when you put something together like this.

[1:37:13] But that being said, it is intended to serve as a deterrent

[1:37:17] because many years ago many cities that had police departments

[1:37:21] did drop off homeless in other jurisdictions.

[1:37:25] And so the whole pair is that maybe with this ordinance,

[1:37:29] we would be able to deter that.

[1:37:32] Thanks for that.

[1:37:35] So if we have a homeless person and they're from Chino and all identification is from Chino I mean I want to go back to Chino

[1:37:48] How do we send them back to Chino?

[1:37:51] I mean do we get to the senior bus and take them there?

[1:37:54] I mean I don't know

[1:37:57] Well, this is only regulating government

[1:38:00] as un-sanctioned government actions of relocating un-house people, so this individual would

[1:38:08] be free to move from city to city as they wish the ordinance would not regulate that.

[1:38:15] And if they do fall underneath one of the exceptions where they are moving into a shelter

[1:38:23] in genome or they have an appointment for a health facility in genome, then law enforcement

[1:38:34] would be able to transport this individual underneath that exception.

[1:38:40] All right.

[1:38:42] Just not taking them home to his mom and dad or something.

[1:38:45] I think you hit it, taking them home to.

[1:38:48] And the way it would apply for us is if there's a grand terrace resident who is has a home here in grand terrace, family and people like care for him,

[1:38:59] that is homeless in some other community and they bring him in, that would be within the scope of acceptable, because they're repatriating him.

[1:39:07] But what we don't want is some guy from Fresno showing up here with no connection to the community and no way to have a family or anybody fed for him.

[1:39:16] and Mr. Mayor, if I may, in many other cities, they also work with the county and their service providers to assist in working with that homeless individual to provide services.

[1:39:27] So, example, Wallace House. Now, that's a contract for then to lead the hospital and come over here for mental counseling to just whatever they promised is.

[1:39:46] If they have unhoused people being dropped out there and not out of the scope of what

[1:39:52] they're supposed to be doing, just taking care of unhoused, that's a violation.

[1:39:57] They have been our CUP.

[1:39:59] I mean, if we can see different agencies dropping them off, that's not within the contract.

[1:40:06] If they're coming in for, and they are being accepted into the facility, that's not dropping

[1:40:13] them off.

[1:40:13] If there's just being dropped on the front porch and they have no relationship with the facility, then that's then that's dumping him.

[1:40:23] I would concur with that.

[1:40:25] Sergeant, have you dropped anybody off?

[1:40:29] Yes, sir.

[1:40:31] We're county, so there's different agencies and different places where we could take our on-house, who are contract.

[1:40:41] I know religious organizations have it.

[1:40:44] other places so we have certain contracts because we don't have a homeless facility here so

[1:40:48] you would take them I know we have our you know whole program that they want to get

[1:40:53] programs and go in there so we have the means to do that and we're not in violation when we

[1:40:58] take them to San Bernardino or anything else like that right.

[1:41:02] That's correct also our hope program has you know we have bus passes in that kind of

[1:41:08] situation that you were talking about about getting somebody to Chino where we can't facilitate

[1:41:12] that because we don't want to take a deputy off the streets just to transport somebody

[1:41:16] all the way to China.

[1:41:19] All right.

[1:41:21] Any other questions?

[1:41:23] Do I have any public comment?

[1:41:25] No, sir.

[1:41:27] All right.

[1:41:27] We'll close the public hearing council deliberate.

[1:41:29] Do we have any motions on this?

[1:41:34] I'll make a motion on this.

[1:41:35] Have a recommendation.

[1:41:38] I'll go ahead and second.

[1:41:40] City, turn you on.

[1:41:42] The title of the ordinance is as follows.

[1:41:45] An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California,

[1:41:49] adding chapter 9.36 of Title IX to the Grand Terrace Municipal Code to prohibit any unsanctioned

[1:41:55] government-sponsored relocation of unhoused persons to the City of Grand Terrace.

[1:42:02] Okay, thank you.

[1:42:03] Motion in the second please vote.

[1:42:08] Motion passes unanimously.

[1:42:10] All right.

[1:42:10] Thank you. I don't know 12 introduction. The first reading ordinance number 362 that add chapter 9.32 of the title 9 to the grand terrace municipal code.

[1:42:23] So Adrian bots you to do all the work.

[1:42:25] This is the third and final item that I will be presenting on tonight.

[1:42:30] And this is an ordinance to prohibit unlawful camping and storage of personal property on public property.

[1:42:39] This item supports City Council goal number two, maintain public safety, as campsites and personal

[1:42:45] property stored on public property causes fire risks, environmental degradation, public

[1:42:50] access impediments, and sanitary conditions, and public safety hazards.

[1:42:55] It also supports goal number five, engage in proactive communication, as it provides procedures

[1:43:00] for staff and the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, regarding the removal of

[1:43:05] awful campsites and a unlawfully stored personal property.

[1:43:12] So for some background, legal information prior to the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision

[1:43:17] in the city of Grant's past, V. Johnson, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Martin

[1:43:22] V. City of Boise had found prohibitions against sitting, sleeping, or lying in public

[1:43:27] violated the 8th Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment when the homeless

[1:43:32] individual had no access to alternative shelter.

[1:43:37] On June 28th of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Ninth Circuit in City

[1:43:43] of Grants Pass and found the cruel and unusual punishments clause does not prohibit

[1:43:48] the enforcement of public camping laws. The court found that the City of Grants Passes

[1:43:55] ordnance, which imposed fines with repeat offenses, incurring larger fines, or eventually

[1:44:00] criminal punishment, was not cruel or unusual. The reasoning was that the cruel and unusual

[1:44:06] punishments clause focuses on the method of punishment.

[1:44:09] A government may impose after a criminal conviction,

[1:44:13] not on whether a government may criminalize a particular behavior

[1:44:17] in the first place, or how the government may go

[1:44:19] about securing a conviction for that offense.

[1:44:25] So one of the implications of this decision

[1:44:27] is that municipalities may now pursue enforcement

[1:44:30] of camping prohibitions, regardless of shelter availability.

[1:44:34] However, it is important to note that the holding

[1:44:36] in city of grants passes limited in scope to the cruel and unusual punishments clause.

[1:44:42] There are still other potential claims that may be brought against camping ordinances, including

[1:44:48] the excessive fines clause of the 8th Amendment, the due process clause of the 5th

[1:44:53] and 14th Amendment.

[1:44:55] The 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, and the right

[1:44:58] to travel through the 5th Amendment.

[1:45:01] As such, camping ordinances should avoid blanket bands on camping activities and pose reasonable finds, clearly define and articulate prohibitions and associated penalties, provide notice before removal of campsites and personal property, and properly store those collected property after removal.

[1:45:20] The

[1:45:23] proposed ordinance prohibits camping and storage of personal property on public property

[1:45:27] and provides guidance and enforcement of violations.

[1:45:32] The unlawful camping section prohibits any person from camping, occupying

[1:45:36] camp facilities or using camp paraphernalia or on public or private property.

[1:45:42] Camp or camping means to place pitch or occupy camp facilities to temporarily

[1:45:49] to live temporarily in a camp facility or outdoors to use camp

[1:45:53] paraphernalia in a single location within a city for more than 24 hours.

[1:45:58] Camp facilities include but are not limited to tents, huts, or temporary shelter.

[1:46:04] And camp paraphernalia include but is not limited to bed rules, terpolins,

[1:46:09] pots, beds, sleeping bags, hammocks, or cooking facilities in similar equipment.

[1:46:15] Some exceptions to the camping prohibition is provided for

[1:46:19] special events and lawful use of private property.

[1:46:23] Special events include programs operated by city departments,

[1:46:27] youth or school events, marathons or other sporting events,

[1:46:30] and other scouting activities.

[1:46:33] Lawful use of private property is considered

[1:46:35] activities of a lawful user of private property,

[1:46:38] normally associated with an incidental

[1:46:40] to the authorized use of private property.

[1:46:45] When an individual is in violation of a camping prohibition,

[1:46:48] The city may remove personal property, camp paraphernalia, camp facilities and other property and accordance with the provided procedures.

[1:46:57] First, a notice to vacate must be posted on each tent or structure in a conspicuous matter at least 48 hours before beginning campsite removal.

[1:47:06] The notice should include the posting date and time, the location, the vacate by date and time,

[1:47:14] directions on how to retrieve collected property, and date by which collected property must be

[1:47:20] retrieved, and finally a removal start and end dates. A person who returns to the campsite during

[1:47:26] removal will be allowed to remove their own property from the site, and any personal property

[1:47:31] this individual these behind will be deemed abandoned. Time stamp photographs or videos should

[1:47:38] be taken before during and after removal work has been completed. Personal property that is not

[1:47:44] a hazardous item shall be time stamp photographed and inventoryed. Collective personal property

[1:47:50] shall be stored in a secure location for at least 60 days. items not retrieved after 60 days

[1:47:57] may be deemed abandoned and discarded or recycled.

[1:48:01] Providing this type of advanced notice

[1:48:03] in procedures for safekeeping and property

[1:48:05] could help curb potential procedural due process

[1:48:09] and Fourth Amendment search and seizure challenges.

[1:48:15] Under exigent circumstances, the city may remove personal property

[1:48:19] camp paraphernalia, camp facilities, and other property

[1:48:22] without a prior notice to vacate.

[1:48:25] Instead, the city will be required to post a written notice

[1:48:29] after removal.

[1:48:30] And this notice should include posting data and time, location, directions on how to retrieve

[1:48:36] collective property, and the date by which the collective property must be retrieved.

[1:48:42] Again, timestamp photographs or videos should be taken before during and after removal

[1:48:48] work has been completed.

[1:48:50] Personal property that is not a hazard at hazard is item, should be timestamped in

[1:48:54] a graph and inventoryed and collective personal property should be stored for at least 60 days.

[1:49:02] Excuse me. Yes, exigent circumstances defined? Yes.

[1:49:14] Exigent circumstances means any circumstance

[1:49:16] in which there is an imminent threat to life, health, safety or infrastructure, which must be

[1:49:21] immediately addressed. And that determination is made by city officials. Yes, that's correct. Thank you.

[1:49:29] So, the unlawful storage of personal property section prohibits any person from storing personal property on any public property or any private property without written consent of the owner.

[1:49:41] Personal property means any item having a parent value of $50 or more, or any item that can be reasonably identified as belonging to an individual that has a parent value or utility.

[1:49:52] And this definition of personal property also will apply to the personal property mentioned in the earlier sections.

[1:50:01] When an individual unlawfully stores personal property and violation of the section, the city may remove

[1:50:07] this unlawfully stored personal property in accordance with the provided procedures.

[1:50:12] First, a notice of removal shall be posted on or near the personal property in a conspicuous manner

[1:50:18] at least 24 hours before beginning removal.

[1:50:21] The notice shall include posting date and time, location, a removed by date and time.

[1:50:27] General description of a monthly store personal property,

[1:50:31] directions on how to retrieve the collective property,

[1:50:33] and the data removal.

[1:50:36] Again, in person who claims the personal property during the process of removal,

[1:50:40] shall be allowed to remove their own property from the location.

[1:50:44] Personal property that is not a hazardous item,

[1:50:47] shall be time stamp photographed and inventoryed,

[1:50:50] and the collective property shall be stored for at least 60 days.

[1:50:57] Once again, under exigent circumstances,

[1:50:58] this city may remove unlawfully stored personal property without a notice of removal.

[1:51:04] Instead, the city will be required to post a written notice after removal.

[1:51:08] And this notice should include data and time of removal,

[1:51:11] location, general description of a monthly stored personal property,

[1:51:15] directions on how to retrieve the collected personal property,

[1:51:19] and the date by which the collected property must be retrieved.

[1:51:23] Again, any personal property that is not a hazardous item,

[1:51:26] Shelby timestamp photographed an inventory and the collected personal property shall be stored

[1:51:31] for at least 60 days.

[1:51:38] Violations of these regulations will initially result in a verbal or written warning.

[1:51:43] Enforcement personnel shall make a good faith effort to contact the person in violation and

[1:51:48] provide a reasonable opportunity to cure the violation.

[1:51:52] The warning shall describe the activity consulting of constituting a violation of this chapter,

[1:51:57] The action required to fix the violation and the date and time by which the violation must be cured in order to avoid subsequent violations and penalties.

[1:52:07] A second violation will be an infraction and punishable by a fine not exceeding $50.

[1:52:13] A lower fine amount is imposed than the city's existing penalty provisions, which started at $100, to deter challenges under the excessive fines clause of the eighth amendment.

[1:52:26] Then any violation of this chapter, which would otherwise be an infraction, will be a

[1:52:31] misdemeanor if a person has been convicted of an infraction within one year, immediately

[1:52:36] preceding the date of the first violation. So in other words, if there is a third violation

[1:52:41] within one year of the first violation, it will be considered a misdemeanor.

[1:52:48] Staff is recommending

[1:52:49] that council direct the city attorney to read by title only and introduce this proposed

[1:52:54] ordinance prohibiting unlawful camping and storage of personal property on public property.

[1:52:58] Thank you.

[1:53:00] Thank you.

[1:53:01] Council have any questions?

[1:53:06] That's my hour.

[1:53:10] Thank you for that report.

[1:53:12] And you mentioned I'm earlier on the slides about the 24 hour limit on per location in the city.

[1:53:22] Is that correct?

[1:53:23] Something like that.

[1:53:25] I believe that you are referencing the camp definition, which means the place picture

[1:53:33] occupying facilities, and then to use camp air

[1:53:37] for nearly a single location within the city for more than 24 hours.

[1:53:42] So, do we have something, is there something written in there

[1:53:45] that would prevent the individual from moving from one part to the next every day?

[1:53:51] And just going into like a round robin in all our parks every day?

[1:53:57] No, there isn't necessarily anything that would prevent an individual from doing so.

[1:54:02] Okay. Thank you.

[1:54:07] Excuse me, would that qualify for potentially for three administrative

[1:54:11] citations, affording the opportunity to take more severe action?

[1:54:17] If this individual has caught three separate times, yes.

[1:54:22] Okay, thank you. I want to get a clarification on that, please. So are they forbidden at all

[1:54:31] from camping or forbidden from camping for more than 24 hours?

[1:54:34] They would be under the definition of camp,

[1:54:37] be forbidden for the camping itself, the action,

[1:54:40] itself would be the 24 hour action.

[1:54:44] So they could camp for less than 24 hours,

[1:54:46] legally in our city, is that what you're saying?

[1:54:56] Yes.

[1:54:57] In a different location.

[1:54:59] Each.

[1:55:00] They would not be prevented from moving

[1:55:01] to a different location within the city, yes.

[1:55:06] Are we missing something in this ordinance, then?

[1:55:10] So, the 24-hour requirement was the avenue that we chose when drafting this ordinance because it seems the typical trend in California for cities or at least the cities in the Ninth Circuit is that they will either restrict camping with a time limit or they will restrict camping and then they will allow for by some sort of resolution areas in which camping will be allowed in the city.

[1:55:38] Since the city of Grand Terrace is smaller and the city historically does not have a large

[1:55:45] encampment populations, we opted to draft according to the time limits that are imposed.

[1:55:53] And we feel imposing time limits is advisable instead of doing a blanket ban, because there

[1:56:00] is potential for future challenges, especially under the right to travel.

[1:56:05] And so we want to be a little bit cautious in enforcing any type of blanket bands.

[1:56:13] Oh, what if we tried to, what if we didn't play cautious, tried it hard and then if they slept our hand we'd kind of backed off.

[1:56:23] That is also a possibility.

[1:56:27] Because you understand the scenario I'm imagining can happen here.

[1:56:31] Right. That is also a possibility. The only reason that wouldn't be advisable is that this is still very active in ongoing litigation and we feel very soon there will be additional challenges under the other potential challenges that I mentioned and so in order to avoid that we were hoping to do something that is a little bit more measured.

[1:57:00] Okay. Well, before I term a mic off, I commend both. My command, whoever was responsible for

[1:57:07] thinking ahead, and with this incident, Santa Cruz, and yet, and yet, and us, on board

[1:57:12] of the ordinance, before it ever happens. That's good work. Thanks.

[1:57:17] So, how could we tell they've been there 24 hours?

[1:57:22] That would be just based on monitoring by city staff.

[1:57:25] We will know how many hours they're prior.

[1:57:30] So I think that's correct.

[1:57:34] I think 24 hours may be beneficial because then it could be during staff hours.

[1:57:40] And so if it's eight o'clock one morning and then eight o'clock the next morning,

[1:57:45] there's still at the same location as opposed to maybe if it was a 12 hour violation.

[1:57:50] It would be difficult for staff to work over time and come back at APM.

[1:57:54] And so it would just be based off of monitoring in that sense.

[1:57:59] The same way we do it parked cars.

[1:58:01] I was going to say that.

[1:58:02] We'll drop the homeless.

[1:58:04] We'll drop the tires.

[1:58:06] So we don't.

[1:58:09] We have a no camping ordinance inside of our parks, right?

[1:58:13] We do not allow camping in a parks.

[1:58:15] And the parks are locked at night.

[1:58:18] Except for our two open green spaces.

[1:58:21] Correct.

[1:58:21] But if we have no camping ordinance on that, we could go out to any time.

[1:58:28] Yeah, if they're camping in the park, it's fair game.

[1:58:32] So this is basically people that set up on a sidewalk or a little pocket somewhere.

[1:58:39] And we have a very observant population that is, and thank you to our citizens who are pretty observant and really staying on that,

[1:58:50] we keep the homeless population down. We get them into resources. So I think 24 hours is

[1:58:57] something that's manageable if it's not. We can come back and look at it again. We end up with

[1:59:02] this explosion of guys that are scouting the 24 hour rule. So before we do the first fine and stuff

[1:59:10] we're saying the whole team out there to try to give them resources or you guys can be part of this

[1:59:17] 24 hour, they can see from an operational perspective,

[1:59:22] we would have the hope team join us as we're asking them

[1:59:26] to move along, which is what we do already.

[1:59:29] We're actually taking out a homeless camp tomorrow morning,

[1:59:32] eight o'clock.

[1:59:34] So hope team is going to be out there, guys, be out there.

[1:59:36] We've noticed that we've essentially followed these procedures,

[1:59:40] and this is pretty much codifying what we've been doing

[1:59:44] for a couple of years already.

[1:59:46] Yeah. Okay. Any other questions?

[1:59:53] Oh. Councilman.

[1:59:54] I just want to thank you.

[1:59:56] Just for the work that you've put into it, and thank you for being measured.

[2:00:00] There are approach, because we've seen other areas and other cities who went a lot harder with their restrictions and we saw the injunctions and we saw the influx of the unhoused in their areas that at this point, you know, God be with them and how they address that, but thank you for the work and the thoughtfulness that you put into this.

[2:00:22] Thank you.

[2:00:24] Okay, do we have any public comment?

[2:00:26] Yes, Bobby Forbes.

[2:00:32] Thank you, so I find it a little confusing because I can't quite hear everybody talking about this subject in these ordinances, but I frequent the areas where the homeless are in our community and I watch I take pictures because I want to know who they are and if there is trouble that I can identify and I can report if needed.

[2:00:51] Colton has a group called Swag, a W-A-G that they've just hired for $250,000, I think, a year and they've given them a location to be in.

[2:01:01] They are, I thought it was a non-profit, but apparently it's not.

[2:01:07] And they have the option or opportunity or right, I'm not sure the right word, to go and offer people rides, go to medical, get them DMV, ID cards, and do different things of that to try to help the homeless.

[2:01:20] on the streets. This is for Colton right now. I know that our hope program, I think it's every

[2:01:26] six months, $125,000 a year if I remember right, and I've met different deputies that worked

[2:01:34] that program. I wonder how successful that is and if possibly this group called swag might be better

[2:01:40] to use even if we're allowed to or can investigate that option.

[2:01:48] The group that's underneath the

[2:01:49] I understand they were tagged and told that you're going to clear it out tomorrow maybe, they'll be down there tomorrow.

[2:01:57] I report to the city when I see that activity happening over and over again.

[2:02:02] I'm interacting with Dr. G from Colton. He handles a little downhill area from the Colton Council.

[2:02:08] But it's hard saying that the staff is going to monitor them sleeping somewhere overnight.

[2:02:13] That's just ridiculous. I probably see more on the street than what the staff can.

[2:02:17] because they're up here working.

[2:02:19] Code enforcement can't do it.

[2:02:21] You're not going to hire someone else to go do it.

[2:02:23] So it's going to be up to the community.

[2:02:24] And thank goodness there are people that do watch,

[2:02:27] but I don't know if they report or if they just

[2:02:29] complain on Facebook.

[2:02:31] And those of you who are on Facebook know

[2:02:32] that I'm often giving out people to contact

[2:02:35] when they're complaining on Facebook.

[2:02:38] I try not to give my opinion too often,

[2:02:41] but not that it's all that.

[2:02:43] It's just that I try to be helpful to the staff

[2:02:45] or to the community to know who to contact and so they're just complaining on Facebook.

[2:02:51] And this is long and necessary, but some of it's really ridiculous.

[2:02:56] I guess if you have it in an ordinance, then you can try to enforce it, but I don't see how

[2:03:00] one deputy working per shift all the time can do it.

[2:03:04] So I hope the community will step up and look at this sales tax so that we can get another

[2:03:09] deputy, we can get this little building back here with people being able to see that

[2:03:16] their sheriff's in town so that the word hits the street for the homeless, for the drifters,

[2:03:21] for the people camping, for the ones who are just coming through, don't want to come up

[2:03:24] our road and get off the freeway or come up from down below by Walmart or whatever it is

[2:03:28] that they are coming so that they are causing the problems in our community.

[2:03:31] They go through my neighborhood because I live by the riverbed in the old river tracks.

[2:03:34] So, I, if I didn't say something, again, you wouldn't know I'm trying to pay attention, but

[2:03:42] I find this very confusing and very unenforceable.

[2:03:45] Thank you.

[2:03:46] Thank you, Bob.

[2:03:48] Have you other public comments?

[2:03:49] No, sir.

[2:03:50] Okay.

[2:03:50] Close public hearing.

[2:03:53] Can't say anything else, any other deliberations, questions?

[2:03:58] And our first and the second, make motion to approve staff recommendations.

[2:04:10] Go ahead.

[2:04:11] The title of the ordinance is as follows.

[2:04:14] An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California.

[2:04:18] Adding chapter 9.32 of title 9 to the grand terrace municipal code to prohibit unlawful

[2:04:24] camping and storage of personal property.

[2:04:27] Okay, we have a person's second please vote.

[2:04:32] Motion passes unanimously.

[2:04:35] Alrighty, so we are on

[2:04:41] 13.

[2:04:49] Okay, item 13 community benefit fund application amendment.

[2:04:53] Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[2:04:55] And I just want to say thank you to G for all her hard work on the previous three items.

[2:05:00] Thank you.

[2:05:01] Very good.

[2:05:02] Thank you.

[2:05:03] So this next item follows up on our last city council meeting where we had a community benefit.

[2:05:10] fund proposed, and a question was raised whether or not we should continue to implement our policy

[2:05:19] when religious organizations are gifted, committed benefit funds for a public entity

[2:05:26] public event. And so Councillor Allen had raised a recent Supreme Court case and asked us

[2:05:32] to look into that, so that's what I'm going to be presenting tonight.

[2:05:37] So this item goes to two

[2:05:39] Council goals, number one ensuring our fiscal

[2:05:42] viability through the continuous monitoring of revenue

[2:05:45] receipts and expenditure disbursements against the

[2:05:48] approved budget appropriation and second developing and

[2:05:52] implementing successful partnerships through productive

[2:05:55] collaboration with community groups, youth programs, and

[2:05:58] senior organizations.

[2:06:01] So, you know, first of all, I want to

[2:06:02] think Councilman Brelling for raising this issue. You know, people

[2:06:08] I go to law school to address, look into these constitutional issues, and this is one of those

[2:06:13] where it's kind of an open question, and it's all kind of walk the council through it tonight.

[2:06:19] So, remember for the public, we have a community benefits program, we provide certain funding

[2:06:25] for community events, public events, in a specific case it was through a religious organization

[2:06:32] who was proposing an event and historically we have had a condition about no

[2:06:40] prostalization as part of the funding of the event. And so the question is whether

[2:06:47] we should continue with that policy or should we amend it in some way. So there's

[2:06:52] three bodies of law that come into play. And so usually one body of laws vague enough

[2:07:00] But now we have three.

[2:07:02] The first one is the establishment clause in the United States Constitution.

[2:07:07] The emphasis here is separation of church and state, and which

[2:07:12] pro-stabilization or sponsorship of religion with public funds is generally

[2:07:16] prohibited.

[2:07:18] I will read a statement from the Supreme Court in that case that I'll be

[2:07:25] referencing a little bit further.

[2:07:26] But he said that the first amendments free exercise and establishment clauses were intended to strike a balance on the interaction between government and religion, but the ultimate goal of avoiding religious strife in a country that now has over 100 different religions.

[2:07:44] And when you get to the pre-exercise, that is also a constitutional right of a religious

[2:07:50] entity, religious entities, and individual persons right to free exercise or religion under

[2:07:56] the constitution, meaning they have the right to exercise whatever religion they choose.

[2:08:02] The third item is under California Constitutional Law and Gift of Public Funds that any

[2:08:08] public funds expended by a public agency survey public purpose and not a private purpose of a specific entity.

[2:08:21] And so what we looked at are some various options.

[2:08:25] One is continuing with the no-prostylization as a condition of approval.

[2:08:31] That would be consistent with the establishment clause and the gift of public funds clause,

[2:08:35] but based on the Supreme Court case that the Council Member Allen had pointed out, it could

[2:08:39] some questions and as background on that case, it's not directly on point but it raises some

[2:08:46] interesting questions. In that case it was a school voucher case in Maine where the case originates

[2:08:53] from, there were certain rural areas where there were no higher education in the area. And so the

[2:09:03] They provided vouchers to those families to educate their children.

[2:09:08] They said the vouchers could be used at private schools but specifically stated no religious schools.

[2:09:18] And historically, that has been constitutional,

[2:09:23] making sure that there is a separation of church and state in use of grant funds.

[2:09:28] and just as Sotomayor descended in the case, she said, you know, the Supreme Court has shifted

[2:09:36] from a rule that permits states to decline to fund religious organizations, to one that requires

[2:09:43] states and many circumstances to subsidize religious indoctrination with taxpayer dollars.

[2:09:50] And she said that because the Supreme Court concluded that the vouchers should be eligible for

[2:09:56] any institution, private, and if it's private, it can be religious.

[2:10:01] That was a little bit of a turn from, you know, centuries of establishment clause cases.

[2:10:09] Now the court found that that was an infringement upon the family's right to free exercise

[2:10:16] of religion, the families, and that's a key point because here we're not infringing on any

[2:10:22] families' choice of their free exercise of religion.

[2:10:26] That being said, the direction of the Supreme Court,

[2:10:29] at least raises question about whether that would potentially

[2:10:31] in fringe on a religious institutions

[2:10:35] right to exercise their religion.

[2:10:37] There is case law that public agencies make

[2:10:41] condition grants of funds.

[2:10:43] And historically, that no personalization

[2:10:46] would be consistent with the establishment clause,

[2:10:48] would be consistent with the gift of public funds

[2:10:50] as well, but this Supreme Court case at least opens up an argument that, well, maybe there

[2:10:57] is a potential for a free exercise question. So, a second option was to soften it to some

[2:11:08] extent, or approach, and to require the primarily serve a secular purpose, and it generally

[2:11:16] implement each of the three bodies of law.

[2:11:20] We would recommend implementing the primarily

[2:11:23] service secular purpose in three facets.

[2:11:26] Number one, that the event and public fund must serve

[2:11:29] a public purpose or provide a public benefit.

[2:11:32] So we have to ensure that case and the council

[2:11:34] would need to make a finding every time we approve

[2:11:39] a community benefits fund grant that the event

[2:11:43] serve a public purpose or provide a public benefit.

[2:11:46] that's number one.

[2:11:47] Number two, the event must be open and available to the public

[2:11:50] to participate without membership or admission fee.

[2:11:54] So it can't be your only member of this organization.

[2:11:59] And therefore, you can only members can participate.

[2:12:02] It would have to be something that we brought

[2:12:04] into the entire community to identify a public benefit.

[2:12:07] And again, this would apply across the board

[2:12:10] to any organization that would come to us.

[2:12:13] The third condition, which addresses the no-prosalization, but it is in a specific content based

[2:12:20] regulation, is that there would be no requirement to listen to any presentation or speech

[2:12:25] of any nature, regardless of content as a condition of participating.

[2:12:30] So for example, I'll use an example of time shares, people go to time shares, and they're

[2:12:38] required to sit and listen to a presentation as part of the event.

[2:12:45] We would do some, we would include this condition where that's not required, the person

[2:12:50] in our car to sit and listen to any speech, religious or whatever it could even be business-oriented,

[2:12:56] as a condition of participating.

[2:12:59] Now what does this allow?

[2:13:00] Does it allow for religious elements?

[2:13:04] But participants are in our car to listen and it shall not be the main purpose of the event.

[2:13:08] and, again, the conditions would apply to all recipients.

[2:13:12] So we believe that this approach would address

[2:13:15] the three bodies of law and ensure that, again,

[2:13:21] providing the fund civilizability would serve

[2:13:26] constitutional muster under these three bodies of law.

[2:13:30] Again, it is an interesting area of law and that's what we're proposing.

[2:13:36] So have it answer any questions?

[2:13:37] I'd like to start, please.

[2:13:40] I'd like to start.

[2:13:40] Well, Mr. Villain, you have a question?

[2:13:43] I'd like to start.

[2:13:46] Thank you.

[2:13:49] Do you have cash in your wallet?

[2:13:52] Do I have cash in my wallet?

[2:13:55] Or on average, do you carry cash?

[2:13:59] Sure, yes.

[2:14:02] Coming from the federal government,

[2:14:05] our cash says in God we trust.

[2:14:07] And our chambers, it says in God, we trust so, is our attorney asking us, are you advising now that we remove prayer and vocation from the beginning of our meetings with your statement of ensuring that we maintain separation of church and state?

[2:14:26] No, in fact, I'm the recommendation is specifically to ensure that the main purpose of the

[2:14:34] event is secular.

[2:14:37] So, and as I stated in my last slide, there will be incidental religious elements that would

[2:14:44] be allowed.

[2:14:44] So, I believe at the last meeting, the speaker on behalf of the organization mentioned that

[2:14:49] there would be prayer as part of the event.

[2:14:52] But, again, the public portion of the event would be the main purpose, so it wouldn't be to eliminate every aspect of it.

[2:14:59] It would...

[2:15:00] It will allow it, but allow the religious elements to be supplementary to the main purpose of a public event.

[2:15:06] And to be clear, the U.S. Constitution does not say separation of church and state. It is a theory.

[2:15:15] And it has been argued over and over in court of law. But there is no verbiage. Is that accurate?

[2:15:22] Well, what the Constitution provides is that we do not endorse any specific religion.

[2:15:29] Sorry.

[2:15:30] The question was, is the verbage separation of church and state in the Constitution?

[2:15:35] It is not.

[2:15:36] Thank you.

[2:15:40] This amendment written in this form is messaging from this dius that we stand by an

[2:15:46] degree to mandating a group of people to abandon their freedom to practice religion upon their

[2:15:53] request.

[2:15:55] There's case law dating back to 1899 all the way through 88 that this issue has been debated.

[2:16:02] It goes back to education and even the construction of buildings for religious institutions

[2:16:09] such as education, Loma Linda right down the road, their university and their medical center.

[2:16:15] Both religious institutions. I'm a graduate of that school. I was required to attend chapel every Wednesday, and study the foundations of seven-day Adventism, receiving federal funds.

[2:16:32] The university not only uses federal funds to educate those who save lives, but also receives federal funds to save those lives.

[2:16:44] The Salvation Army, their mission statement says to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ,

[2:16:51] also receiving federal funds, Catholic Charities, a very well-known organization, and I quote from their page,

[2:17:01] proudly carry the name and values of the Catholic faith, in which 90% of their revenue source comes from federal grant funding.

[2:17:10] If we had a youth organization come in and request, we'd like to have a yoga session, and we would like $2,000 to do that retreat.

[2:17:22] Yoga is founded and deeply rooted in Hinduism and Buddhism.

[2:17:28] annually, grand terrace, the event of the year is our light up, our light up grand terrace event

[2:17:37] and our Christmas event held at a 70th-day Adventist institution

[2:17:44] as a woman, as a person

[2:17:47] of color, I don't stand by this amendment and I refuse to marginalize a group of people

[2:17:53] With such discriminatory practices and asking that they denounce or subject themselves or subscribe to secular practices over their faith and belief.

[2:18:06] Thank you.

[2:18:09] May I respond to that, Mr. Mayor?

[2:18:11] Sure.

[2:18:12] So, again, the proposal that I'm recommending is generally consistent with what you're

[2:18:19] what you said.

[2:18:22] In each of the examples you provided, there's a public purpose or public benefit that those

[2:18:29] organizations provide, whether it's a hospital, whether it's a, you know, community-based

[2:18:35] organization, each of those provided public benefit.

[2:18:37] And I'm not saying do not provide any funds to them.

[2:18:43] That has not posed in any way.

[2:18:45] What I'm saying is to ensure that we comply

[2:18:49] with at least the apparent direction of the Supreme Court.

[2:18:54] We at least ensure that A, the funds are used for a public benefit,

[2:18:59] which is again consistent with the constitution of the California

[2:19:01] in public funds.

[2:19:03] Second,

[2:19:06] that the funds we use for public purpose and public benefit, again, that goes

[2:19:12] to the establishment clause of ensuring that there is a separation.

[2:19:20] I agree with you, it's not specifically in the Constitution, but it is a constitutional

[2:19:24] principle that public agencies in giving money have to be clear on the separation I mean this

[2:19:35] this Mr. Garra. Do you receive funds from the city when you attend our meetings?

[2:19:42] Yes. When we begin and we participate in an invocation are you receiving government funds?

[2:19:51] Yes. Thank you. But again, that goes to my point. Council Member Sabino is the primary purpose

[2:19:58] of the government and our city council meetings is a public benefit, public purpose of governing

[2:20:03] the city. The fact that there is an incidental prayer at the beginning of this meeting would be

[2:20:11] exactly consistent with what I'm proposing. We are allowed to provide the benefits so long as there's

[2:20:20] community meetings are community governance.

[2:20:23] The event must be open and available to the public to participate

[2:20:26] with our membership or fee.

[2:20:28] This is a public meeting, a Brown Act meeting.

[2:20:30] It's open to the public for anybody to participate.

[2:20:32] We do not decline.

[2:20:34] And third, that we don't require anybody to listen

[2:20:37] to what we're saying.

[2:20:38] We're not requiring anybody, but we can say it.

[2:20:42] And like the prayer, it is there.

[2:20:45] And I say on my screen that it does allow for incidental religious elements.

[2:20:50] So, everything you're proposing, I don't disagree with.

[2:20:53] I'm actually consistent with that.

[2:20:55] I don't know if any church that is close to the public,

[2:20:59] or that forces anyone to stay,

[2:21:01] because you're stating that,

[2:21:03] nobody's required to stay here and listen to any of this,

[2:21:08] but you're implying that in a religious space

[2:21:13] that people are forced to stay there and hear their messaging.

[2:21:16] And so again, I can't, I don't agree with what's been presented here today, nor will I vote in favor of it.

[2:21:28] Thank you.

[2:21:30] I will, no, last point.

[2:21:31] Again, I'm quoting from the court.

[2:21:36] And so to my or, Justice said, the Supreme Court has shifted from a rule that permits state to decline

[2:21:44] fund to fund religious organizations to one that requires states in many circumstances to subsidize

[2:21:51] religious indoctrination with taxpayer dollars.

[2:21:54] So it's clear that at least from Justice Sotomayor's standpoint, that there is a change.

[2:22:00] There is a different and under the prior rule, there cities and states were not required

[2:22:06] to provide funding just because of violation of the establishment clause of maintaining the

[2:22:11] of church and state. That was the intent. But it appears maybe the court is changing direction,

[2:22:17] and this proposal is intended to at least capture. That we're again, we're not saying you

[2:22:23] can't do religion. We're not telling the police as you cannot. We're saying the bulk of the event,

[2:22:31] the public event has to be a public purpose. Everything I'm providing I believe is consistent with exactly what you're proposing.

[2:22:41] Councillor Allen?

[2:22:44] I have a question.

[2:22:51] Please tell me or tell us what your other contract city, namely Irwin Dale, has done and why

[2:23:00] about this situation.

[2:23:02] I believe you touched on it in the last meeting.

[2:23:06] Well, they actually have a similar policy.

[2:23:09] Let me see if I could find it really quick.

[2:23:11] And I'll point out two things, hold on a second.

[2:23:19] So their policy, I can find it really quick.

[2:23:25] It says, the city will not approve any requested donation

[2:23:30] that otherwise meets the criteria allowing

[2:23:34] for a basically a community benefit.

[2:23:37] If the donation will cause the city to violate the establishment

[2:23:40] clause of the United States Constitution,

[2:23:43] Generally, a donation to a religious organization violates the establishment clause unless it primarily serves a secular purpose, neither advances or inhibits any religion, and avoids excessive entanglement by the city in any religion or religious purpose.

[2:24:01] So that's their policy and I decided not to go into as detail as their policy precisely for the reasons that Council members of Bino has raised is again trying to balance between the establishment clause and the free exercise clause and I believe that the three conditions would accomplish that.

[2:24:28] So Irwin Dale did this and why did they do this and what did they do then to alleviate the situation?

[2:24:39] So Irwin Dale has done and what many other organizations cities have done is it's either one of two things.

[2:24:44] Number one is they encourage the religious entities to establish a nonprofit themselves that is not necessarily religious affiliated just to avoid

[2:24:54] the establishment clause issue. That's one option.

[2:24:58] A second option was Erwin Delcreated its own community benefits organization.

[2:25:04] It's a separate entity.

[2:25:07] That is a non-profit.

[2:25:10] I believe one of our council members serves on the board of that, but it's also a board comprised of many other

[2:25:17] businesses represented with businesses in the community and residents.

[2:25:21] And so they use that as an GTT kind of fundraise, do community events, things of that sort.

[2:25:28] Great.

[2:25:29] Thanks for that.

[2:25:32] Now, council members, Sabino, you mentioned several organizations, you know, religious organizations

[2:25:38] that help with social services.

[2:25:42] And I'm familiar with them because I serve on the San Bernardino County homeless partnership,

[2:25:48] which is the part of the continuum of care for the Interagency Council on Homelessness.

[2:25:54] And we allocate or direct funding for a wide variety of organizations to serve the homeless

[2:26:02] population and many of those are churches and religious organizations and much, much, much

[2:26:06] of that money is federal dollars.

[2:26:09] But the point I'm making is that they're funded by indirect federal dollars, not direct

[2:26:15] federal dollars.

[2:26:16] And I think that's the difference in what the Supreme Court case is pointed out.

[2:26:21] And they're sort of, my understanding is that they're saying,

[2:26:25] they're still saying direct funding is still not looked favorably on,

[2:26:32] and that's why the indirect funding route like through organizations such as the ICH

[2:26:37] or through voucher programs or foundations are these indirect funding routes for

[2:26:45] government dollars, public funds that can be used by private organizations, even religious organizations, without

[2:26:54] you know, all the hang-ups of the establishment clause.

[2:26:59] And this is the direction that I was trying to take us forward because we have a foundation here,

[2:27:03] and we can use it in this city.

[2:27:05] We have our own, and we can use it for that purpose and alleviate this entire problem.

[2:27:09] Can you name the foundation that you're asking to redirect taxpayer dollars, too?

[2:27:13] We have a, we have, there's a, well, we have one in here called the foundation of Grant Terrace, and if that's not adequate, there's the in an empire community foundation, and then if that's not adequate, like the door window did create your own.

[2:27:24] And so you're asking that taxpayer money goes to an outside source.

[2:27:29] Well, that's what it's doing anyway, it's going taxpayer money always goes to some source.

[2:27:33] No, you're stating that you want the decision to be made outside of this governing body with what is done with taxpayer funds.

[2:27:43] Is that an accurate statement?

[2:27:47] That's correct.

[2:27:47] I think we should fund the some foundations, some entities, some organization we can fund.

[2:27:54] And that organization would be responsible for.

[2:27:59] You've answered my question of where you want the taxpayer college to go.

[2:28:02] Thank you.

[2:28:05] And the great thing about a foundation is

[2:28:08] that they can fund secular and non-secular with no problems.

[2:28:15] Okay.

[2:28:17] Councillor Anderson?

[2:28:23] It seems to me the obvious answer is just to include

[2:28:26] a no-presentizing provision in our agreements rather than try to

[2:28:36] do what's being contemplated.

[2:28:41] During the course of my career, I worked for five cities, including grandchairs.

[2:28:50] We all had accept for grandchairs had an anti-prosetizing provision, because making a judgment

[2:28:57] call on primarily a secular purpose who's going to do it, and who's not going to do it,

[2:29:04] was problematic.

[2:29:05] So we required all of our grant recipients and subrecipients to include the anti-prosetizing,

[2:29:16] to certify and assure that religion wouldn't be a part of their service program to their participants.

[2:29:29] I also am a graduate of Loma Linda University.

[2:29:34] And I'm also served in the grant acquisition role for many years for both my church and some classes.

[2:29:48] In each case, we're federal or public monies, we're acquired, successfully acquired,

[2:29:56] We signed the Anti-Prositizing Prevision.

[2:30:00] Even though the University was established by the Church and had a greater purpose in a greater missionary goal, that with part and parcel of our operation, I'll also say that, while I respect Sotomayor's opinion, it's a descending opinion, that carries no weight as far as the law of the land.

[2:30:25] She may be right in her assessment, that the church is, I mean,

[2:30:29] sees me at the court as turning, but it's speculation at this point.

[2:30:34] So I'm not comfortable necessarily with sort of my yours,

[2:30:39] the sending opinion being included in your analysis in this particular issue.

[2:30:46] It just seems to me, as I stated at the outset, an anti-prosetizing provision

[2:30:52] with solve this problem, and if the applicant is okay with that, they'll sign it.

[2:31:01] If the applicant is not okay with it, then you have reason to question the primary

[2:31:07] secular purpose, which is the underpinning of your analysis, and I have great difficulty

[2:31:13] believing that it adherence to that provision, however it's structured,

[2:31:22] what accomplishes

[2:31:23] purpose.

[2:31:24] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[2:31:26] I hope right time you have anything?

[2:31:29] I do.

[2:31:30] Maybe I'm cutting to the chase here.

[2:31:32] Go ahead.

[2:31:33] Cut to the chase.

[2:31:36] It just seems like we put an awful lot of effort in this country to us, in protecting bad behavior.

[2:31:46] and prohibiting good influx.

[2:31:51] Isn't it kind of backwards upside down?

[2:31:57] Where kids supposed to find positive influx?

[2:32:01] I know the original founding fathers had an intention

[2:32:04] and that was, they got away from England

[2:32:07] because it was a church of Anglican thing

[2:32:10] that was became the state church.

[2:32:12] And it was supported by government funds.

[2:32:17] It was pure and simple.

[2:32:19] You either, you didn't do any choice.

[2:32:22] Taxation without representation, basically.

[2:32:24] If you're of a different religion.

[2:32:27] So I guess it's a question of support,

[2:32:30] which is what was happening back then,

[2:32:33] versus a partnership in good influence.

[2:32:36] And I believe in that.

[2:32:39] And I don't think we should limit the concept of proselytizing because just simply because

[2:32:47] people have their own minds and they do have the eye can be standing out on a sidewalk somewhere

[2:32:54] and somebody can come up to me and say, hey, if you heard the good word or whatever, and

[2:32:59] I always have that opportunity to make a choice, and I don't think kids are over the age

[2:33:04] accountability are stupid in that area. It's just that it seems to me that if we

[2:33:12] err on anything we should be erying on the side of good. So I don't see any

[2:33:17] point in limiting that. Let them come after us. There's a lot more of us good

[2:33:25] intenders than there are the bad ones, I think. So that's just my thought. Thank you.

[2:33:33] I know we've got, we have public comments, a couple, all right, before we, I'll, I'll say my

[2:33:40] piece out to the public comment. Give me any other questions for the city attorney.

[2:33:46] Okay, go ahead and public comment.

[2:33:47] Chris, the ball.

[2:33:56] Hi, I'm Chris the ball. Good evening. Mayor, City Council. This has been a long

[2:34:01] meeting. I think what I'll do is just bring my question directly to Mr. Wallowitch. Next week,

[2:34:06] maybe I can get on your calendar.

[2:34:10] It is regarding the community benefit fund, yes, I just need some clarification because I do seek out the community benefits fund for senior legacy in which we are a separate class, we do fall into the foundation.

[2:34:25] it's not for it's not open to the public it is for a group of seniors. We have I think

[2:34:31] we've given community benefits fund to baseball teams to cheerleader teams so I think

[2:34:40] it's still anyways I had more specific questions that I'd like clarification on but I

[2:34:46] won't waste any more time this evening I'll just see you directly. You know where my door is.

[2:34:50] Thank you.

[2:34:52] Thank you.

[2:34:54] Anna Summers.

[2:35:00] Hello.

[2:35:01] I am a new resident.

[2:35:03] I just moved here last October, so Anna of this month will be a full year.

[2:35:07] I am so proud to be a resident here in Grand Terrace.

[2:35:10] July 9th was my first city council meeting.

[2:35:13] When I walked in, I was concerned of the appearance,

[2:35:16] not going to lie, I felt like it was really outdated.

[2:35:19] But in the meeting, I saw how much was given back to the community.

[2:35:22] Granting Boy Scouts, a woman's club, high school,

[2:35:25] a grand terrace organization upon their request.

[2:35:30] I was so blessed to see that there was in God we trust

[2:35:33] was stated boldly over our leaders.

[2:35:36] I went home to my husband and he asked me how is the meeting.

[2:35:40] I told him would joy, it was fun and awesome,

[2:35:43] and he said nobody ever says that about city council meetings.

[2:35:46] He started laughing, so I assure him that God had blessed us

[2:35:51] house in a city where people comes first.

[2:35:54] Not the material things of the world,

[2:35:56] and it brought me so much to it to see that elected leaders

[2:35:59] were so genuine to meet their constituents' needs.

[2:36:03] I am here today because I was reading through the agenda item,

[2:36:06] and I was shocked to see under the unfinished business

[2:36:08] on item 13.

[2:36:10] And the wording here was concerning

[2:36:13] when it's said primarily serving only secular purpose.

[2:36:16] everything you we all do in life is guided by morality that

[2:36:22] pricks our conscience that's given by a higher power even if you don't believe in

[2:36:26] the Almighty God Elohim. This recommended add on application amendment feels like a

[2:36:33] discrimination those that are Christian of all denomination. I look up

[2:36:39] under city to see how many church there is. It's about 10 that I could see on the map

[2:36:44] that is grand terrace alone.

[2:36:46] One of the very first event that my husband and I got to attend

[2:36:49] in a beautiful city was the light of grand terrace holiday

[2:36:53] tree lighting ceremony at a zir hill church.

[2:36:57] My husband and I love seeing the community come together

[2:37:00] as though we were a small town in the middle of America,

[2:37:03] yet we get so Cal weather.

[2:37:05] To celebrate Christmas, you can't spell Christmas

[2:37:07] without Christ.

[2:37:09] I believe this is going to be the 10th year anniversary

[2:37:12] of hosting and this awesome event on a church property, but to amend something like this specifically

[2:37:17] excluding this kind of community gives, that gives back so much, seems like a disloyal service.

[2:37:25] If our city were willing to fund non-secular clubs on Grand Terrace High School, I asked what would

[2:37:31] you do for the Christian club on Grand Terrace High School? They came for funds. With about 10 churches

[2:37:37] in our city of population, just under 13,000 residents, how many residents do you think the

[2:37:42] amendment would discriminate going against the individual first amendment?

[2:37:46] Separation of church is not constitutional, it's principle, is to keep the government from

[2:37:51] infringing our first amendment.

[2:37:54] As a new proud citizen, I hope our city council member would really consider and understand

[2:37:59] that you represent everybody, even though you may disagree on our religion.

[2:38:03] Thank you.

[2:38:04] Thank you, ma'am.

[2:38:10] Please keep.

[2:38:12] I know we want to motivate the senator, but please no clapping or booing.

[2:38:17] It's the same thing, so.

[2:38:19] All right.

[2:38:20] Next.

[2:38:21] Jason Olvera.

[2:38:31] Ladies and gentlemen, the city council.

[2:38:33] My name is Jason Olvera.

[2:38:34] And I'm one of the pastors in the minister.

[2:38:36] I live in an empire here in the beautiful city of Grand Terres.

[2:38:39] I'm here today.

[2:38:40] On behalf of our church and our senior pastors, Edgy and Selenegas.

[2:38:43] We would like to first off by thanking you for allowing us the opportunity to speak today.

[2:38:47] We stand before you to express our deep concern for it on this proposal, excuse me that

[2:38:53] seeks to prohibit the seeks to prohibit churches and religious organizations from accessing

[2:38:59] funding and grants. This proposal not only raises questions about fairness and equity,

[2:39:05] but also threatens the vital role that these institutions playing our community.

[2:39:11] For many years, our church and many others have been at the very forefront of community service

[2:39:17] providing essential support to those in need.

[2:39:20] They offer food baits shelter for the homeless,

[2:39:23] counseling for families and crisis,

[2:39:25] countless programs that are a lifting and powering

[2:39:28] our citizens.

[2:39:29] These organizations are not merely places of worship,

[2:39:33] but they are pillars of hope

[2:39:34] and support many individuals and families in our city.

[2:39:38] We're actually having an event this October

[2:39:41] to reach the community with the gospel.

[2:39:45] But excluding churches from funding opportunities sends a message that their contribution to the

[2:39:51] community is undervalued.

[2:39:54] It is essential to recognize that when churches are restricted from accessing financial resources

[2:39:59] from its very own city and community, it brings greater division between local city government

[2:40:05] and the local church.

[2:40:07] It's not just the organization that suffers, it's the community as a whole that suffers.

[2:40:12] The lack of support in funding would directly hinder their ability to reach out and serve and make a difference in the lives of people.

[2:40:20] In terms of prices, whether it be natural disasters or a hardship economy hardship,

[2:40:25] it's often the church is stepping to provide assistance and comfort.

[2:40:29] They are the first responders in many situations.

[2:40:32] They offer, they offer not only material support but also emotional support in guidance.

[2:40:37] removing access to funding will limit our reach and and stop us from reaching the community.

[2:40:44] We urge you to reconsider this proposal and recognize the fundamental role that the churches and other religious organizations play in our community.

[2:40:53] Let us work together to assure that every organization is dedicated to serving our citizens, has the opportunity to thrive and to contribute.

[2:41:02] It's not just about funding, but it's about fostering community where all voices are heard and could children and value.

[2:41:11] Jesus is, and always will benefit the community, I truly believe that.

[2:41:17] I wouldn't define the gospel as indoctrination, but I would define it as its hope.

[2:41:22] If you look up here, all these people that are here with me today, they were reached through community outreach and their lives are changed today.

[2:41:31] So, please reconsider.

[2:41:34] Thank you.

[2:41:35] Thank you, sir.

[2:41:36] Any other public comment?

[2:41:38] No, sir.

[2:41:39] Okay, I'm going to bring it back for a deliberation.

[2:41:42] First of all, thank you, City Attorney, for the work that you were requested to do.

[2:41:48] But, as I'm thinking today, what have we just passed?

[2:41:54] So it just passed three ordinances for homelessness,

[2:42:00] one of them, and the other two, camping, all right?

[2:42:05] I think those people were involved with the community,

[2:42:10] a church group, a youth group,

[2:42:12] maybe we wouldn't have to be passing these ordinances.

[2:42:15] Maybe they would have their life straightened out,

[2:42:17] and that's what Jesus.

[2:42:19] So, as the pastor said during times of emergencies, yeah, I've just got through coming home from South Carolina from our hurricane, four days, no power, a two-year-old and a one-year-old,

[2:42:35] worrying about having food for them, but you know, whether the community do, they got together.

[2:42:41] Who else in the community brought everything together was the churches, the foundations.

[2:42:47] not only bring in food and water, but bring in hope and faith in our Lord.

[2:42:54] And when you have that hope and faith, you can walk to the valley of the shadow of death

[2:42:58] a lot easier.

[2:42:59] You could do that without being scared.

[2:43:04] Now, as Counselor Semino said, in God we trust, yes, and God we trust.

[2:43:11] There's people out there that want to take that off.

[2:43:13] There's people that want to take off the money.

[2:43:17] Accounts of member Henderson said, you know, the organizations it is built.

[2:43:22] You know, this country was built on a religious freedom.

[2:43:26] You guys could take it away, they could take away no matter what,

[2:43:29] but you know what?

[2:43:31] What do we have for that?

[2:43:33] This youth group, I'm looking at their application,

[2:43:36] and the only thing that was brought to my attention is says,

[2:43:39] where this is going to be held at.

[2:43:41] You know, the name of the organization who's going to do it, and also that puts a red flag,

[2:43:46] that's discrimination in my point, because we have youth retreat and we're going to be

[2:43:52] it says it's a three-day event that the youth will be out in the foundation and have activities

[2:43:58] and have fun.

[2:44:00] Why do they need this money?

[2:44:01] Because a lot of the youth can't afford it, and you want to have them attend and have fun.

[2:44:07] Now what is it that youth can't go to that?

[2:44:10] You're just going to put up a tent now and then violate the city ordinance.

[2:44:14] He's going to, you know, be the un-house.

[2:44:17] He's going to, you know, do all this other stuff that we just passed.

[2:44:19] We just spent good money for the lawyers to do, right?

[2:44:22] Because we have to do by the book.

[2:44:25] We have to do what the state says.

[2:44:27] Well, you know, like the Supreme Court, she's saying one opinion, and that's the whole thing.

[2:44:34] It's opinions, that's your opinions.

[2:44:37] This community benefit fund was established and put together pushed forward by Councilwoman

[2:44:45] Robles.

[2:44:47] The reason why, because other entities were getting our funds and not being equal with our funds,

[2:44:56] being a good old boy thing with our funds.

[2:44:59] discriminatory

[2:45:00] Against our funds. The foundations, not saying the foundations, but just saying all those entities were

[2:45:08] picking and choosing were the money once ago, for their own cause. So it was brought to the council,

[2:45:14] your government body that you voted for, to be equal, to treat everybody equal, to establish funds,

[2:45:23] what little we can do and what we can give. And that's what it's put in our lap. We don't need

[2:45:29] past the buck we need to make the decision and that's what we're here for. So when we keep

[2:45:35] going on this and keep going on this and you know just I read the paper I was gone and I saw

[2:45:43] Councillor Allen's thing about the money he gathered for the women's club, the Lions Club

[2:45:52] and the foundation, the money for stuff to bleed, the schools, he did that on his own.

[2:46:01] Personally, that should have been a team effort. We're a body. As somebody comes up to you and say,

[2:46:07] hey, I got this, I want to do that. Introducing me, the correct way was, we are a body, you do that.

[2:46:13] So this body right here, both somewhere these funds go. Now it could be three to two, two to two like it was last time.

[2:46:19] that's what we're coming back.

[2:46:21] I think, and I'm going to make this motion

[2:46:27] that we just dumped this, drop it.

[2:46:30] We stay with our original thing.

[2:46:32] We have confidence stat that could go through everything

[2:46:34] the paperwork.

[2:46:36] This city is found at by, you know, it's conservative.

[2:46:41] It's found by the close business, it's found by the volunteers.

[2:46:44] It's found by our churches here that we have good working

[2:46:48] relationships with Pastor Edgy's church, brought back to the Easter egg height. It was gone

[2:47:00] for a long time and brought it back. I never seen so many people at Richard Rollins Park

[2:47:04] and they weren't, people ask them about God but they weren't preaching it. It was the whole

[2:47:10] community was out there and what did they say? They felt love. They felt that love. And that's

[2:47:17] this is. So my recommendation, and if I could get a second, that we just...

[2:47:23] Second.

[2:47:24] Drop this, where the motion is second. Do you have any other comments?

[2:47:29] Yeah, what do you mean by we just drop? I mean, you want to table the issue?

[2:47:34] I just want to get rid of it. We keep our...

[2:47:35] What does that mean? We keep it the way it is application. No amendments. No extra clauses.

[2:47:42] So, right now there's a no-prosalatizing in it, and I gotta tell you, I know Councilman Henderson, you and I are pretty close to them, but I gotta disagree that I think it's highly, I think it's just really, really unfair to ask someone who's dedicated to preaching the gospel to tell them, no you can't do that.

[2:48:09] I mean, and to say, now you have to sign a statement saying you won't do it, are we forcing them to not do their chosen mission or we forcing them to tell us that falsehood?

[2:48:20] And is it even right for us? It's as wrong for us, making them do that as it is for them to have to do it. I believe.

[2:48:28] So, I don't, that's why I think the solution is an indirect funding source, the way that,

[2:48:34] San Bernardino County uses it.

[2:48:36] San Bernardino City with the ICH and the San Bernardino County homeless partnership.

[2:48:41] I was in other entities like that.

[2:48:46] And nobody up here behind this diast, especially me,

[2:48:50] wants any of your activities to be hindered in any way.

[2:48:56] Every church in the city should have access to any of the funds that are available

[2:49:00] through the community development block grants or whatever source of funding there is.

[2:49:12] The indirect funding source, I believe, is the solution to the problem because we can fund a third

[2:49:19] entity with CDB funds and then that entity and if it's an entity that is not being managed

[2:49:27] effectively, then there's a solution to that problem too.

[2:49:33] But, Jeff, you've already moved $30,000 worth of money, $10,000 each to three different organizations,

[2:49:42] which didn't equally go to organizations within this community.

[2:49:46] And so, to make the recommendation that we, I did not, I didn't stop talking, I didn't stop talking.

[2:49:52] Do you want to rush into the floor, UK?

[2:49:55] I did just done that.

[2:49:57] That money was given by another county.

[2:49:59] Wait until she's done what's her statement?

[2:50:02] It's an inequity to move taxpayer funds to non-elected officials.

[2:50:08] That's the inequity.

[2:50:09] The inequity is asking people of faith to only engage in secular practices.

[2:50:18] Isolating a group is discrimination.

[2:50:21] It is segregation and I do not stand by it.

[2:50:24] Well I agree that that's what I'm saying.

[2:50:25] It's not fair to ask to tell them to in order to get our funding.

[2:50:28] You have to agree to not preach the gospel of Jesus Christ or say prayers or any or or

[2:50:35] or prophesies or any of that. That's not fair.

[2:50:38] Bross it to them.

[2:50:39] It's what they have, and so that's why I, you know, I don't agree with that either what

[2:50:46] you're saying, but and that's why I think the solution is an indirect funding source.

[2:50:52] Because I want them to be able to get the funding they deserve that they want.

[2:50:56] They do great things for their, their congregants in the community, you know, as, as do the other churches.

[2:51:03] But for example, we funded or we, we funded and I voted for $361 to the Catholic Church.

[2:51:11] I guess it was last year or the year before.

[2:51:13] They had an event in their parking lot, big all day festival.

[2:51:17] You know, for the whole city to come out, car show, music, and all that kind of stuff.

[2:51:20] Similar to what you were describing, you know?

[2:51:22] And that's the kind of things that the community benefits from.

[2:51:26] There wasn't any concessions being held or anything going on up there in the parking lot of the church.

[2:51:33] So those are the kind of things that, yeah, okay, that's secular, but, you know.

[2:51:38] And it was obvious that they could freely sign and say we won't processize here because this is just a big festival.

[2:51:45] So, you know, now,

[2:51:50] having an indirect funding source would just solve all the problems.

[2:51:55] That's what I believe.

[2:51:56] So, is that your second motion?

[2:51:59] That's right.

[2:51:59] Oh, is it an alternate motion?

[2:52:07] I actually would think that it deserves more of it.

[2:52:12] I don't know if it even.

[2:52:13] If it might deserve more of a discussion, if we decide to change our policy and fund a indirect funding source

[2:52:21] for all. I mean, unless you think that it's something that could, I mean, I want to know

[2:52:29] what you want to do. You said that this is your recommendation and then, so if you're making

[2:52:35] an recommendation like that, do you want to make a motion? Has an alternate motion? Or do you

[2:52:40] want to put it on a future agenda?

[2:52:45] I don't know what the best course of action for us to

[2:52:48] discuss it would be, but I would like for us to either have a discussion about using

[2:52:55] So a future agenda and I guess having a future agenda item, yeah, because that way we have a discussion on

[2:53:04] This may or may I be recognized? Yes, sir. Thank you sir.

[2:53:11] Been a few words tossed around discrimination, segregation,

[2:53:18] that

[2:53:21] a person

[2:53:26] who's African-American,

[2:53:29] I

[2:53:31] think I know a little bit about it,

[2:53:37] and I would never be partying to an action that discriminates against anybody or individual

[2:53:48] or for any reason or for any purpose.

[2:53:53] My concerns about this topic have been raised ever since.

[2:53:59] I became a member of the Grand Terror City Council and I put questions to the city attorney

[2:54:05] and to the city manager regarding using public funds to fund religious purposes.

[2:54:15] And initially,

[2:54:19] I was told that the agreement covered those areas to anti-prosetizing.

[2:54:27] To be honest with you, I'm not sure what the current status of the exact length which

[2:54:32] the agreement. But my objection, I just didn't say even objection, my position on this

[2:54:39] issue has nothing to do with the blessings that this community derives from its churches

[2:54:47] and its people of faith has nothing to do with that. It is only a legal issue for me and

[2:54:57] that we comply with the law as it relates to the use of public funds.

[2:55:04] It's that simple.

[2:55:05] I think the issue has been muddied up somewhat.

[2:55:10] I'm not a party to someone saying, don't give these folks money because of the religion

[2:55:18] that they attest to or the church that they belong to.

[2:55:23] I support what the applicant is doing,

[2:55:29] wholeheartedly, just as I support the activities

[2:55:33] all the other community benefit beneficiaries.

[2:55:38] But I can tell you from my experience,

[2:55:43] 37 years as a public employee in an additional 10 years

[2:55:47] of doing committee commission and city council

[2:55:51] activities,

[2:55:55] four of the five cities that I worked at doing the course of my career had

[2:56:01] blanket provisions about anti-prosolatizing. Now, were those cities wrong and grand

[2:56:07] terraces correct? I personally don't think so, but I have no issues with the positions

[2:56:15] taken by my colleagues. They're strongly held positions. They're people of faith. They

[2:56:22] support the greater good for this community.

[2:56:26] And I support that, the greatest amount of good,

[2:56:29] the greatest amount of people in our community.

[2:56:34] So don't twist it into something it's not.

[2:56:38] Mr. Henderson does not appear to discriminate against the audience,

[2:56:41] the people and the audience, or any other religious organization.

[2:56:46] If we're being told that there's no issue,

[2:56:49] that a primarily secular purpose is to answer to the question,

[2:56:55] that maybe that's it.

[2:56:57] I don't sense, but I could be wrong in the pastor can correct me,

[2:57:04] that the primarily secular purpose is necessarily amenable to the organization.

[2:57:13] And if it isn't, I can understand why.

[2:57:16] So, if your mission is to spread the word of God,

[2:57:25] then accepting funds that might infringe

[2:57:27] upon that is an important decision that you have to make, and an important impact on

[2:57:34] the organization,

[2:57:38] but just because someone aspires to do the right thing from a legal standpoint,

[2:57:45] Don't make it into something that it's somehow discriminatory or that segregation is being

[2:57:56] practiced or that other nefarious motives are being ascribed to the supporters of that

[2:58:05] particular position.

[2:58:07] If my colleagues decide

[2:58:12] that there's support, majority support for this community benefit application,

[2:58:18] I have no problem with that.

[2:58:21] I have no problem with that.

[2:58:23] I'll vote my conscience, but at the same time, majority rules.

[2:58:29] And I support majority rules.

[2:58:31] And I'm not going to drag my heels and criticize my colleagues

[2:58:35] if they vote counter to my position on this issue.

[2:58:40] So I just want to make that clear.

[2:58:43] I support what the effort of the applicant

[2:58:47] and the applicants that have come before this particular group.

[2:58:56] So with that Mayor, I would call for the question.

[2:59:00] Thank you.

[2:59:02] Ms. Clayton, do we have any issues with the application

[2:59:08] the way it is now?

[2:59:10] To my knowledge, we don't have any issues with it.

[2:59:14] We've been using it for as long as I've been here

[2:59:17] and years prior and there hasn't been any issues

[2:59:20] we've given to churches before.

[2:59:22] So let's spend the perfect will rolling forward.

[2:59:25] Correct.

[2:59:27] So that's why my motion is just to keep it.

[2:59:31] Remove this item and just keep the application the way it is.

[2:59:35] And I had a second from Councilwoman Savito.

[2:59:40] And so that was my alternative.

[2:59:42] So do I have another motion for anything else?

[2:59:48] Please vote.

[2:59:53] Motion passes with council members to be know may your program will send may your

[2:59:57] Hussey voting yes and

[3:00:00] Council member Henderson, and Council member Allen Voting, no.

[3:00:05] Okay, well, thank you. Thank you, City Attorney for all your work. We appreciate it. Item 14, new business.

[3:00:25] Good evening, Mayor. Mayor Potem, council members, Christine Clayton, finance director. The City of Grant Harris received a community benefit application

[3:00:34] from the church of fire and Christ requesting $2,000 for their youth retreat.

[3:00:39] and the pastor, Johnny Senobal is here again to speak with you guys. Mr. Senobal.

[3:00:54] Here we go again, huh? It's fun listening to you guys. Feel smarter.

[3:01:01] It's, you guys bring a good, this is like a fun debate class instead of listening to it.

[3:01:05] It's an old wise ways with our furniture.

[3:01:10] It's like looking at you too well, over here.

[3:01:16] So, you're seeing on here that your activities for September 6th and 8th and it's open for all the youth who want to come.

[3:01:25] The more the mayor.

[3:01:29] And how late is that activity? What's the start time on this and how late are you guys going?

[3:01:36] Well, we're going on, let's see.

[3:01:39] Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

[3:01:40] So you're keeping youth off the street to do good things.

[3:01:46] That's so purpose.

[3:01:48] All right, sir.

[3:01:50] There's a council.

[3:01:50] Have any questions for the applicant?

[3:01:54] Councillor Merrell.

[3:01:56] I noticed this is great.

[3:01:59] Lock Clevver's a beautiful place.

[3:02:00] I mean, well, right now, it's not because it burned up in a line fire.

[3:02:04] Well, I don't know if it directly did, but it was evacuated.

[3:02:11] So, have you already taken the, is this for next year, set Timber?

[3:02:16] Because it's October now.

[3:02:17] Is this for next set Timber?

[3:02:19] It's kind of we're trying to press it for either later on this month, starting in November.

[3:02:25] Because they're still open.

[3:02:27] We've been contact with them in case if it does shut down or if it did cause the fire and so on and so forth.

[3:02:34] But they're still open and we're kind of like trying to,

[3:02:37] We're rushed for funds basically, but it is for this year.

[3:02:42] Okay, I just noticed the application has said in September, you know, it's October now.

[3:02:47] I just wondered if it had already occurred if you already went and or if you were going planning to go in the future.

[3:02:54] And so I know that line far got real close down there.

[3:02:59] It didn't tone in over there in Mountain Home and they evacuated.

[3:03:03] But we were there.

[3:03:06] We went Friday, Saturday, and we were going to stay an extra day, but we had to leave early

[3:03:14] because Smoke was coming over the mountain.

[3:03:19] And Pop, what is that?

[3:03:22] Breathing was a good fruit.

[3:03:23] So instead of going through parents, the last thing we wanted, any complications through

[3:03:27] that, so we just ate everybody packer stuff, and let's go.

[3:03:35] So, okay, I would just wanted to get a clarification on those because I'd date and think so.

[3:03:39] You're open to the, okay, yeah, I hope that the camp survived.

[3:03:45] Any other questions for pastor?

[3:03:49] Councilman Henderson?

[3:03:51] I'm ready to make a motion, sir.

[3:03:52] All right, sir, go ahead.

[3:03:53] Well, wait, let me see who have any public comment?

[3:03:56] No, sir.

[3:03:57] Okay.

[3:03:58] Go ahead, sir.

[3:03:58] I moved to approve.

[3:04:01] Second.

[3:04:02] So, are we going to, but we're still open for discussion now.

[3:04:06] Right?

[3:04:06] Yeah.

[3:04:07] Okay.

[3:04:08] So, you called the questions.

[3:04:09] I didn't get a chance to finish.

[3:04:10] I just want, I want you guys to know, okay.

[3:04:14] I'm on your side.

[3:04:16] I just want it.

[3:04:16] Just like the council member Henderson said,

[3:04:18] it needs to be legal.

[3:04:21] And I'm not, I didn't grow.

[3:04:24] I know where Mobile Alabama is.

[3:04:25] I got religious error.

[3:04:26] And I understand what he's saying.

[3:04:27] And I have never felt or faced the kind of situations that he has faced, although I have

[3:04:33] felt discriminated against by my religion, by religion because in 2018, when I was running

[3:04:39] for public office, I actually had a member of the City Council at the time, tell me they

[3:04:44] couldn't support me because they didn't know what kind of Christian I am.

[3:04:47] And so how do you think that makes me feel that I have to struggle to get through that barrier

[3:04:51] first before I get through any other?

[3:04:53] And it didn't matter that I'm an ordained minister, and that I was on the board of directors and the church that I went to and the board of directors that private schooled in my kids attended at the time.

[3:05:03] You know, and I grew up in a Christian church and graduated from Christian college and schools and all that stuff, and ordained minister.

[3:05:09] So I guess none of that really mattered, because if there's no kind of Christian I am, so I can't support me.

[3:05:14] So I understand, I understand, I put discrimination, feels like, in the religion.

[3:05:20] And that's why, for me, the legal course of action, like Council Member Henderson said, is the best course of action, that's why I chose what I did, but I wish you great success.

[3:05:32] Thank you.

[3:05:33] Any other comments?

[3:05:36] All right.

[3:05:37] We have a motion by Council Member Henderson.

[3:05:39] Second by Mayor Pro Tem, please vote.

[3:05:46] Motion passes as Council Member Sabino.

[3:05:49] Council member Henderson, Mayor Protim Wilson, and Mayor Hussey, and Council member Allen

[3:05:55] Hazard Stain.

[3:05:57] All right, we'll enjoy your trip and thank you for taking care of you, and we're going to

[3:06:03] go ahead and take 10 minutes recess right now, and we'll be back at 9.20.

[3:06:12] So, 10 minutes recess,

[3:06:21] okay, let's go ahead and recap being the meeting, a lot of you guys

[3:06:25] state. I must like us so. Future agenda items at this time the City Council may propose

[3:06:35] an item discussion on any action. If you have against the City Council meeting, it

[3:06:39] consends and the majority of the forum is required to place any item on agenda, to having

[3:06:44] requests,

[3:06:49] you want to talk about it. That's up to you. Our it is dead whenever you want

[3:06:54] to do.

[3:06:55] I would like to have a discussion about it.

[3:07:00] I would like to have a discussion about it.

[3:07:03] Yeah, we're open for discussions.

[3:07:05] So you want to make a motion to make a motion to have a discussion

[3:07:11] about using a third party entity like a foundation for this purpose.

[3:07:15] What we were talking about.

[3:07:18] The second

[3:07:23] stage of.

[3:07:25] All right, council, communications, council,

[3:07:28] home and Michelle Savino, give me communication, you want?

[3:07:33] I do.

[3:07:34] First of all, my nephew's supposed to be watching

[3:07:37] if he's still awake, happy birthday to you.

[3:07:40] His grandparent's resident just turned seven years old.

[3:07:43] So happy birthday.

[3:07:46] Gosh, so I've recently, we have been out.

[3:07:51] We attended the ribbon cutting

[3:07:52] for Robert Martinez Art Gallery, as well as the vegan vibes, which anyone's familiar with vegan

[3:08:03] corner around here, what they've started once a month, and I believe this weekend, they're

[3:08:08] going to have it again on the 13th I'll have to double check, but they have other vegan

[3:08:15] vendor food vendors come out and so it's just an opportunity for the community and those

[3:08:24] who are vegetarian or vegan to be able to come out and how a place to be able to, you know,

[3:08:29] get a variety of foods, the donuts and the video tacos were fantastic.

[3:08:36] So if you can stop by, stop by and support, I think that's everything because my computer

[3:08:45] died on me, but I think that's, no, state of the county. We tend to state of the county as

[3:08:54] well, and that if you've, if you've never watched what our Board of Supervisors are doing in

[3:09:04] the region, just phenomenal with regard to ensuring the development, the programs that they

[3:09:10] and just really being a good protector of what's happening in our region.

[3:09:16] Supervisor Don Rao has really done well and not only making sure that we have good support

[3:09:25] from our local businesses, but you wouldn't believe the amount of technology that we have in this area.

[3:09:32] Almost the small Silicon Valley of source where, you know, we have the high tech, our developers, our robotics, and our drones, just a number of different programs going on in the area, not to mention the airport and the region. So definitely a lot of good things happening out, not only just in grand terrors, but outside in the region. So thank you.

[3:09:59] Sorry. Thank you.

[3:10:01] All right, Councilor Anderson?

[3:10:06] I also attended the Robin Martinis ribbon cutting.

[3:10:12] Really a nice gentleman, a very nice business operation for his art gallery.

[3:10:18] My wife had attended the Grant Harris Art Show and came back and talked about.

[3:10:23] We are a pro-Chim.

[3:10:26] Wilson's artistic bent and Robin Martinis, and she indicated that

[3:10:31] If there was an opportunity to go to a groundbreaking or a ribbon cutting sheet, she would like

[3:10:35] to participate.

[3:10:37] A wonderful fair, very strongly supported by his family and friends, and I look forward

[3:10:43] to get things in that regard.

[3:10:46] I did not attend the State of the County because I was in Las Vegas doing Las Vegas

[3:10:55] things.

[3:10:57] Every year there is a national super meat that I'm deeply involved in and so for September

[3:11:09] 18th through the 22nd I believe we had a really good time there with like-minded folks

[3:11:18] probably 200 cars in attendance, all types and stripes, so it's great, it's wonderful.

[3:11:26] And so that concludes my report, Mr. Mayor, not a city council event, but a city council

[3:11:32] representative at that event.

[3:11:35] Well, I know you're not running for reelection, so we're going to get together and buy you a

[3:11:43] I mean, I'm sorry, Councilman Allen.

[3:11:48] Thanks, Mayor.

[3:11:49] That was a, that art gallery up there that they opened up.

[3:11:54] That's a beautiful thing.

[3:11:55] If you guys should stop by and look at his art, his photos.

[3:11:58] They're amazing.

[3:12:00] He's a real, real professional, real artist.

[3:12:06] And so I attended also on the 17th of day after that,

[3:12:09] the Cal City's lunch and at the ESRI clinic where we discussed

[3:12:14] the how cities and jurisdictions are using geographical information services to improve the

[3:12:22] services they got offered to the residents. And so that was a great luncheon, a great tour

[3:12:28] of their facilities, what an amazing place that ESRI is. And so then, of course the next day was

[3:12:35] the state of the county at the Ontario Convention Center, I attended that also and it was really

[3:12:40] amazing, I had no idea that we had in our county a company that since planes into outer space.

[3:12:52] We also have in San Bernardino, in our county, one of the top electric motorcycle manufacturers

[3:12:59] right now, and that's just, that's pretty amazing to me, I think that's great.

[3:13:03] That's two things I learned, but there's so much more about the county, Michelle mentioned

[3:13:07] I did have about the great things that the county is doing.

[3:13:14] So the following day, I attended the Inland Empire Veteran Final Health Summit at the

[3:13:18] in Redlands at the Intemporary Club, which is sponsored by the Longalinda Veterans Hospital.

[3:13:23] And it was a all day long event to showcase all the various providers of care and services

[3:13:31] for veterans and their families in San Bernardino County and Riverside also.

[3:13:39] The one thing I did attend also on that Thursday for the first time and I want everyone

[3:13:43] to know about this because this happens the third Thursday of every month right here in

[3:13:47] front of City Hall is the Machado family give away and this family that comes to

[3:13:53] out here with a great big straight truck and gives away hundreds and hundreds of free

[3:13:59] baby diapers.

[3:14:01] So market on your calendars if you know anybody who needs free baby diapers and they also

[3:14:06] have other goods, household goods for kids and families, and for school age kids also.

[3:14:13] So that's every third Thursday of the month at 9 a.m. you can come here and see that.

[3:14:21] So

[3:14:25] on the 28th, the grand terreside, Lions Club had their October Fest and the grand

[3:14:32] terreside country fair, what a great event.

[3:14:34] Thanks so much to the volunteers in the city that hosted that put on the country fair and the lions who had the October fest

[3:14:42] I tell you what those that lions club has got it going on

[3:14:46] Because I went to their bunko on last Sunday. That's for some I've ever played bunko and that was a hoot

[3:14:55] So because I'm because I represent the city on the island on the

[3:15:01] I'm a member of the Interagency Council on Homelessness, the Regional Steering Committee. We met on Wednesday, October 2, and in a special meeting to approve the direction of funding to the various entities in the central valley that are providing services to the homeless. These are government funds that are sent down to a third party entity, and we many of them are churches. I think the Lutheran mission got a ton of money.

[3:15:30] charities and Salvation, several all the entities get a tiny little

[3:15:36] some of my need to help out with the services.

[3:15:39] And so that was what I did that Wednesday.

[3:15:43] And then on Friday, the fourth, I was privileged to be invited

[3:15:48] to attend the Southern California Edison's Leaders Roundtable.

[3:15:52] I think you were there also at UCR with the Chairman of the Board

[3:15:57] the president of CE, Steve Powell was there, and several council members, mayors, and leaders

[3:16:05] of the, from all over the Illinois Empire, the High Desert, the Low Desert, for all the

[3:16:09] way from the entire county, and they were there in a round-table discussion with the President

[3:16:16] of Edison, over anything that they're concerned, a lot of it had to do the rates, a lot

[3:16:21] had to do infrastructure. One of the things I took away from there is the Chairman of the Board,

[3:16:28] and President of SE Redley admitted he said, I'm sorry that the rates had to go up double digits

[3:16:34] every year for the last five years that it was required in order for us to complete the upgrades needed

[3:16:41] because of the fires and he said that that should stop the next year. Those double-digiting

[3:16:46] So that's some sort of a relief and that the pricing crisis won't be quite so high as they as they used to be as they were have been.

[3:17:01] And so let's see, with that said, I believe, oh, I already told you I played Bunko with the land so that was, and then on Monday this past Monday yesterday was the

[3:17:15] to see Council on Homelessness meeting where we actually discussed the future funding request

[3:17:21] of HAP4 funding and HAP5 funding that will be coming up after that and that is the government

[3:17:28] funding that will be allocated out to the various entities and for housing and community centers

[3:17:37] and libraries and all kinds of things.

[3:17:40] And so with that stuff, that was the last thing I did until today.

[3:17:44] Thank you, Mayor.

[3:17:45] So do you want any money of Bunko?

[3:17:48] Actually, no.

[3:17:50] I didn't even win anything off the table,

[3:17:53] any of the drawings of the pants,

[3:17:55] smelly candles or anything like that.

[3:17:58] All right.

[3:17:59] Mayor Pro Tem?

[3:18:00] Thank you, Mayor.

[3:18:01] I'll cut it short here because I know we're long on time here.

[3:18:07] I did attend the city chamber meeting

[3:18:10] We're a senator of bulk, we're incoming senator of bulk, spoke, and also later got an opportunity to represent the mayor at PNC Bank, and acknowledged them as the business of the month, met with, oh, before that.

[3:18:29] I attended the country fair, it was a great activity, also attended the ribbon cutting for our

[3:18:37] photography and we're not fooling around. There's some terrific stuff there and of course,

[3:18:42] she's a very talented artist. And then attended the state of the county and boy, the robotics

[3:18:49] and everything were really incredible. I could see why they, you know, substitute that for

[3:18:54] of fireworks in places, and then I was in an orientation for Omnitrans, which turned out

[3:19:04] to be a fairly healthy meeting in itself.

[3:19:06] I had the CEO of Omnitrans for this neck of the woods, and a on her assistant, and I was

[3:19:15] all by myself for the orientation, just so I could make it to one meeting, but it was great

[3:19:23] was very informative and it may have even changed my opinion a little bit about the sustainability

[3:19:29] of omnitrans. And then I attended an omnitrans meeting, I'll be half of the mayor. And then

[3:19:36] also attended later that same morning at the SPCTA meeting. And it's interesting to contrast.

[3:19:43] I can say that hundreds of millions of dollars, who threw those two devices, and it's very

[3:19:51] definitely important to pay attention to the news

[3:19:55] that we received from those areas.

[3:19:58] But the top or was I met with at her request,

[3:20:03] Senator Rosalice Ochoa Bowl, and we got a chance

[3:20:09] for over an hour and a half to chat about the city status,

[3:20:15] and our drainage concerns, or roads,

[3:20:19] the Mount Vernon road, the extension of Mount Vernon, the state mandates that we get and are

[3:20:27] unfunded most of the time and heavy handedness there and some of the politics and then talked

[3:20:34] about homeless stuff and affordable housing we pretty much covered the whole gamut and I got

[3:20:40] chance to go over with her, what we did up in Sacramento as a body about our drainage in our roads and so on.

[3:20:53] And so I was able to explain to her why that was a concern, why the 100-year-old road that snakes down Mount Vernon could use a little bit of help.

[3:21:04] So, anyway, all of that was important, and I think FaceTime is very important to the circumstances.

[3:21:11] Reminds me a lot of what I used to do is a regular old character at a job.

[3:21:17] So, anyway, I still welcome the opportunity to represent the city and have some more discussion

[3:21:23] with those folks and make sure they understand who we are and our needs. Thank you.

[3:21:29] Thank you. Well, I'm a little jealous. I didn't get to attend the fair.

[3:21:32] I was taking care of those two little babies with no power and stuff, and waiting three hours

[3:21:38] for ice.

[3:21:39] You guys get to have a good time back here while I'm over there working.

[3:21:43] Anyway, I want a special thank you for the Mayor Colton for getting that homeless

[3:21:48] chemit, cleaned up, called a September 5th, and there's a lot of stuff like you've

[3:21:55] learned tonight, and you just can't go in there and take everything, you've got to go in

[3:21:58] there and make sure there's resources and everything else.

[3:22:01] And the ACLU, I'd something happen with the ACLU in San Bernardino, so we might begin

[3:22:08] in flux of homeless because they're going to be cleaning their encampments out.

[3:22:13] So just bear with our city, they're going to be wandering and trying to find another place

[3:22:17] to go.

[3:22:21] And Chamber Meeting tomorrow is here, right, in this building.

[3:22:26] And then right at 9.30, they're business of the month of the mislead.

[3:22:30] If you never tried mislead, you've got to go do it.

[3:22:32] So I told them right at a hurricane where you go, you've got a mislead.

[3:22:36] So I got my mislead right there.

[3:22:38] So now people have been asking, we've got to go fast, but you know, the ballads came in.

[3:22:45] I didn't know the school system was even asking for another bond.

[3:22:48] I know we voted for two bonds before and in the law forces for minimum, you know,

[3:22:55] officers and staff at the county state and then there's also a TOT tax for measure K for the county for their hotels.

[3:23:04] And then of course, I can't.

[3:23:06] I like to educate you.

[3:23:07] Of course, I measure here that the citizens brought forward measure M for our own, you know, fleece an enhancement.

[3:23:16] So make sure you guys read and educate yourself just don't go on there and vote whatever.

[3:23:23] One shout out will be what the League of Cities is pushing is Prop 36 to make sure we can

[3:23:30] repill some of 47, so the League's, and everybody's yes on that, and Prop 6, please know

[3:23:39] because that's going to be set up before they're going to be giving inmates minimum wage

[3:23:45] or on par of their work program is to go to work, and they're going to make them not work.

[3:23:51] So those are the two things that the league's pushing.

[3:23:54] But please educate yourself on what you're voting for.

[3:23:58] You heard it tonight from Mayor Poetem on what Sacramento

[3:24:02] does to us.

[3:24:04] So that's all I have for right there.

[3:24:06] City Manager, you have anything?

[3:24:08] Yeah, two items.

[3:24:09] First, a sad one, Lieutenant Lane, announced that he

[3:24:13] will be going off on medical retirement.

[3:24:16] And he has been with us for four or five years now, long.

[3:24:21] Much longer than we typically get a lieutenant.

[3:24:24] He's done a wonderful job.

[3:24:25] He's invested himself in the community.

[3:24:27] He's been a big part of the city.

[3:24:28] We're going to miss him.

[3:24:30] I understand that there is the sheriff is looking for somebody

[3:24:34] and has somebody on tap.

[3:24:36] It's at least as good as Lieutenant Lane going into the future.

[3:24:39] So we look forward to, well, it could be Sergeant Addy.

[3:24:42] I don't know.

[3:24:42] But we'll see who we get and you know we'll open our arms and work with them just like we did look for Tana Lane

[3:24:51] But we will miss him. He's going to be with the sheriff's department for probably another

[3:24:56] 10 to 12 months until they cycle him out

[3:24:59] But he is no longer able to do active due to your active patrol work

[3:25:03] So he's no longer able to be our chief police on

[3:25:06] The positive side council member Anderson asked about the city clerk retreat recruitment

[3:25:11] We have completed that process, we hired an outside head hunter, got some very, very qualified

[3:25:18] applicants from throughout Southern California, disinterviews, and for those of you that are

[3:25:25] highly observant, you've noticed that Daisy is sitting in the pit, and Deborah is off

[3:25:30] to the side, so out of the review and the applicants, Daisy will be our new city clerk going

[3:25:37] forward, and so she will be transitioning for the next couple of months, and then she'll be

[3:25:44] starting in the end of December officially, as Deborah leaves us for greener pastures.

[3:25:52] Thank you, Jason.

[3:26:08] All right, well Daisy doesn't know what she's getting into, so but yeah, that's just pretty good promotion, but you know, you sure never you don't want to just pull your

[3:26:18] You know, well Daisy won't let you now because you got the promotion so your people being a psychopath so

[3:26:30] you break it or end or an election year and everything right

[3:26:34] Well, that's a good way to, you know, put your foot in the fire, and then sergeant, if you want,

[3:26:41] I'll go talk to the sheriff and tell them, put some bars on you if you want, sir.

[3:26:46] You might not listen to me, but, you know.

[3:26:48] All right.

[3:26:49] So we have a close session.

[3:26:53] Oh, yeah, is the fire out, finally?

[3:26:56] No.

[3:26:58] We're 34 days.

[3:26:59] Over time?

[3:27:00] No.

[3:27:02] We are 34 days into the line fire.

[3:27:04] I just came from the line far, I'm going back to the line far.

[3:27:07] We're looking probably another 10 to 12 days.

[3:27:09] You'll start to see some smokes, some political smokes

[3:27:11] we call them from the interior.

[3:27:14] But fire season is here, obviously.

[3:27:18] We spent the last 34 days on the two,

[3:27:20] whether the three fires have been included in the airport.

[3:27:22] And I do want to apologize that I was not here.

[3:27:24] It was all hands on deck on that last council meeting.

[3:27:27] Even the BC that was supposed to come here,

[3:27:28] he ended up taking a strike team up to right would.

[3:27:31] That's where I ended it up at.

[3:27:33] And I'll talk about one thing just really quick

[3:27:34] and know where we're short on time,

[3:27:36] but being prepared means something,

[3:27:39] the town of Raiwood,

[3:27:40] back to a 5200 people in about 34 minutes.

[3:27:43] That's pretty unheard of.

[3:27:45] The evacuation order came a little bit late

[3:27:47] because of how fast that fire grew.

[3:27:49] We're seeing fire grow that we've never seen

[3:27:51] since the old fire and that was 22 years ago.

[3:27:54] So just understand that to be prepared,

[3:27:58] we have to have defensive will space.

[3:28:00] I did watch the recording of the council meetings

[3:28:02] And I will go off the back of the city manager and say we have to be prepared.

[3:28:07] It's not a matter of if it's a matter of win.

[3:28:10] So I will be returning back up to Big Bear and later on this evening.

[3:28:15] Thank you.

[3:28:16] Well, you're right, sir.

[3:28:17] Be prepared just like my son wasn't prepared one last in three years ago.

[3:28:21] Where's his generator and he never bought it?

[3:28:24] So he got an early Christmas gift before I left.

[3:28:26] He got a generator.

[3:28:27] But no, you have to be prepared.

[3:28:28] You never know what's going to go on.

[3:28:30] You don't know what's going to happen. I know we have a certain stuff, but you don't know you do not know what's going to happen, and

[3:28:37] Mother nature can be a wicked person and

[3:28:41] climates and then and then people

[3:28:44] yeah, and

[3:28:46] Yeah, and then

[3:28:48] Chainsaw's a good thing to have too because after cutting, you know, branches in a hurricane with a handsaw trying to help this deputy so you get

[3:28:55] Because it's tree fell in the street so he could go to emergency

[3:28:58] I was the thank god you of the neighborhood got together and I was all this one out there

[3:29:02] I'm like and I'm doing the most of the work I go here.

[3:29:04] I started giving us all the kids but anyway, we have a closed session conference with legal counsel existing

[3:29:10] litigation and pursued a government code section 54.95, 54.5, 54.95, 56.90, name of the case,

[3:29:28] numbers C, IV, S, B, 2, 4, 2, 3, 3, 0, 5.

[3:29:33] So we're going to go back there and hurry this up and then if I don't see you guys have a

[3:29:37] good night and that's the luck on that fire.

[3:29:40] Let's get that.

[3:29:50] Okay, we're going to reconvene after the closed session, staff and council will give

[3:29:55] directions. I need that. Anything else?

[3:30:00] The meeting is going to be November 12, 2024 at 6 p.m. Don't forget to trunk her treat coming up.

[3:30:08] We don't have a second meeting this one. That's what you crammed everything in tonight.

[3:30:26] See what you got out of?

[3:30:27] I mean, December meeting ceremony, that's 15 seconds from me, right?

[3:30:32] Yeah.

[3:30:34] And you're a pinto that we're buying you.

[3:30:37] Yeah.

[3:30:39] So the next meeting will be November 12th at the year 2024 or 6 p.m. in a request to have item placed on a future agenda must be made in writing and submitted to the city clerk's net and we'll see you on trunk or treat.

City Council Meeting

Agenda

Transcript