[0:05] Okay, we're ready to begin.

[0:13] Okay, it's 4-1. Welcome, everyone, to tonight's

[0:17] Hamper City Council procession and study session. We'll begin with a roll call, please.

[0:24] Council Member Kairis. Council Member House. Council Member Reagan. Here,

[0:29] Ice Mayor Paton. Mayor Martinez. Here. Thank you. Now, public comment, this will be, we're

[0:38] We're going to have a close session before we have our study session, but so we can still

[0:45] have public comment.

[0:46] 30 sessions?

[0:47] Well, 30 sessions are considered special meetings of the Brown Act.

[0:51] And according to the comments from the public elevator to items listed on the agenda, in

[0:56] this case, it'll be the close session item.

[1:00] Please, maximum three minutes of the speech speaker, please begin your comments by stating

[1:05] in your name and providing City of Residence.

[1:08] Anyone wishing to speak?

[1:13] See and then, we'll move on to our closed session.

[1:18] And we'll begin the study session afterwards.

[1:20] Thank you.

[1:25] Report out from our closed session.

[1:27] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:28] There were no actions taken.

[1:30] Thank you.

[1:34] We'll continue with our study session.

[1:38] Study session will have a public comment section.

[1:42] I have a public comment section after each study session item will begin with our first item on the study session fiscal year 2025.

[1:53] 26 and 2026 27 capital improvement plan CIP review second presentation. This is.

[2:00] We'll begin with our staff. Thank you.

[2:03] Good

[2:13] afternoon, Council.

[2:16] Christopher is finance director here with a team at this table,

[2:23] and then behind us as well of Alejandro Dolorio,

[2:28] a financial analyst, and Frank Centeno, our engineering and utilities director.

[2:35] So today we'll be continuing on capital improvement plan review.

[2:39] We'll be covering all the other funds that we didn't touch last meeting and so just a quick review of where we're at.

[2:50] This is the final review of the capital improvement plan.

[2:55] There still be more opportunity at future meetings, but today's the last day of formal review of that section.

[3:03] and then May 6th we'll bring the operating budget for review and then May 20th wrapping

[3:11] up operating budget and everything else presenting a personnel master position control to review

[3:19] and take a look at before formal approval and then just kind of hit any lingering questions

[3:25] that council may have. And then June 3rd, public hearing will be scheduled and noticed as required.

[3:35] And we'll be looking for budget adoption at that time, budget book presentation. And

[3:41] for all that, a new requirement, vacancy rate report AB 2561, that will be also another public hearing

[3:51] item prior to budget adoption and that'll be a presentation by staff just reporting on what the

[3:59] vacancy rate is among staff positions throughout the year but we'll be looking at the end of March

[4:06] of this year.

[4:13] So today we'll be looking at the general fund, measure H fund, transportation funds,

[4:17] and then remaining impact fee funds mostly associated with the transportation funds, circling back to

[4:24] the general fund, the staff would like to share that approach that staff took on that

[4:31] is that there is no surplus in the general fund for this upcoming budget year.

[4:36] Anything recommended for adoption would be taking out of the general fund reserve.

[4:43] So the process that staff used to develop that was at the executive level with all the department

[4:50] head that was the committee for the general fund capital review and all projects were rated on a

[4:59] level of either health and safety importance. Is this a urgent project or is this a project that

[5:07] can wait and is good for the community but can wait? So based on that ranking system and then based

[5:15] on if perhaps a project was attached to a outside funding.

[5:24] That's where the

[5:25] recommendations were developed and are presented for Council to consider today.

[5:31] The Measure H Fund, what we'll be reviewing today, has been presented and approved

[5:36] by the Measure H Oversight Board. So that is all in accordance with the expenditure

[5:43] plan that was approved by voters. The numbers may not exactly match up to that expenditure plan,

[5:50] but that's because at the planning level, that's how those numbers were developed with the

[5:54] expenditure plan. Now, we're going into budget. So, we're looking at budget numbers now,

[5:59] getting a little bit more nitty gritty. Over time, staff would anticipate those numbers to even fine

[6:05] to and further and today we're only looking at the capital section of Measure H. So there's

[6:13] still another couple million to look at during the operating budget review but that's what we're

[6:18] looking at today just the capital portion but again has been reviewed by the Measure H oversight board

[6:24] and that was unanimously recommended for consideration by City Council.

[6:29] So, Chris, just to add that, that also involves, because we haven't seen funding yet, just

[6:37] went into a fact on April 1st, we won't see the first set of funding until July, right,

[6:43] around the, you know, third quarter of the year, you know, but so your budget estimates

[6:50] are just that.

[6:51] I mean, just understanding, and I just want to kind of put it out there, those numbers for

[6:56] measure age could come in higher than anticipated or lower than anticipated.

[6:59] Correct.

[7:00] And that was some discussion at the oversight board level.

[7:05] These are based on current projections.

[7:07] They are actually a little bit lower than what was initially presented and presented to voters.

[7:14] We're at about 18 and a half million could come in under, could come in over.

[7:21] If we come in over, that'll be a good problem, right?

[7:23] then there will be more consideration, more discussion, but there are some large capital projects to consider there.

[7:30] Chief Lee, the public safety building, which will be multi-million, tens of millions of dollars there.

[7:36] I guess I just have a point of clarification from the operating budget versus the CIP budget.

[7:42] When you're talking about measure age in the operation budget, that's going to be the cost of the personnel.

[7:49] that we're going to hire as opposed to because we didn't see that in this current budget.

[7:55] So I just wanted to make it correct. Yes, the operating budget houses salaries,

[8:00] benefits, and operating expenditures. So today we're not looking at that portion today.

[8:06] We're looking at the capital projects. And from a capital improvement plan point of view,

[8:13] So it's mostly anything over 10,000 in value, typically it's going to be stuff that we would capitalize, which means we're potentially depreciating it and tracking that value over time.

[8:29] There are other soft cost projects that are involved in there on a capital

[8:34] like program basis and so you may see stuff like that such as additional

[8:41] maintenance for parks that's included in the CIP plan.

[8:48] So today we'll be looking

[8:49] at Council's feedback. I do apologize. I sent City Council electronic

[8:56] version of this but not a hard version. I know for myself I have to readjust every

[9:04] now and then and use my bifocals so bear with us and we'll go through this

[9:11] together. Alejandro I'll go ahead and turn it over to you but we'll go through

[9:18] the general fund first so any questions there council.

[9:24] Do you see a negative

[9:25] negative 913 thousand in fiscal year 2026.

[9:34] How is that? How are we? Because where is

[9:38] that money coming from? Because the grant funding is on. We have requested two is that we

[9:44] do that off to five. But in the whole, what's the plan? That negative. That negative come out

[9:52] of General Fund Reserve.

[9:55] That would be a decision that we need to think.

[9:58] There you go.

[9:59] No.

[9:59] Future.

[10:00] No, not today.

[10:01] The official decision will be scheduled for June 3.

[10:05] But today, staff welcomes council feedback.

[10:10] These projects that are listed here, like I mentioned,

[10:15] were vetted through the department head level,

[10:18] at staff level.

[10:21] Most of these projects, again, are associated

[10:23] either with outside funding or they were deemed important enough to present to

[10:30] City Council now for consideration to be funded out of the reserve because

[10:35] the large the 676,000 for the Great Separation Project that and when you say

[10:42] it's multi-funded was that because there was need for matching funds is that

[10:47] That's something that we had to or we'd be waiting for a reimbursement of that money when that funding comes in.

[10:56] That would be because I require matching funds as a requirement.

[11:00] I have a question.

[11:02] If we pull the funds from General Funds, is it pulled from General Funds as a loan and it gets repaid back into the General Funds or it's just using General Funds?

[11:11] It is just using general fund reserves and so based on good point to go into though, based on the City Council adopted reserve policy, should there be a surplus in future years, that will build up to continue to strive to reach the 35% general fund reserve goal and we are just that I'm

[11:34] have to look at destiny right now but 28% currently. So we're not there yet but that's

[11:41] still pretty darn good but it did yeah so we're not like that 1% so I don't think staff would

[11:47] be in a comfortable enough position to be able to recommend but I know that on social media certain

[11:53] people have taken and blasted our city in the last few weeks and everything's saying that we're 2

[11:58] million or we're going to be you know a huge amount in the whole over the next two years and everything

[12:03] else. And I feel like they just don't have all the facts with what they're putting out there.

[12:07] And staff will be presenting a balanced budget.

[12:14] So I'm looking at, I'm sorry, or 2026 and then it shows negative 913,110.

[12:26] What you're saying that is that amount would be pulled from the general.

[12:29] That's the estimated reserve contribution required.

[12:31] So then when you mentioned earlier when you said anything new meaning anything that doesn't say new on it

[12:38] You're talking about anything we would add to this. That's not already on this list

[12:41] Correct

[12:43] You said anything if you said anything new would have to be added. You would have to add that cost to that number correct or did I misunderstand?

[12:53] I

[12:53] I'm probably on following and maybe I should backtrack to to clarify anything that says new there has not been it's not a project yet.

[13:04] Okay, so it's not part anything that says new has not contributed to the what we're going to pull from the general fund then it would.

[13:11] If it's listed in fiscal year 2026 or 2027 any of those middle columns it would be pulling it's part of those.

[13:19] the capital request row, I just want to make sure that the capital request, like 2 million,

[13:27] is recommended in the first year. Of that grant funding is 1.2 million almost, so the general

[13:36] fund reserve contribution would be a little over 900,000 and the same would apply to year 2 here.

[13:44] Anything here is funded.

[13:47] I'm just a point of clarification as well is on fiscal year 2027 when we look at in a negative

[13:53] 1600 that's counting the 900 negative 900 from the year before so where is that in addition to

[14:02] no that is it's accounting for the negative 900,000 it's running about just a decrease of about 700,000

[14:11] that is correct. One no to make is that the projects that we have listed as

[14:16] grant funding, it's contingent on grant funding. I mean we don't receive the

[14:20] grant, we wouldn't be for projects. And that goes for the Greensville 9th Avenue

[14:28] roundabout that's contingent on the grant funding. Correcting is that matching

[14:33] that 340 is that matching funds as well? Where is that covered by the grant if

[14:39] you? Is this the one that Congressman Valadeo gave us that 7.8 million or advocated for?

[14:48] No, this was a, um, it was a federal grant that we applied for in addition to. Yes, and so would that be

[15:00] That's matching. Those two amounts would be our matching funds. Currently, what do we have in our general reserves?

[15:11] It is a little over 12 million at about 28% of the reserve goal.

[15:21] What we have in our reserves is 12 million. Correct. Okay. In the general fund.

[15:28] Yeah, we said because we set the limited, you know, the total limit of 35% of general fund reserve.

[15:39] That makes up that part of that 35% were at 28% currently after, you know, the previous decisions council made with regarding the settlement that we had no things that we had take funding out of the general reserve to cover that so to see that it's back up now to 28% and depending on, you know, the economy and how things go.

[16:04] we can, you know, I think it's not unforeseeable that we'll be at that 35%

[16:09] park rather much quicker than later. But also when we first got on council it was

[16:15] that years, it was at six percent. Correct. Right after that verdict. Correct. And it dropped

[16:24] us down to six percent. So we've been, I would have said, the finance department has been working

[16:30] really hard to even have only eight percent. How many millions do we need to go to achieve that 35% if we're at 12 million now?

[16:41] It gets just under 16 million.

[16:46] 16 million total something, all four million.

[16:52] Yeah, because it's based on the general fund budget, right?

[16:55] Whatever I told the budget, so if it's a general fund, 40 million a year,

[16:59] I mean, 35% of that needs to be set aside for our reserve.

[17:04] So then that leads me to it, I should apologize, with measure age and increasing our general fund, quote, unquote, budget.

[17:11] Is that 35% taking to consider measure age, increasing, or is it just completely measure age?

[17:18] Good question, Vice Mayor.

[17:20] Measure H is, although it's, or accounting purposes

[17:24] and financial statement purposes may be considered

[17:27] part of the general fund, the accounting of it will be

[17:30] separate and the reserve policy for measure H is a separate 15%.

[17:35] I

[17:39] just think, you know, most importantly for me

[17:41] is like, as I go through this list and I see,

[17:44] and I know the community sees it as well as the number

[17:47] of projects where it says new, new, new, new, new,

[17:50] this list and you start seeing the things that we have in the works, and I love the comment

[17:56] that my colleague made earlier in the social media and the comments that I've been seeing

[17:59] here the last couple of weeks too regarding, oh, Hanford's in a $2 million deficit, and

[18:03] it's just kind of productive to what we actually are, and to show that the voters have supported

[18:12] us with measure H, but that measure H funding is set aside specifically for capital improvement

[18:19] items that we put to the voters so we could see those improvements made.

[18:24] I think when you start looking at a number of projects that are on here and what's coming

[18:28] for the future, it's fun to see.

[18:32] And I just have to say just that comment that you see on social media.

[18:36] Quietly, your highly irresponsible in my opinion because the individual was a member of

[18:42] Council at the time that made the balanced budget policy and should know, and I think it's more so of, you know, clickbait in a sense to drawing attention.

[18:53] Yeah, I just think that's just irresponsible on journalism and itself for putting that I just.

[19:00] And I hope they do a follow up story on that as well.

[19:02] I hope so too. I really do.

[19:03] You guys are making me really glad I don't spend any time on social media.

[19:08] For the building that's the multi-generational building, indoor multi-generational facility,

[19:16] multi-funded, is that something that's in the journal?

[19:22] No, it's got a number.

[19:24] That's in, I believe that's in planning the planning years.

[19:28] Yeah, it is in the planning years.

[19:29] It doesn't start till 2008.

[19:32] We're not there yet.

[19:33] I know. Can I just ask a question about what that is? Is that going to be like what Lamor has?

[19:38] Is that what we're talking about? Like their rec center? Brad you want to come up and just give

[19:43] a brief vision of that. No, it's a great question. Really quickly in the 2020 parks and rec master

[19:49] plan the need for an indoor rec or multi-generational. We can't have came up with that. The new model is

[19:58] you know the seniors could share that facility during the day and the morning and then it kind of

[20:02] morphs over to a youth, more based.

[20:06] That's been in the CIP for five years since I've been here.

[20:09] It kind of began to plan for that,

[20:12] because there is a need other than long field.

[20:15] We have no indoor recreation at all.

[20:20] We've got the civic auditorium,

[20:21] but I wouldn't classify that as a recreation facility.

[20:26] I walked in there a while ago

[20:27] and talked to the ladies that are running it.

[20:29] And I saw all the different things that they have the different stations around there.

[20:34] I think that that's awesome.

[20:36] Are you guys going to be doing something like that during the summer?

[20:39] That would be a perfect place to take and use with all the stuff that we've done with the courthouse.

[20:43] I mean, with the Civic.

[20:45] Yeah, we're happy that the Civic wasn't already rented this week of spring break.

[20:50] So by allowing the camp to come here, we free up the Longfield Center, right?

[20:55] because there's a conflict there when you've got programming and drop in at the same time,

[21:01] even though we have the divider net, you've got a lot going on. So we're happy to be here,

[21:08] you know, to be able to spread it much bigger facility, pretty well located. We can get them

[21:13] get them around. So I believe our goal this summer is to be back in with the summer camp.

[21:19] I think there's those days when there's an event planned and now we've got to

[21:23] This place them for for short while I'm in agreement that this is needed and I'm just thinking about the things that people told me in the last six months

[21:33] People aren't gonna like that. That's put off till 2029 saying it's I was in agreement that it's a good thing

[21:41] Are

[21:46] there ways that we can take and do like?

[21:49] I mentioned it once before city of the more is doing a special kind of a thing a

[21:55] A nonprofit, I'm not going to say it right, but anyway, a nonprofit thing that they've got to where they can take and get donations from the public to accomplish some of the things and it's tied in somehow, another with the rec department or different things like that, can we get something like that going so that the public can basically if they want to, they can take and do donations to help get some of these projects to happen sooner?

[22:20] Thank you, Brad.

[22:20] What you're referring to is a foundation, I believe, and so we would have to formally adopt

[22:27] Parks and Rec, or whatever we want to call it, a foundation.

[22:31] Many of the larger cities have very large foundations that help to offset funding for

[22:38] capital.

[22:38] It could be for a number of things, so that is a possibility.

[22:42] We haven't really indefinitely looked at that at this point.

[22:47] If we could figure out a way to do it.

[22:48] I don't know who to ask or who could take and do it, but I would love somebody to take on that kind of a project that knows what to do like so maybe like you maybe.

[22:57] That could be a future agenda item.

[23:00] Be a future agenda.

[23:01] I think it would be a policy needed to be adopted by council.

[23:04] I think it would be a good idea to try.

[23:06] Yes.

[23:08] Just going back to the general fund.

[23:10] Some highlights here.

[23:12] Due to state requirements.

[23:14] Agri-cultural mitigation program development is in there, slated for the first year, several projects in there for public safety, primarily police, but however there's the two fire engines that are on their way, the equipping is slated for funding there as well over the next two years.

[23:41] I've got a silly question. What's Romeo excites?

[23:46] Okay, that's where I look to my police folks.

[23:52] Romeo excites or red dot sites that go on the fire, so you can shoot with both eyes open.

[23:58] It makes a really easy point and shoot. I remember now.

[24:05] Helps our police.

[24:13] No other questions? Move on to measure H. Again, this was reviewed and approved.

[24:19] for recommendation by the measure H board and it is in accordance with the expenditure plan but that being said any questions

[24:33] items to note this does kick off a couple of major capital projects primarily that comes to mind is the top the public safety building

[24:48] And then fire station number four, those will begin at least conceptual design and planning in year one.

[24:59] The question is a quick question on those two because, you know, especially with the public safety building and the fire, new fire station, the cost, right?

[25:07] As there are bend discussions or will there be discussions regarding as this first year's measure each funds come in, maybe an alternative mean source or option to get the project started.

[25:26] I mean, I guess once again it's like a bond or something like that to get the project started so we're not waiting.

[25:34] Yes, at a planning level, it appears that we could pay as go, so cash fund the fire station number four, that will only work to a certain point with the public safety building, because that's tens of millions of dollars, staff or cash that we will be able to cash or pay as go, at least for the first couple of years.

[25:59] but just depends on land acquisition costs potentially.

[26:04] We know that the concept or the needs assessment and preliminary planning will be over a million dollars.

[26:11] Recently reached out again to the consultant that had proposed last year for

[26:16] consideration to kick that project going but staff at the time deferred it and

[26:20] to see what would happen with measure H. So we'll be bringing that back to council.

[26:24] So, at least the initial stages of the public safety building would be pay as go, but then at some point we will be working with the city's financial advisor and HA advisors to see what options are best to fund that, and it would most likely be in some type of form of bonds.

[26:47] So, the 6 million that we have a lot or the measure age has a lot of, have they specifically said that that is going to be for

[26:55] land acquisition or that is for designing and engineering?

[26:59] Did they get into that detail or is that at a certain level?

[27:03] Like who did the measure age?

[27:06] Measure age oversight committee.

[27:07] There was some discussion of that by getting into the weed so to speak is not really the purpose of the board.

[27:14] is more review and recommend so that's at a staff level but we we did advise the

[27:21] board that we would be working with the city's financial advisor for a lot of

[27:26] that stuff and then I'm working with consultants too but that's a big task

[27:31] that Frank's engineering team will be taking on we do have one engineer that has

[27:37] some direct experience in another city's public safety building recently so at

[27:43] At least from this employee's perspective, I think we do have some good in-house experience on hand, which is perfect timing for us here.

[27:53] I have another question.

[27:54] Okay, he mentioned land acquisition for that.

[27:57] Do we own the land over there on the one way, 11th Avenue, in the one way, the South.

[28:05] The East Corner for Beacon used to be.

[28:08] Do we own that, does the city own that?

[28:09] on at this time.

[28:11] Oh, okay.

[28:12] That's curious because I know that that could be a possible location and I just didn't

[28:18] know if we already owned it or not.

[28:20] I mean, that in fill would be.

[28:23] It would be could be that's something that if the city council did approve I'm re-engaging

[28:31] with Darden architects, that's something that we would work, staff would work with them

[28:35] on identifying is that a suitable location and then see if we have a willing seller moving

[28:50] on to the gas tax fund. So this fund, just for council, quick summary here, this is a transportation

[28:59] related fund, so street related, street projects. If it's in relation to that area, it can be

[29:10] used here. So this is a restricted fund only for street transportation projects. So that's why you're

[29:18] like, no, I don't, I don't see a park feature. Well, it's because it's restricted.

[29:25] Streets not storm drains or sewer. No, unless it's specifically related to a street project that

[29:35] needs to happen as to be a specific or a direct relation to a street improvement.

[29:42] And sometimes those are necessary in order to meet greater or what not.

[29:48] I'm talking a little bit of engineering lingo.

[29:54] He did give me a thumbs up so he did well.

[30:17] TDA on slide six here is Transportation Development Act Fund. It's very similar to the Gas Tax Fund street-related projects.

[30:36] One thing, I'll just give a quick personal note. There's a lot going on. So we do. There will be a pool on staff resources, I would imagine. So just to keep in mind,

[30:53] and there's a lot of needs out there.

[30:55] There's still a lot in the planning years,

[30:57] and then a lot of these projects do take time.

[30:59] So just something to take note for a city council.

[31:03] But on this one, we're in the positive.

[31:05] So that's a good thing.

[31:07] Did you just explain the zinc blue backups?

[31:10] Is that another public safety type of thing

[31:14] or is that transportation?

[31:18] Is that with the light?

[31:20] Thanks for us.

[31:20] Each of our signals have battery backups in them.

[31:23] Zing Blue is the manufacturer that we use in our cabinets now.

[31:27] And the cobalt controllers are those are in those.

[31:30] That's what controls the intersections.

[31:34] We have 20 something right now that we can't even get serviced.

[31:39] Oh, really?

[31:40] They no longer service and we're making many more.

[31:42] Is that something that we're thinking in the long haul that we have to have those replaced?

[31:46] That's part of the in the TDA. I believe it's in that one are the measure age. It is budgeted for this this upcoming cycle though and these controllers that we're talking about, you know because we have a lot of red light runners or yellow light and it turns red.

[32:04] but does that help the timing on in, you know,

[32:09] a north-brown turns green as opposed to bed?

[32:12] And what that, that's all engineered.

[32:15] That's all engineered through these controllers of how.

[32:17] It's, so the state does mandate traffic counts

[32:20] and timing, minimum timing, maximum timing.

[32:23] So it's your traffic counts, the intersection

[32:25] that everything's taken into consideration

[32:27] before their program.

[32:28] That's awesome. Thank you.

[32:33] One thing to touch on that the vice mayor

[32:35] kind of brought to mind. You will notice in all of these other funds outside of the general fund,

[32:42] they are balanced for the most part. You see a slight negative there, but for cash,

[32:48] flow purposes, staff would not believe that that would happen. These are not all going to just

[32:53] happen right away, so it'll take some time. So the important thing is there that these are balanced

[32:59] in that they're not taking the funds into a deficit, which is just not sustainable because something would need to pay for it.

[33:10] And typically what happens is if an on outside the general fund goes in the deficit and doesn't have cash.

[33:20] So to speak, the general fund would need to do a temporary loan to that fund.

[33:24] And that's not what is ideal.

[33:28] So all of these are presented as a balanced budget.

[33:32] One last question, and maybe this is for Russ as well, on Roger's Roading 11th Avenue.

[33:39] Is that for on the signal, is that for a protected left?

[33:47] Yes.

[33:48] Thank you.

[33:49] Yeah.

[33:49] Thank you.

[33:56] Moving on to C-MAC, which is congestion mitigation air quality fund, that is also a restricted transportation fund, but it is specific to a grant being awarded to the city through K-Cag.

[34:16] So anything here you'll notice that it's a zero balance, whatever we spend we

[34:23] would anticipate getting reimbursement back. So these are the projects and

[34:28] there's a couple here that are contingent on grant funding.

[34:36] And I get you to go

[34:37] back on something really fast. The last one that had, it started off with zero, zero,

[34:42] 50 TDA transportation, down about three quarters of way on that. There's one

[34:48] that says campus drive and it looks like it says CIR from Lacey Boulevard to Sixth Street.

[34:53] Are you guys planning on putting it around about there?

[34:59] That was my question. It's something else, though. Um, Frank or Russ.

[35:04] That is a pavement rehabilitation. I think it's cold.

[35:10] Something recycling. Well, then cold in place recycling. I was close. Okay, perfect. Okay, I'm glad it's not

[35:15] one of those other things. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for the question.

[35:27] Now looking at

[35:28] Park Park's facility impact fees on slide page eight. There's just a few here and

[35:58] slide nine.

[36:00] Okay. Just on the park impact fees. I know that in a future agenda item we are going to be talking

[36:05] you know, about the park impact fees and what legally we could use for them and how we could use this excess.

[36:16] Is this something that we need to have that conversation before, you know, or will after that conversation will be able to change something that is budgeted or the fiscal year 26 and 27.

[36:31] And because if we're able to use those park impact fees and we establish as a council

[36:38] a certain criteria, will we be just trying to, I don't know, I don't know if I'm asking

[36:45] that.

[36:45] I think I know where you're headed.

[36:47] Frank will be bringing at a future meeting discussion on the impact fees comprehensively.

[36:55] So we'll be taking a look at all of them.

[36:58] I believe all of them, right, Frank?

[37:00] Yes, all of them.

[37:00] Yeah, so they'll be sorry, but they'll be based on the list here of of improvements that you see here and then also projects identified in their in their corresponding master plans.

[37:13] So every I think every department has a master plan of sorts and so projects identified in that as well as projects identified here in your the capital improvement funds.

[37:26] which are really the project derived from a master plan.

[37:31] So do we issues that we would have?

[37:33] We have 4.7 million in park impact fees.

[37:37] That's just for CIP.

[37:39] But do we have more impact fees in another, you know,

[37:44] in our operational budget?

[37:46] Or is this all the impact?

[37:47] This is a capital fund.

[37:49] So it's everything.

[37:50] This is all the impact fees.

[37:52] Because I thought that that number was going to be around five or six million

[37:54] that we had talked about in ask council meetings and well it would include I mean what's not

[38:01] shown here are subsequent phases to these projects for example hero's part right now it's only

[38:07] showing 1.78 but we know that's plenty more than that so there's other phases that impact fees would

[38:16] would take into account those future phases as well because it was my understanding on impact fees

[38:23] that the developments in the area of a park like for instance all of that

[38:28] development was stone crest and pinnacle homes and around hidden valley park you

[38:35] know should be the beneficiary of those impact fees from that development and

[38:41] not necessarily taking to other parks on the other parts of the city but it seems

[38:48] like that wasn't followed that kind of that rule of thumb was not followed you know decades ago

[38:55] when those those impact fees were collected so is that a policy or is that some direction

[39:02] that we as a council need to provide to staff or have a policy put in place where we kind of

[39:12] make up for the money that wasn't that we could use some of this impact fees on you know the hidden

[39:18] Valley Park where it should have been used a long time ago.

[39:22] So when we come back, I know that that's one of the questions that was brought up by

[39:25] Council maybe a couple of months back.

[39:28] We will, you know, we'll be researching and try to answer those questions.

[39:34] Perfect.

[39:35] Thank you.

[39:35] And I guess conclusion to the response.

[39:41] Budget amendments may be done at any time by City Council.

[39:44] So outside of this budget process, should there become a project that becomes a high need that is up to City Council to be able to appropriate that.

[39:57] Now just the only thing I'd add is there's a lot of projects going on.

[40:02] So that would be though, that's why this budget process is a good time to take a look at everything kind of comprehensively.

[40:09] moving

[40:14] on to the transportation impact fees, so this kind of circles back to street related projects.

[40:29] One project that you'll see that's new, but staff thinks is a needed idea or needed project is developer reimbursement project.

[40:42] So as development comes in and enters into reimbursement agreements for improvements that are required when they come in and agreed upon.

[40:50] and its impact fee related or eligible, that's what this project would cover is that funding.

[40:59] So instead of staff coming to council to request an appropriation for reimbursement,

[41:05] that appropriation is already made and recognized.

[41:08] And this is based off an existing list that staff has potential reimbursements that are in the queue.

[41:17] moving

[41:27] on to age 10, the Quadix Capital and Replacement Reserves Fund. This one

[41:33] will take a while, so please take your seats. Now I'm just kidding, there's one

[41:38] project here.

[41:42] This is a fund that is

[41:47] a legacy fund from many years ago that had

[41:50] been used to establish some equipment replacement for the Quadix Center, so with

[41:57] with this funding staff is recommending the punch water slide repair.

[42:04] Is there any way possible or have you guys already gone through and figured out what

[42:10] the hourly schedule is going to be over there this year for the plunge?

[42:14] It would be nice if it stayed open and available later in the evening for people because I've

[42:21] heard a lot of people have complained because it shuts off at like four o'clock and it's

[42:25] still hottest can be outside and if the kids could take and stay there longer

[42:29] in the evening because I know we've closed it off for swim lessons or things

[42:33] such as that. I'll follow up with Brad and have him provide counsel even if

[42:38] even if they were to section off a small part of it and still have the rest of it

[42:42] open to the public. But somehow another taken you know it's for the kids and if

[42:47] you're going to have the kids use it. Brad's wanting to say something please.

[42:50] We're looking at the hours right now we know in the past we've been a little

[42:54] bit and again remember one pool for different needs so open swim is one of the

[43:03] needs we have our water aerobics classes and lap swimming which are kind of

[43:08] more fitness based we also have quite in-depth swim lessons that we feel is

[43:13] very important we feel it's actually a public safety need to teach young people

[43:20] and older folks to swim. So we've got all these competing. We're trying to balance out the

[43:25] best we can. I think there will be some adjustments the prior years on our hours and our schedule.

[43:32] The good news is the majority of our lifeguards are returning. That's good. That's rare.

[43:38] One thing that's really nice is whenever you have the movies there. I've been with movies. We'll be

[43:43] back. I've taken them to my grandkids a few times and they really enjoyed it. Brad is the

[43:48] hampered piranhas using our pool or they are at different locations because I know they have

[43:52] used the plunge in the past which took up that a lot of that evening and after four o'clock time

[43:59] frame because I you know the hottest part of the day is two three p.m. but it doesn't start going

[44:05] down until seven eight or so I have requested time we haven't made a final on that at this point

[44:13] Even if we check to see if the high schools would allow them to take and have swim lessons at the high school

[44:19] They will not

[44:22] That's that question

[44:25] Maybe we can ask again

[44:27] No, I don't even have the right pools these programs that you have are they

[44:31] Is there a fee on these programs? Yes for of course swim lessons open swim that type of thing

[44:38] We do offer financial aid on all of that

[44:41] Okay, but as far as public there's just a minimum fee. It's three dollars. Okay, the day.

[44:50] Again, but like Ms. Reagan was saying the pool has been they closed at four o'clock. How does part of the day? I mean

[45:00] Or to allow parents to bring kids to swim lessons. But again, we'll close in a public facility to the public. The public is taking swim lessons. Majority of the public doesn't take to swim lessons. I mean, we're closing a public facility that was an intended to serve the public and servant using it for specific programs. I think we need to consider what's important for the public. Could we have the swim lessons like from seven to eight or later in the evening?

[45:29] We're looking at it all right now. I don't think tonight is the night to make those decisions.

[45:35] Yeah, I think let's get back to the budget. We're kind of struggling into that.

[45:41] I apologize.

[45:44] That is, oh, just for taking a soft track. Going, circling back, if there's

[45:52] no other questions, again, just the next steps will be operating budget review next month and

[45:58] and a budget review wrap up over the next couple of meetings and then public hearing on June 3rd for budget adoption.

[46:07] So at this time, just like to end it back to Council for any final comments, questions.

[46:18] I think most importantly, I think just, you know, this is just one phase of the budget process, right?

[46:25] I'm showing the community what the capital improvement projects, what they are, what they

[46:30] look like, because the next five, seven, ten years down the road future, and what we can

[46:36] accomplish.

[46:37] And like I said earlier, there's a lot going on here.

[46:40] And I think we have to be careful as a council adding to that what's going on category.

[46:47] We've talked about the last couple of years about the need for the road repairs and all

[46:52] that.

[46:52] And so now is this funding starts coming in and we start spending having those funds available to do those improvements for the community, which are much needed, you know, that's what I like about this plan at locks us in. It kind of gives us a pretty good direction of where we need to go and what needs to be accomplished over that next five to 10 year limit.

[47:09] So thanks for the hard work. I think it's very comprehensive, but it goes to show the community just what's out there and what we have in the works.

[47:18] everyone knows government moves slow unfortunately privately you can get

[47:23] things done quicker but you're dealing with this type of money and this and

[47:27] these projects of this size it's their significance so thank you for the time

[47:32] and I appreciate the presentation.

[47:35] One other question really fast rolling down a

[47:38] little bit I see airport capital and I see it they have no funds available at all

[47:43] or they don't have anything I mean how do we take and maintain the airport if

[47:49] there's no budget listed though.

[47:53] 8-6.

[47:54] And the one one?

[47:56] Oh, you're telling me to tell you in page 6.

[47:59] Page 6.

[48:11] That was covered last meeting.

[48:13] And what staff projects is that those are needed improvements

[48:18] and those will be covered by future revenues,

[48:22] primarily from the sale of fuel.

[48:25] So there will be recovery there.

[48:28] That's what staff anticipates.

[48:30] But it is limited so there's only only those couple of projects being proposed.

[48:35] Okay, thank you.

[48:36] Mr. Mayor, I have one question to be made.

[48:39] Right above that, we see the landscape assessment district 0.250.

[48:47] You know, doing a glacier play equipment and putting equipment in.

[48:52] I think that might be a equipment replacement.

[48:54] There are other LEDs that are needing some improvements, is this the time to, and they

[49:02] do have money in their levy or not the levy, but the fun balance.

[49:11] Is this the time to kind of look at those other LEDs that need some repair, or can we do

[49:20] do that at a separate council meeting.

[49:27] At this time, staff wouldn't be prepared to have an in-depth discussion on that.

[49:31] But I think City Council comments on any that are known are welcome.

[49:36] And then we can follow up at a staff level and work on developing a plan.

[49:42] I know at a staff level, we will be having another discussion regarding the overall condition

[49:50] of the LEDs and and finance will be working with the parks and community services department to more formally develop a plan.

[50:01] So we do have some internal workings going on, but happy to receive any comments on any known areas or if we don't need to, you know, gather consensus for possibly a future agenda item.

[50:14] It's something that it will be coming forward to the council.

[50:20] I'm receiving from different neighborhoods and different LADs, certain needs, whether

[50:27] it's from lighting to new faucets, I mean, drinking fountains to little places to sit

[50:37] in the shaded area, et cetera, basketball courts to be put on there, and they have money

[50:42] in their LADs.

[50:43] And so I just didn't know, you know, I understand that we're not able to have that discussion right now,

[50:49] but you see that moving forward with a consensus for a future agenda item or.

[50:54] Yeah, that may be most appropriate, and that would give staff some more formal direction and some time

[51:01] to go through all the information that we have and develop a plan. That is worth more discussion with

[51:08] city council. I would recommend that. Thank you.

[51:12] One last question, Chris. Do you know what the actual amount is that the city gets on gas taxes?

[51:22] The reason I'm asking is because there's somebody that I know that is wanting to take an open up a gas station and he hasn't done it yet because of impact fees. It's 150,000 for him to do it.

[51:31] It's the place that used to be like a truck fueling station over off the 10th Avenue just north of the freeway.

[51:37] And I don't know whether it would be, I think it would be great if we could take and defer some of the impact fees to get them to take and get it going.

[51:46] Specifically, so we can start getting the tax revenue dollars that would be generated from diesel trucks pulling off the freeway and filling up there.

[51:53] You know, I'd look to rank if there's an impact fee deferral program we have. I'm not aware of one.

[52:02] We don't have a deferral program, but staff will be looking at some sort of a reimbursement program, and perhaps that can be part of that.

[52:14] I think that he could generate a lot of funds because there's no place around here for filling up a diesel that I can think of.

[52:20] And with it just being like a couple of blocks off the free, it would be a great location.

[52:24] I think that would be a good conversation to have in that future item with the impact fee consultant.

[52:31] Thank you.

[52:35] Any other questions?

[52:44] I don't want any other questions.

[52:51] Thank you very much.

[52:53] Appreciate it.

[53:03] Public comment.

[53:05] Please begin by stating your name and city residents.

[53:18] Hi, my name is Jordy Nelson. I live at 411 West Greenville, in Hanford.

[53:23] Vice Mayor Payton suggested I come and express my concerns today

[53:27] over the ongoing issue of my property and my neighbor's property continuing to flood whenever it rains.

[53:33] There are no storm drains on Greenville, so when it rains, the sidewalk and my entire driveway floods.

[53:39] My property takes in most extreme flooding, often up to my knees.

[53:42] It continues at my driveway, did the way the city installed the sidewalk when they expanded

[53:47] Grangeville. I have tried renting some pumps. It pumps out to the street and the immediate

[53:52] floods back down my driveway from either side. My driveway is beginning to crack, my picket

[53:57] vents around my front yard has begun to rot away. I've tried standbugs, not only further

[54:02] floods the road. The standbugs also block my driveway and then enforce to way through water,

[54:08] on other parts of the sidewalk to get into my home. The only way I can get out of my

[54:12] My car during a storm is if I drive into my backyard.

[54:15] Even then, I'm still getting into ankle deep water.

[54:17] There are three drivers in my home, myself.

[54:20] My active duty firefighter partner and my teenage son.

[54:24] That's three cars.

[54:25] Two people are still forced to park and need deep water and

[54:29] exit into water.

[54:30] We all keep rain boots and our cars in the winter just to get in out of our house.

[54:34] The flooding is currently causing my neighbor's basement to flood as well.

[54:37] I've seen people in wheelchairs and kids walking to school unsure what to do to

[54:41] move past my section of street, forcing them into the busy road of Grangeville.

[54:45] I did advise that Mario, the city manager of my problem two years ago, during a massive

[54:50] storm. Mario did get me in touch with someone from the city. I'm unsure which department

[54:56] he worked for. However, he came to my residence and said, unfortunately, there are no strange

[55:00] dorms anymore due to when they ride in Grangeville to Ford Lanes. Unfortunately, my house is in

[55:05] the worst spot for the flooding. He added me to a list of locations for a vacuum truck

[55:09] to come and vacuum up water when it rains. During large storms they come multiple times a day

[55:14] and during the night. Short storms they come at least two times. Obviously never clearing out

[55:20] the water completely. I'm very appreciative of this, however it's not a long-term solution.

[55:26] I have pictures with me I can show my driveway and the sloping issue. I also have pictures of my

[55:30] driveway after short storms. Unfortunately I do not have any pictures after larger storms. I appreciate

[55:36] you listening and I'm hopeful for consideration that you will allocate some of these funds that you

[55:41] all speak of to my neighborhood and my situation. Thank you so much and I'm sorry I'm so nervous.

[55:46] I don't, I don't public speak and I just, I wasn't here for my whole life, I'm from here.

[55:51] So I'm hoping that you can help me or at least look in some way down the line as is

[55:58] my hunger of the block. Thank you. Thank you.

[56:07] It's Nelson thank you for coming tonight.

[56:10] Vice Mayor Payton, do you have any information on the property that is referenced in?

[56:14] She's providing pictures that I'd like to bring in your address once again was 411

[56:20] Greensville.

[56:22] Greensville.

[56:23] I'm almost directly across from the fire station.

[56:25] Our station one.

[56:26] I mean one.

[56:28] Okay.

[56:28] You're on the north side of the street, correct?

[56:30] Yes.

[56:31] No one on this side.

[56:32] Outside.

[56:34] I've got a question.

[56:35] Can I ask?

[56:37] Mr. Mayor, may I ask a question?

[56:42] question for you. I know you're experienced on all this stuff and everything else, and

[56:46] I think you're the proper person that I would ask this question to. In her situation,

[56:50] if she were to have some French drains put in the front of her yard, would that help?

[56:54] So I had several contractors come, and they said that they would just flood my backyard

[56:59] inside of my front yard, so kind of in a-

[57:01] By French drains, it's basically a hole with a grace and with withs.

[57:05] My father's a contractor also. Yes, I have looked into that, but it goes under it's like

[57:15] It's a big hole. Yeah, it goes through your head over the top. Yeah

[57:19] And it's in several pounds of like rock and concrete

[57:27] And this is due in my understanding because you

[57:31] So if you drive down Grangeville, you'll see on this side of the road. It's very level. It curves down

[57:37] this way. So my house then unfortunately has the lowest point so all the water

[57:44] just pours into my yard and then it when mine's completely full it pushes out

[57:48] to the neighbors and then flood the sidewalk. I'm not sure if you raised the

[57:52] curb of the sidewalk if it would help some but unfortunately there used to be storm

[57:56] drains you can still see them they're closed so there's nowhere for the water to

[58:01] go.

[58:06] I don't know what the solution is. Your neighbor is the one that brought this

[58:10] My attention to actually supervisor Robinson and your neighbor. Yes, he came door-to-door. He was very nice and so

[58:17] Supervisor Robinson just letting the council reached out to me to see what the city or the assistance because when they

[58:26] expanded Grangeville, it's my understanding that it was at a higher level than what the elevation of your home is which causes all the water to

[58:36] you went to that. Frank, did you, I know you were, are you wanting to say something or?

[58:41] No, I just wanted to say that the information was duly noted and we'll certainly add it to the list.

[58:47] If you recall the last time we talked about the budget and CIP, we pointed out that the storm drain

[58:57] fund in particular was really in the negative.

[59:03] So, there is a list of other projects that are also in need, but we will be working on

[59:10] a storm drain fee increase, and that will be coming before you here soon, because there

[59:20] hasn't been an increase in how many years.

[59:25] The last one I think was 1999 or so.

[59:30] You've seen several houses where the French drains would solve that problem, and it's an easy, easy fix.

[59:37] I have had my father's a contractor, but I also had three other people come, and they all said it would not be a fix for me.

[59:43] And two, I needed to get in touch again with Mario, so I am doing that.

[59:47] But I have definitely considered that as an option.

[59:54] It's also not something that maybe that I should have to fund when I didn't create the problem in the first place.

[1:00:02] Okay, thank you so much. Thank you for taking the time to our attention. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak?

[1:00:13] In none, we'll move on to next item on study session. Presentation of the city approved goals for the fiscal year 2025 and 2026 and discussion regarding some of the measurable objectives for each of the five approved goals.

[1:00:33] goals.

[1:00:36] Good

[1:00:49] evening now, I think, Council.

[1:00:57] Tag team in here with Jason Waters to go

[1:01:01] over Council-approved goals for the fiscal years 2025 and 2026.

[1:01:09] So a couple of

[1:01:10] months ago, a staff met at a strategic goals and objectives retreat or

[1:01:16] meeting and established these. So these are from the consultant that was there

[1:01:22] and the report was included in along with your staff report for your review.

[1:01:29] So this is all from those meetings, established goals and this will establish goals and provide

[1:01:37] direction on measurable objectives and furtherance of Council's goals.

[1:01:43] So as we go through here, there's the five main goals that City Council has established.

[1:01:51] So we'll be reviewing that, reviewing the noted goals that were discussed at that meeting and then receiving, looking to receive feedback and direction from council on which goals to focus in on which measurable, measurable goals to focus in on and look at over the upcoming year or so that we staff can take that work on it and report back in about a year.

[1:02:20] at mid-year, next year, February, March is what we tend to think, give staff some

[1:02:27] time to focus in on it. And as discussed in the report and as we go through

[1:02:35] this presentation here, it is important to note that this is on top of, we just

[1:02:43] reviewed capital projects, right? So there's a lot going on. So it is important

[1:02:47] to keep in mind, especially as we go through the budget, there may be a financial need for

[1:02:55] obtaining these goals or a staff need. So there's a resource need that may pull away from other

[1:03:03] goals that are being established during budget time. So just something to keep in mind as we go through

[1:03:09] here. But here's the five goals that have been established, the quality of life, physical sustainability,

[1:03:15] outreach, an open governance, customer service, and employer of choice.

[1:03:21] So I'll take the first half or so here, and then I'll turn it over to Jason.

[1:03:31] So the quality of life goal.

[1:03:33] So this is as written in the report, the City of Hanford will be a leader in the coordination

[1:03:38] of resources and pursuit of new opportunities to enhance health, safety, and infrastructure

[1:03:43] of our community and individual rights of all.

[1:03:47] So these bullet points, I won't read each one, are what was noted down during that discussion.

[1:03:57] At this point, as we go through here, as we get on these bullet points, staff will look

[1:04:02] to Council to engage with staff on what are the recommended goals to focus in on and look

[1:04:12] towards the future on obtaining measurable objectives there.

[1:04:20] Mr. Mayor, I'd like to put a question for Chris.

[1:04:24] We're talking measurable goals and I see some items up there that are kind of hard to have

[1:04:31] the measure so we can come back and see our progress.

[1:04:35] One is having the public feel safe in all spaces at all hours or invest in more recreation

[1:04:43] programs you know we could create more youth activities in a sense of like we

[1:04:51] can create a bunch of youth activities but you know we're we're talking about

[1:04:55] funds you pay for staffing we're talking about you know what does it take for

[1:05:01] the equipment the advertising and all of those things but to make somebody feel

[1:05:08] safe in all spaces, feelings, how do you measure someone's feelings if with somebody maybe

[1:05:15] feels safe just if they see you know a teenage kid riding a skateboard and they're like oh

[1:05:23] what's going to happen you know or somebody may not feel you know so how do we measure

[1:05:27] those and so I'm just thinking like how do we be a little bit more specific on that and I'm looking

[1:05:33] Maybe just probably producing like maybe statistics, you know, response times, you know, the crime rates or something to the community on a regular basis and, you know, just throwing that out there.

[1:05:48] We need to have those three right there.

[1:05:50] It's going to be very hard to have a measurable goal and we just need to redefine that.

[1:05:55] But Mr. Vice Mayor, if I can jump in here, I don't disagree with you.

[1:06:00] I think one of the things I liked about the final worry on the quality of life goals,

[1:06:09] we added the infrastructure.

[1:06:11] We talked about the needs and the community and things, so that was added into this from

[1:06:16] our previous goals that we had.

[1:06:18] But going back to what you were talking about, I think when we discussed this, we all know,

[1:06:23] we all hear it.

[1:06:24] and it's easy to go through the community.

[1:06:27] The community doesn't feel safe.

[1:06:28] I mean, that's just the sentiment out there.

[1:06:33] We have a police department does a wonderful job

[1:06:36] but they have limited resources

[1:06:37] and they have limited number of officers and they have a,

[1:06:41] so measure each is gonna help with that, right?

[1:06:43] So we're gonna be able to add some additional personnel,

[1:06:45] be able to be less reactive and be proactive.

[1:06:50] Same thing when it comes to fire safety

[1:06:52] as we build these fire stations, all those things.

[1:06:53] So yeah, there is a hard one to quantify, you know, on what a measurable is, but I think

[1:07:01] when you start looking at what we've tried to put in place and address the concerns

[1:07:06] of the community and with the support of the community and getting these additional funds

[1:07:11] available to us, we're going to be able to address those.

[1:07:14] And it may take some time to quantify what that benefit is.

[1:07:19] But it would just say with staff you want us to provide direction on like what do we want to want to fire?

[1:07:30] Some direction in that regard would be helpful

[1:07:34] especially as you as you touched on feeling safe in all spaces could we quantify by adding more?

[1:07:42] Officer, you know because of measure age we could say that we have increased you know the number of officers the number of heart

[1:07:49] team the number of Blue Resource Officers in the classroom because that could be a measurable

[1:07:54] goal because we have you know X amount and it increases so that we could use that as a measurable

[1:07:59] goal. Well yeah and I think one of the concerns right is the funds haven't come in yet.

[1:08:05] We're kind of getting a little bit of carton from the board but yeah so whatever those numbers

[1:08:10] be and the funding how the funding allows that I would see that more so putting that as some sort

[1:08:17] the measurable goal. I like that. Yeah. And I think and I think our chief does a wonderful job of

[1:08:23] you know of coming back and giving us updates on you know things that during our annual report

[1:08:28] as well as the fire chief when they give us our annual report of what's you know what has been done

[1:08:32] through the year. I think that that will start to show that trend change and I think it's critical

[1:08:39] and it'll be able to you know like we just were able to add for you know four additional

[1:08:43] police officers and things like that.

[1:08:44] Those things start to happen and it comes to fruition and I think that's the best way

[1:08:51] to address it.

[1:08:52] So if you look, do you want like a sub bullet point?

[1:08:54] Is that kind of which?

[1:08:54] No, I'm just going to staff is wanting like what type of guiding us on.

[1:08:59] What do we deem as a measurable goal?

[1:09:03] As I'm thinking like the next one down encouraged and implement fun things for residents.

[1:09:10] What's fun for some may not be fun for others.

[1:09:12] and so how do we measure that?

[1:09:14] So, you know, what are we looking at as a measurable?

[1:09:18] And if council deems, you know, it's not measurable,

[1:09:21] then we wouldn't pursue that one.

[1:09:25] Well, I think it's important that they're there

[1:09:26] because it reminds us of what it is we're trying to achieve.

[1:09:31] Right?

[1:09:31] I think I'm confused maybe because I'm new,

[1:09:34] but I don't under, like we're just reviewing these, right?

[1:09:38] Reviewing and providing direction to staff,

[1:09:41] like after that retreat and establishing this goal what objectives does council want

[1:09:50] on us to try to reach what is what is what is staff to pursue in light of council's goals.

[1:09:57] We will report back in about a year and say hey you guys tasked us with looking at these things

[1:10:03] this is how we accomplished them.

[1:10:12] You could. I mean on the vague ones we might just

[1:10:15] generally about programs, but it wouldn't necessarily be measurable from one date to the next.

[1:10:22] I'm not trying to change anything, right? We're just reviewing?

[1:10:27] Yes, just how do we measure it?

[1:10:29] You have the opportunity to change, so staff is looking if you decide, hey, this one maybe isn't as big of a priority, let's remove it,

[1:10:35] or hey, we should shift it slightly. I think we're open to anything at that point.

[1:10:40] I think it would be, I printed out the thing that was online and I don't see that specifically

[1:10:47] slide in here.

[1:10:48] To me and everything, I would love it if we had that, if we had a space to go through

[1:10:53] and if each of us had a space to take and get back with you, we create more youth activities

[1:10:59] and we could take and write down things that we think would be good for us to try to accomplish.

[1:11:09] And then, because for us, that's very, very, very vague to me.

[1:11:15] It looks like pie in the sky, everything smiley, and everything is roses, and everything.

[1:11:20] I think, I mean, in regards to making the public feel safe all the time, they're never going

[1:11:25] to happen.

[1:11:27] That's like impossible.

[1:11:28] We want to take and encourage the public to feel more safe.

[1:11:31] But I feel like, if people call the police department and a police officer shows up, or they

[1:11:37] They stay on the line with them while they get help or whatever.

[1:11:40] Same thing with fire department and everything, people feel safer.

[1:11:44] Okay, but you're not going to make everybody feel safe all the time.

[1:11:47] It just can't happen.

[1:11:48] I think in general, staff wouldn't be looking for specific notations on what to do.

[1:11:56] But just more general guidelines direction on what council would be looking for.

[1:12:03] And staff could go back to the drawing board.

[1:12:05] and look, okay, how can we do it?

[1:12:07] What can we do?

[1:12:08] And fit it in the budget that you have to work with.

[1:12:10] Correct, correct.

[1:12:11] That would be the primer.

[1:12:12] We don't want to take and make you guys

[1:12:14] take and try to accomplish something

[1:12:15] that's impossible for you to accomplish.

[1:12:17] We want you to succeed as we succeed.

[1:12:20] You know, but I mean, if I had that form

[1:12:24] with space that we could take in right underneath,

[1:12:26] I could take and come up with some possible things

[1:12:28] on several of them.

[1:12:30] And then you guys can take and look

[1:12:31] and tell us whether they're doable or not.

[1:12:33] Well, I think what staff would look for currently is based off this or ads or deletions, provide

[1:12:42] staff us that direction, that framework to go forward with.

[1:12:48] And then in a year or so, we'll report back on what we were able to achieve.

[1:12:54] If there's specific ideas during that time, Council is more than welcome to funnel that,

[1:13:02] that so to speak to staff during this next year and that we can integrate that into our inner workings, I wouldn't see this meeting as necessarily that to accumulate all of that right now, because it will take time, right?

[1:13:19] But we are more than receptive to those ideas.

[1:13:23] I like the goal, like access to all parks safely, I like the lighting, I think, you know, as a goal, we should all of our parks should have, you know, ample amount of lights that, you know, if you're there in the evening, you feel safe, if you're walking around, you know, the park or playing in the park.

[1:13:42] I think that would be something that whether it is in neighborhood parks or in our city, you know, city parks, ball parks, you know, that they're all working, they're all, you know, every park has, you know, so like standard across the board, all our parks are in, you know, our well lit.

[1:14:04] I think we also need to take where it mentions junior explorers for fire and police departments, I feel like any of those kids that get involved in that and everything we need to take and have recognition for them because if we can take and grow our kids into doing public service and everything for the safety and everything I think would be awesome.

[1:14:23] something to go in off of that with junior explorers and fire and police departments career days I think there is a lot of the junior high and high schools are having career days that you know just making sure that maybe our departments have some representation

[1:14:39] you promote the junior explorer programs on during those career days as well.

[1:14:45] That could be something that can happen as well.

[1:14:53] You guys are working on the lights for over at the sports complex correct? That's in the works

[1:15:01] So in general here, just making sure I kind of have it in my mind, okay, everything listed here. I think there's some that could be maybe consolidated a little bit, but council appears in agreement that these are, these are good to look towards.

[1:15:36] community needs.

[1:15:40] So listed from that meeting, several bullet points here, and again, I won't read all of these.

[1:15:48] There is one new that was not mentioned at that meeting, but has been mentioned in past discussion, especially during the revenue measure, pre-measure,

[1:15:58] or H discussion, staff thought to add in the transient occupancy tax, the TOT, which is

[1:16:07] a tax on hotels, so as visitors come in, they pay an 8% tax.

[1:16:15] That is something that could be presented to the voters potentially as early as this

[1:16:22] November, so that's why we bring it up now.

[1:16:26] So if council had any interest in that kind of now is the time to start doing that because we would need to get everything in place by July.

[1:16:34] Which are currently at eight.

[1:16:38] Taking a look at surrounding communities maybe made me many are higher as high as 12% in this area.

[1:16:49] It would lead to several hundred thousand more in revenue for the general fund, but should

[1:16:56] council have any interest that's something that we could come back at a future time.

[1:17:01] This is only for people who rent the hotels.

[1:17:05] It's not like our revenue measure that everybody who's, you know, whoever doesn't apply to anybody

[1:17:13] that's not purchasing taxable goods of some sort in the community. I'd be in favor of looking

[1:17:21] at it and moving forward and seeing what is that number. I mean 8% if I remember from previous

[1:17:29] council meetings we're on the very low end and everybody else's at that 12, 11, 12% rate. I don't

[1:17:39] necessarily when I have to, you know, travel, look at the hotel and say,

[1:17:45] they're hotel, they're TOT taxes way too high. I'm going somewhere else, you know,

[1:17:50] but I think it's something that we definitely as a council would like to, I would

[1:17:55] personally would like to look in. Didn't those funds used to go to the Chamber of

[1:17:59] Commerce or visitors agency or something along the line of that?

[1:18:05] Talking many

[1:18:05] years ago. I'm not aware of that. I looked over at my finance manager

[1:18:10] We haven't seen any records showing that.

[1:18:14] I'm talking many, many years ago.

[1:18:17] Before their time.

[1:18:21] Typically, I can speak just typically for cities.

[1:18:24] That money does go into the general fund and is used

[1:18:28] for all general fund purposes, typically.

[1:18:33] And Chris, for us to grow the ASCO,

[1:18:36] we have to achieve the 35% first

[1:18:40] And then everything else correct is over into the ACO right and what can we use the ACO on it's it's at Council's discretion. So the easiest way to

[1:18:55] Related over would be any of those general fund projects that we discussed earlier at budget and of course the IP review those BACO.

[1:19:03] And so instead of pulling from reserve we be pulling from

[1:19:08] virtually are savings ACO and just to give you a shout out as well the CA

[1:19:13] policy our goal is a grade A it used to be a grade B and now you've worked

[1:19:20] really hard with you and your staff we have worked really yes you to it's

[1:19:25] currently at a grade B correct correct so we're just going for that that top

[1:19:30] great. The A means what? Oh shoot.

[1:19:38] I think I thought I

[1:19:41] first was California policy and I was like no, it's not a

[1:19:43] California policy. Not remembering. It's.

[1:19:54] Mr. Price, my

[1:19:55] right. I agree. I think I think that and I'll agree with Mr.

[1:19:59] Tavariser. I think we definitely need to look at having the

[1:20:01] discussion regarding the TOT tax. I think it's it's well overdue,

[1:20:06] it's time. And again, I'm just going to speak for me, but I think you kind of said it yourself,

[1:20:13] you know, and I go to book hotel room out of town. I don't look at, you know, what that local

[1:20:17] TOT tax rate is. I'm looking at a particular hotel that I want to stay at whether it's, you know,

[1:20:24] a comfort in or, you know, the Marriott, it doesn't matter. You know, so yeah, I think I would like to see

[1:20:31] That discussion here in the future, if November is the deadline for that, I'd like Council

[1:20:37] Babel have that discussion.

[1:20:39] I'd also like to see that.

[1:20:41] I would too.

[1:20:42] I also have another question.

[1:20:43] Like, a lot of the people that are unhoused, sometimes they are housed in some of the hotels.

[1:20:55] Okay.

[1:20:55] We would still be charging that 10, 12% to those also.

[1:20:59] So, correct, it would be across the board.

[1:21:03] I'm not aware of what it is.

[1:21:05] I know that it's being a funded if it's those are, yeah,

[1:21:09] we don't, we don't know.

[1:21:09] Because saying it would be, it would be across the board though.

[1:21:11] I might depend.

[1:21:12] I know that some of those are conversions from hotels.

[1:21:15] We don't house, as a city, we don't house almost.

[1:21:18] We don't have a voucher.

[1:21:19] I know that, I know that like Salvation Army pays sometimes for people

[1:21:22] to have a place to stay or a community at KCAO does also.

[1:21:27] It would be no matter what.

[1:21:28] but it would just basically be for that room,

[1:21:30] for that night, correct?

[1:21:31] I would assume that'd be the case.

[1:21:33] I would tell her it's room,

[1:21:34] or I'd use to this.

[1:21:36] Okay, with that, you know, we,

[1:21:37] this might be one of our,

[1:21:39] our earlier objectives that we want to meet

[1:21:40] since it sounds like we're on a closer,

[1:21:42] a tight deadline here,

[1:21:43] so maybe we come back in the future

[1:21:45] with a study session item or something

[1:21:46] to talk about it further.

[1:21:49] I hope the TOT, correct.

[1:21:51] Also, yeah.

[1:21:52] It's a great suggestion.

[1:21:55] Outreach in open governance goal,

[1:21:57] So the community will be kept informed the current future and emerging city matters through a well-aligned and multifaceted system of public communication this first our outreach.

[1:22:07] So a lot of a lot of information regarding the use of social media, highlighting city council, highlighting businesses, informational videos.

[1:22:17] So we did receive some requests that maybe we could use videos to inform the public about what we're doing, how the city operates.

[1:22:24] So all things that would be signed to Brian Johnson, though, who's not here today.

[1:22:42] So yeah, it's our outreach so we want to make sure how council feels about these.

[1:22:47] My concern is over extending our communications department and I think

[1:22:52] I think the responsible thing to do is maybe possibly look on I believe it's like item number seven or bullet point number seven expanding the communications department with possible interns.

[1:23:04] I think there's a lot of things that can be done on social media and I know we talked about as a council in the past that we'd like there's certain needs that we need into.

[1:23:15] that, you know, I was, would like to consolidate the social media, but, and I probably that

[1:23:21] was the comment that I made at this meeting, but what do we want to do? If we're having

[1:23:26] all of these social media platforms, I think more assistance in that department would be

[1:23:34] something to look into.

[1:23:39] I agree with the vice mayor and I know we had the discussion about you know I'm getting

[1:23:44] some help in that department you know it's such a heavy workload there for one individual.

[1:23:49] If you're looking at social media video editing you know it releases that's releases everything

[1:23:57] done. Yeah I agree.

[1:24:03] You say else council? We'll make make note of that one. So we only have two people

[1:24:07] do we need a consensus to move forward?

[1:24:11] The staff would look for consensus.

[1:24:13] That would be

[1:24:16] okay.

[1:24:18] That.

[1:24:20] Great.

[1:24:22] Customer service goal.

[1:24:23] All parties interacting with the city of Hamford

[1:24:25] at all levels shall experience professional,

[1:24:27] efficient, and effective customer service.

[1:24:30] They're the potential objectives that we receive from council.

[1:24:43] You know, I think some of these are also closely tied

[1:24:46] to the outreach.

[1:24:48] There's discussions about putting things on the website,

[1:24:50] highlighting what we do. I think a lot of ways those are going to be merged probably if council to just to keep with these.

[1:24:57] If I remember when I was speaking to a couple directors when we were talking about the customer service schools.

[1:25:03] They mentioned they don't even remember like staff training and I think that is that could be very beneficial, you know, in being, you know,

[1:25:13] So providing that customer service training that hasn't been provided to our staff, and if that's one way that we can improve, I think that would be something would be important.

[1:25:34] Also our website, you know, just being as that you, we've mentioned in the past councils being that trusted source, not giving out misinformation and, you know, updating our web page to make it user friendly, because I've heard sometimes that

[1:25:49] people said you know that it's hard for them to navigate around but I don't know but that's

[1:25:55] expanding the communications department as well you know maybe getting a web person intern just

[1:26:01] to do the website and the other person desperate.

[1:26:06] One thing I think off the top I thought to interject

[1:26:11] is where do we house all these people um adding staff we may have some facility issues so just

[1:26:17] something to consider to you. That is true. That is true.

[1:26:27] Any comments or additions

[1:26:29] to this?

[1:26:35] On public education. We're not talking schools. We're just talking about

[1:26:40] educating the public, not public education. Correct. There's one thing that kind of, you

[1:26:48] know, those QR codes, you could have, you know, we've talked about getting out documents

[1:26:53] that outline who to call all that stuff. There is a magnet QR code that a person could put

[1:26:59] on the refrigerator any time they could and their camera there in our city is updating things that

[1:27:06] are going on due to contact that could be something that could go out in utility bills that is

[1:27:13] something that could go out and at Thursday night markets to families for people to be in constant

[1:27:21] communication and our communication department could easily update that on a weekly basis on a you

[1:27:29] know, where it either takes them to a link on the website or it takes them where those

[1:27:36] can be archived or events, safety, who to contact, public, something of that nature that

[1:27:43] could be like our little city of Hanford QR code that, you know, the first

[1:28:04] thing that

[1:28:06] I don't have a problem with the QR code.

[1:28:08] I'm begging it.

[1:28:09] Maybe not be all that necessary to put it

[1:28:11] with a utility bill.

[1:28:12] It could go on the corner of the utility bill or something.

[1:28:15] It's the thought process behind that is just that it's

[1:28:20] constantly something that could be constantly updated.

[1:28:23] So could they could they do that on my hand for that?

[1:28:28] If it whatever your access needs to be updated,

[1:28:31] it doesn't matter how you get there.

[1:28:33] where all the QR code is is a different way to get there.

[1:28:35] Thanks to the website.

[1:28:36] So we are using it, we're utilizing that right now

[1:28:41] for project specific things.

[1:28:42] So if we have a project that we want to do outreach

[1:28:45] and there's a specific page for it

[1:28:46] and we want public input,

[1:28:48] we've sort of asked our consultants for their documents

[1:28:50] that provide those things.

[1:28:51] So this summer you'll see a lot of outreach

[1:28:53] that we're doing at Thursday night market

[1:28:56] and you'll see our consultants that will have

[1:28:57] to our code things that they will point specifically

[1:28:59] to like that specific project's website.

[1:29:03] So I think, you know, if we can find additional ways

[1:29:05] to sort of incorporate that, I mean, we can certainly.

[1:29:08] The weekly news of the city, you know,

[1:29:10] and that that's always something

[1:29:12] that is being updated.

[1:29:13] It's something that they can always go to.

[1:29:16] You see what's going on.

[1:29:19] That was a thought that was given to me by a, you know,

[1:29:21] a techie engineer idea.

[1:29:24] It's not my idea.

[1:29:25] Yeah.

[1:29:26] What's the thought?

[1:29:26] I have a nuts and bolts question. Who maintains our website?

[1:29:30] The combination. So there's some individuals within departments that maintain their own

[1:29:35] things or have the ability to do it. Brian does it. There's several people have access.

[1:29:41] Okay. Well, for instance, like let's say you want to know your holiday schedule for the garbage.

[1:29:47] Who is the person who actually updates that information on the website?

[1:29:52] I don't know who does.

[1:29:52] They live in Hanford, do we have a web company that we use?

[1:30:03] We have a dedicated employee who does that? We have IT that provides assistance, but as far as I know, there's not a dedicated web service person consultant or otherwise. Ryan.

[1:30:16] Say that we did do something like this. Who is the person responsible for updating the pages? It sounds like it's department.

[1:30:25] If it's department specific, oftentimes it is someone, a single person in the department that has access or Brian at times.

[1:30:33] And that was when we brought to communications director Ron, that was part of the thing where the other directors could funnel their information to Brian.

[1:30:40] Brian would handle, you know, dispersal of that information.

[1:30:44] I'm just, this is a lot of like if you really think about maintaining a site and having

[1:30:49] a website, it's your, this is a lot more than just, oh, let's simply add something.

[1:30:54] This is like, this could be somebody's full time job maintaining this.

[1:30:58] It doesn't sound like we have this person and currently our trash schedule is not updated

[1:31:03] for the current year.

[1:31:05] It never is.

[1:31:06] So obviously we have a deficiency there.

[1:31:09] So I don't think we need to address on adding anything new.

[1:31:13] I think we need to maintain the website we have in a QR code, you and I can make a QR

[1:31:19] code right now, it's very simple.

[1:31:21] That's just a fancy way that a lot of people, that's not in their generational time frame.

[1:31:26] They don't know what to do with a QR code.

[1:31:28] I think it's great.

[1:31:29] I think it's great of information out there, but I would actually like to focus on improving

[1:31:34] our quality of what we have out there before we're trying to advance ways to get it out there,

[1:31:39] Because I don't know anybody, Travis, who's going to any government website thinking that they've got their finger on the pulse of a city.

[1:31:47] That's not how it is.

[1:31:49] If you live in New York, you're not going to go to New York's website to see, you're going to be on Instagram and other things.

[1:31:55] So I don't know, I just think that might not be a goal that is a realistic goal, that a city not only do we provide all of the public services, but

[1:32:04] but then we are supposed to inform the public on top of that.

[1:32:10] We are and I see your point and I see just more I want to advocate for expanding our

[1:32:17] communications because we do have a website and we as a council what we want to be more

[1:32:22] transparent we want to be the information out to the community and so you know through people

[1:32:30] People are, unfortunately, they're not the reading type as much anymore.

[1:32:36] They're very visual, and so that's where I'm looking at, you know, we need to put out

[1:32:40] more videos, more social media content, more website content to be that trusted source

[1:32:46] that everybody goes to and get information.

[1:32:49] How we do that, I think first of all, we need to, you know, as you said, one person could

[1:32:54] be just solely doing the website themselves.

[1:32:57] one person could be just solely doing all the social media platforms.

[1:33:02] This is where I have a hard time with this position sometimes because we've just talked this whole, we've been here since four.

[1:33:11] We've been here two hours and we've talked about how we don't have money.

[1:33:14] But then we're talking about adding on more things that cost money.

[1:33:18] So I just like sometimes we ourselves, myself included.

[1:33:22] Everybody in this room, we have a disconnect about reality.

[1:33:24] It's like we, I feel like, so that's where sometimes I don't know where to go with this.

[1:33:29] I'm just throwing it out there to the simple people.

[1:33:31] I don't know if you guys feel this way, but sometimes I just feel like we don't have a deady.

[1:33:36] It doesn't sound like that's a realistic goal to have a dedicated person who works on our website.

[1:33:42] So I think because the budget's not there.

[1:33:45] I'm just saying just overall, I understand the budget and the deficiencies that we have and what we need to do.

[1:33:51] So, you know, the interns have been, I know we did a couple, we did a financial intern, we did a couple interns a couple of years ago, in planning, and they were, like, we're looking at, I think for the summer, and it was like 10,000 per, 11,000 per intern or something.

[1:34:08] I mean, so I would more steer to the intern side of it where we won't have to do health benefits.

[1:34:15] We don't have to do retirement plans, et cetera, that it might be an alternative in a less expensive way to help out our communications.

[1:34:26] Can we make policy and decisions based on interns and the labor of somebody?

[1:34:32] I don't know, it just seems like a weird, not a solid.

[1:34:37] I'm just throwing ideas out there that we can, because our, or what our goals are to

[1:34:42] be more transparent to get communication out there and how do we do that.

[1:34:52] We can look at the internship option.

[1:34:57] Sometimes with internships and this will be something we can discuss with Brian because

[1:35:00] Brian would probably be working with this individual is, although they're great, oftentimes, sometimes

[1:35:05] they take more time.

[1:35:09] So I think we can look at some options there to see if there might be a way to fit in.

[1:35:16] It's a conversation we can have and see if that might work.

[1:35:21] Enduring budget review that could be a time if we're not able to squeeze it in now.

[1:35:27] It's open discussion for council to add in some funding.

[1:35:31] I mean, and Chris, I don't mean to interrupt, but I look back two years ago where we were versus where we are today now with the communications director and the things that we've done.

[1:35:41] I mean, is it a perfect world? No, can it get better? Yes. You know, it's going to cost money. It's going to talk cost time.

[1:35:48] And we talk about that 90, 10 rule a lot, you know, all those things. So, yeah, I mean, I agree with my colleague. It's a perfect world. It's great.

[1:35:56] I think, you know, but the reality is I think we've made some strides. I think this shows just kind of uses as a reminder of us that we keep moving.

[1:36:05] And again, something that we've done recently is whenever we have grant funding, we've always included a public information component now.

[1:36:12] That's helped to leave it Brian because now they're providing information of Brian. Brian has to post it, but he doesn't have to put the things together.

[1:36:18] And so I think certainly in the future whenever we have grants and funding that allow us to do that, I think that's going to be for top of mind for us as well.

[1:36:32] Employer choice goal. So the city of hamford will strive to focus on recruitment and retention of the best and the brightest.

[1:36:39] So these were there are several things brought up social media in terms on there as well.

[1:36:45] Some information about certain things that could be made available to employees to help retain them or attract them to the city.

[1:36:54] Happy to receive any comments on this.

[1:36:59] I like the idea of the hybrid model growing that out there where people could work from home.

[1:37:06] It is the new generation that is coming up in the tech world.

[1:37:12] That is something that is, I'd be interested in just looking at that a little bit more and

[1:37:18] seeing what that would look like, and you have differences between salary employees and

[1:37:25] hourly employees, and if there is a difference in there, there is also union contracts to have

[1:37:31] discussions with, and it's a big, huge thing.

[1:37:35] but I'd be interested in to see how that could help.

[1:37:39] It's COVID when we went through COVID,

[1:37:41] that definitely opened a lot of people's eyes

[1:37:43] that a lot of productivity could happen outside of the office.

[1:37:49] Okay.

[1:37:57] The other comments on this one are things that add or change.

[1:38:04] I think, as Vice Mayor mentioned, some of these things are going

[1:38:07] to be things, you know, there's contracting negotiations and things

[1:38:10] like that that, you know, I'll play a role in this as well.

[1:38:13] So the housing incentives for potential employees coming up with different kinds of funds or different kinds of grants that could be provided to employees to incentivize them to take and move to our area or to be willing to come to the city and work with hampered and everything I think would be good.

[1:38:45] Can you explain the implementing the down payment assistance program or employees or just for members of the community?

[1:38:52] I think the intent of this comment was for employees specifically so that similar if there's an employee here and needs down payment assistance, they could access some type of funding that would allow them to do that.

[1:39:03] We probably can merge with the affordable housing.

[1:39:10] I think we can certainly look at these things.

[1:39:13] I think this goes back to the cost issue at the beginning, so I think these are all very good things, but these are also very expensive, can be very expensive things as well.

[1:39:36] Andrew Lerma might be able to come up with some ideas of different kinds of grant funds that they could apply for, there might be some available for that.

[1:39:43] A lot of times those are income-based and so it would have to be low income employees only in those instances, usually that she deals with.

[1:40:03] Anything else?

[1:40:06] We

[1:40:10] have this council discussion style.

[1:40:12] I think we've done some of that.

[1:40:13] So I'm happy to receive any additional comments or things that you have your comments council.

[1:40:18] You guys did a great job.

[1:40:20] I think we are all striving to, it's set in the report, you know, everything that we do, whether it's our police, our fire, our parks, our roads, is the billboard for the city.

[1:40:32] And I think we are, you know, with staff and council, we're all working together and I felt this goals and objective session was very productive.

[1:40:40] It was very informative and there was a lot of great ideas that were shared.

[1:40:44] And we just continue to improve that billboard, you know, that people see on a daily basis as they drive through our town.

[1:40:55] And then we use that to strive and move forward. I think that's great thought.

[1:41:00] Thank you.

[1:41:04] Anything else?

[1:41:06] I do have one other thing real fast.

[1:41:08] I knew you guys just in the spring, just within the last month, there was a luncheon for the city employees.

[1:41:16] I would like if we could get it back to where in the fall, we have employee appreciation dinner that also includes their staff.

[1:41:25] I mean, their spouses are significant other where they can take and do it to where it gives them an opportunity for to be there with their families.

[1:41:35] And anyway, I think that that would be good if we could take and do one in the fall too.

[1:41:40] But have it to where we've also just instead of it just being a lunch and have it to where there's somebody on stage they're taking and telling things about different people from different departments and have different kinds of awards or different kinds of things I mean department managers can take and put in for different ones of their employees for different kinds of awards we just need to take and recognize our city employees more because there's so many people that basically just aren't seen aren't noticed and we're very very fortunate to have them.

[1:42:14] Okay, at this time, anyone from public wishing to speak on this item,

[1:42:23] see you're done.

[1:42:24] Okay, at this time, we'll adjourn and reconvene at 7 o'clock for the regular session of Council

[1:42:31] meeting.

[1:42:32] Thank you all.

[1:42:39] Welcome, everyone, to tonight's Amperity Council meeting, we'll begin our meeting with

[1:42:47] is a roll call, please?

[1:42:51] Council Member Kyris.

[1:42:52] Here.

[1:42:53] Council Member House.

[1:42:54] Council Member Regan.

[1:42:55] Here.

[1:42:56] Vice Mayor Payton.

[1:42:56] Here.

[1:42:57] And Mayor Martinez.

[1:42:58] Here.

[1:42:58] Thank you.

[1:43:00] We'll start with the invocation by Andrea Lott.

[1:43:10] Stand and bow before our Lord God.

[1:43:15] It's a privilege to entreat our God to preside over this assembly and the business to be conducted.

[1:43:21] it. Father thank you for each one here. Please guide the business that will be

[1:43:27] conducted. We pray that all things done here today will be directed with your

[1:43:32] wisdom and by your love. Help our community to be a community that stands out

[1:43:38] and stands up for what is right and for the betterment of every citizen. Dear God

[1:43:43] bless these officials and their families. Bless all the families here attending.

[1:43:49] Father, even bless all those who are attending over the airways.

[1:43:54] We humbly ask these things in the name of your Son whose sacrificial death we celebrate

[1:44:02] and we remember during this Resurrection and Holy Week, amen.

[1:44:11] Would you please select someone for our flag salute?

[1:44:23] Thank you.

[1:44:24] Ready salute.

[1:44:26] A pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

[1:44:31] And to the Republic for which it stands, a nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice overall.

[1:44:40] Thank you very much.

[1:44:41] Okay,

[1:44:47] any close session report?

[1:44:52] There are no actions taken.

[1:44:55] Okay, we'll move on to our recommendation.

[1:44:58] And at this time...

[1:45:00] I risk to go ahead and take the lead on it. Mr. Mayor, thank you. Welcome, everyone. It's a special night for our city. So I've got a little slideshow that's going to be playing in the background as we go through. But it's, it's a long journey for these ladies. And I just I just want to first say and I will say it again at the end. Congratulations on a wonderful season. I mean, it's great to have you all here tonight. So we'll kick things off.

[1:45:29] So whenever you're ready, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council and honored guests.

[1:45:34] It's a great honor tonight we recognize the 2024-2025 Sierra Pacific High School Lady Golden Bear's basketball program.

[1:45:43] The 2025 California Inesco Elastic Federation or CIF Central Section Division 2 champions with an overall record of 25 and 9 on the season.

[1:45:56] I, along with thousands in attendance at Selon Arena on February 28th, 2025, watched the

[1:46:03] Lady Golden Bears compete for the Valley Championship.

[1:46:08] At the end of the game, with the final score of 50-43, the Lady Golden Bears were victorious,

[1:46:15] claiming their second central section CIF Championship.

[1:46:19] it.

[1:46:22] After their victory, I was honored to meet with the team in their locker room and

[1:46:26] offer my congratulations as a Hanford City Council member. I share with the ladies how proud

[1:46:32] the Hanford community was of their success and how they represented our entire community

[1:46:39] with honor and grace. The dedication and commitment of the coaching staff and players to accomplish

[1:46:46] this achievement cannot be underscored.

[1:46:51] Due to their exemplary season, the

[1:46:53] Lady Golden Bears have previously been honored by the Hamper Joint Union High

[1:46:57] School District, the Fresno Grizzlies Baseball Organization, King's County

[1:47:03] Board Supervisors, and Congressman David Valladale in Washington DC. So,

[1:47:10] tonight, we the Hamper City Council would like to recognize the coaches and

[1:47:15] players of this year Pacific High School Lady Golden Bear is basketball program for their

[1:47:20] exemplary season.

[1:47:22] Congratulations.

[1:47:31] Of Coach Victor, come up forward if you'd like to make a few comments.

[1:47:39] Hello, Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the City Council.

[1:47:41] It's a pleasure being in front of you as often as I am, but it's an extreme pleasure to be

[1:47:46] here today in this moment, recognizing these amazing girls that I get to coach almost every

[1:47:52] day.

[1:47:53] They say basketball season is in November through March, but if you really want to win a section championship,

[1:47:59] you're basically starting in April and running through hopefully fighting for a state championship in March.

[1:48:05] And so that's what we just did this past year where we worked from April, making it to the state semi-regional finals this season in Division 2 competing.

[1:48:15] And we take everything for granted.

[1:48:17] We want to express our extreme appreciation to our administration team led by Miss Jamie Rogers and our athletic director Patrick Snyder at Sierra Pacific High School.

[1:48:27] There are tremendous supporters in everything that we do constantly there and constantly not telling us to know what the ideas that we may have, except for the girls when they ask to leave school.

[1:48:38] So, to our district office and to our school board for constantly approving us, and making sure that we have the resources available as well, we want to say thank you and to our amazing supporters, the students at Sierra Pacific High School, the parents and the fans that don't have kids going to Sierra that fill those stands is an amazing tree at our water state playoff game, there was over 900 people at our game, and so that was an environment that you were screaming at each other to be able to hear each other on our benches.

[1:49:08] And that's an environment that you want for every basketball game.

[1:49:11] And so we can't express how thankful we are for our community without that.

[1:49:16] Hanford's a special place.

[1:49:17] Hanford has a great basketball history with the Hanford High Basketball team in 2001.

[1:49:23] And their story program.

[1:49:26] And we continue to just work to build on that legacy and

[1:49:28] ensure that Hanford Women's Basketball continues to have a star on it.

[1:49:33] And we hope to be that continued star as the future goes forward.

[1:49:36] So thank you all.

[1:49:36] I

[1:49:43] was at that basketball game with that water and that was a fun evening to watch that game with that gym

[1:49:48] It was absolutely amazing

[1:49:49] So I have a resolution here. I'd like to read it and it's the city hamper resolution of recognition for the hamper joint union high school district

[1:49:56] Valley champion sear Pacific high school golden bears girls basketball program whereas

[1:50:02] The sear Pacific high school golden bears girls basketball program achieved its second central section Valley championship title in

[1:50:10] in 2024-2025 school year, and whereas the team brought excitement, joy, pride to the

[1:50:19] citizens of Hanford with their skill, enthusiasm, sportsmanship.

[1:50:25] And whereas the Sierra Pacific High School girls basketball team were named the Division

[1:50:31] 2 Valley Champions.

[1:50:33] And whereas head coach Victor Shaverin Jr., assistant coaches, Hayley Betencourt, Josh Blair,

[1:50:41] and Victor Shaverin were responsible for the leadership and direction of these successful

[1:50:47] young ladies.

[1:50:49] And whereas it is fitting and proper to recognize each of the following players for their athletic

[1:50:55] achievements, skills, and sportsmanship that are credited towards the success of the team.

[1:51:01] I'm going to individually introduce each of the players, and first we have Kamora Gardner.

[1:51:10] Kamora, if I can have you come on up, stand up here in front of the, come around the front here,

[1:51:14] right down through the center.

[1:51:19] Next we have Riley Rue,

[1:51:29] Greedy Bangar,

[1:51:36] Andy Jones,

[1:51:43] Ava Nugent,

[1:51:50] Mia McLemore,

[1:51:57] Kiana Adams,

[1:52:04] Aja Jackson,

[1:52:11] Aiyang Aiyun,

[1:52:18] Oppa Jock Aiyun,

[1:52:25] Lila, Lough,

[1:52:32] and Yuzell, Kavio.

[1:52:39] So now, therefore, be it resolved.

[1:52:41] The Hanford City Council does hereby commend and applaud.

[1:52:44] It's here Pacific High School Golden Bears Girls Basketball Program for its achievements

[1:52:49] and for recognition and honor they have brought to the City of Hanford.

[1:52:53] Presented this day, 15th April, 2025,

[1:52:56] signed by Mayor Lou Martinez, vice mayor Travis Payton, council member Kimber

[1:53:04] Regan, councilwoman Nancy Howes, and councilwoman Mark Harris. Congratulations to you all.

[1:54:52] Mr. Chair, ladies, the move, yes.

[1:55:30] There he is.

[1:55:46] Congratulations.

[1:55:56] Two points here tonight.

[1:55:57] Coach, ladies, thank you.

[1:56:03] You got what it is?

[1:56:07] See what?

[1:56:08] I mean, with only four seniors,

[1:56:10] the future looks bright for the program as well.

[1:56:13] The future and the past has been very bright for this program.

[1:56:16] So I'm excited to see what the years ahead bring.

[1:56:19] Mr. Mayor, thank you for giving me the opportunity.

[1:56:21] You're very nice as young ladies.

[1:56:22] Council member Kyrus, good job and a great group of young people and they've really accomplished

[1:56:35] great goal and achieved this recognition and want to be able to thank the public for

[1:56:42] being here and recognize them.

[1:56:44] Thank you very much.

[1:56:44] Moving on, we'll move on to public comment section.

[1:56:50] At this time, citizens can comment on subject matters within jurisdiction of the Ampli-City Council.

[1:56:58] There's also a public opportunity to request an item from the consent calendar to be pulled for discussion purposes or to comment on any item on the agenda.

[1:57:08] State law does not allow the council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda.

[1:57:14] accept that members of the councilor staff may briefly respond to statements may

[1:57:18] request imposed by persons exercising their public testimony rights. A

[1:57:23] maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. At least begin your

[1:57:27] comments by stating your name and providing your City of Residence.

[1:57:38] Good evening

[1:57:39] council. I come here tonight to ask you to reconsider your feather flag

[1:57:43] ordinance that apparently was passed a few months ago. I don't expect the City

[1:57:48] of Hanford to help us in business in any way. But I expected not to hinder us in business.

[1:57:55] We were paid a visit by code enforcement and she was very respectful. She was just doing her

[1:57:59] job. But we were asked to remove our feather flags at our business and those feather flags

[1:58:05] have created business. By that I mean we have a dealership and one of those flags states we buy cars.

[1:58:12] people don't realize that when they drive by, and they see that, and they stop, and we

[1:58:18] purchase many vehicles throughout the years doing that. We also have a service

[1:58:22] department that's open to the public. One of those fellow flags stated that. That

[1:58:27] were open to the public. We generate business by that.

[1:58:35] It's just it's wrong. We're

[1:58:39] just trying to, we're just a small business with 10 employees. We create tax

[1:58:44] revenue, we're a clean facility, and I feel like we get harassed on something minor like

[1:58:51] that. If the city needs make an ordinance that maybe some people are going too crazy with

[1:58:55] their feather flags, make it for so many feet you're allowed one feather flag. If you've

[1:59:00] got a hundred feet of storefront, you're allowed one, two, whatever you guys come up with.

[1:59:04] But just to ask us to remove it completely is this wrong. What's ironic though is on that

[1:59:11] That same day that we were asked to remove those feather flags, the illegal homeless camp

[1:59:16] behind our property, which we've complained about, start a fire.

[1:59:22] In that fire, propane tanks are exploding.

[1:59:24] Back fence is burnt.

[1:59:26] Our department has to come.

[1:59:29] And we have it all in video, it was a show.

[1:59:33] When code enforcement is there, those people are back there.

[1:59:36] you think they're asked to move, ask to clean up their crap, that they leave? No.

[1:59:41] But we're asked to leave to get rid of our flags when they just had a fire, burnt the back of

[1:59:47] the property, burnt the fence, fire department has to come out, it is an eye sore, there is so much

[1:59:53] garbage back there, which has been taken care of, not by the city, but by us.

[2:00:02] That's all I ask is for you to reconsider the feather flag ordinance. Whether it's one for so many feet of storefront, I can understand that maybe people get carried away with their feather flags. One more note I'd like to just to bring up is we were a county island. We've been a business 32 years. We've been a county island. As far as we knew, 32 years. Apparently we were annexed in the city. That's how we found out is when code enforcement

[2:00:29] came the pays of visit. We were never notified that we've been annexed to the city ever.

[2:00:36] We found out when code enforcement showed up. Again, she was respectful, she was just doing her job,

[2:00:42] but just want to bring that up. Thank you. Our reference that was Stephen,

[2:00:49] Olivera, for anyone else wishing to speak.

[2:00:58] My name's Leonard Diaz, I'm with Hanford Hall of

[2:01:00] Sales also. As Stephen stated, we've been there for 30 years as a county item.

[2:01:06] We knew eventually we were going to be annexed.

[2:01:09] Like you said, we got notified by code enforcement come and tell us our flags were banned.

[2:01:16] I understand that some places have ratty looking flags.

[2:01:19] We have always kept our flags up neat, clean, they're taken down every evening and put up every

[2:01:25] morning.

[2:01:27] So to get that kind of notification that congratulations, you're a part of the city, take

[2:01:31] out on your flags.

[2:01:33] It's not a very welcoming thing.

[2:01:37] As you said, being annexed in the city after we've been counting for 32 years,

[2:01:41] and the only way we get notified officially that we've been taken is several months later

[2:01:47] for a code enforcement.

[2:01:50] I really strongly recommend City Council needs to sit and talk with the local businesses.

[2:01:54] Not just those of us who've just been asked, but all the local businesses

[2:01:57] to find out what we're going through with your code enforcement, with all these rules

[2:02:04] and regulations that hinder our business.

[2:02:08] This is something that is we didn't really want to become part of the city.

[2:02:14] Understand why, but this is the only way we get treated.

[2:02:21] I would have at least thought a nice little thing, hey, congratulations, you've just been

[2:02:25] next to the city. Here's some of our rules and regulations. But that's not what

[2:02:31] you guys do for us. We need help. The flags help us. They attract attention. We

[2:02:39] have brand new flags that we keep in stock. As our flags start to look a little

[2:02:44] ratty, we take them down. We replace them. Our flags are security. Into the ground, we

[2:02:50] have sleeves drilled into the ground. So our flags are nice and secure. They're not

[2:02:54] not going to blow over on top of somebody.

[2:02:56] And I think they look nice.

[2:02:58] I think our lot is probably one of the nicest looking areas

[2:03:01] on that side of town.

[2:03:04] It's not a nice sort.

[2:03:06] They have those flags.

[2:03:08] Are there some that are?

[2:03:09] Yes.

[2:03:10] And you notify those people and say,

[2:03:11] you take them down and replace them.

[2:03:14] But you're throwing the baby out with the bath water

[2:03:16] when you knock everybody out.

[2:03:18] Thank you.

[2:03:19] Thank you.

[2:03:32] Good evening, Mayor and members of the council.

[2:03:34] So my name is Denise Braybat.

[2:03:36] I'm a resident of Hamford.

[2:03:38] I'm here tonight regarding violation notifications

[2:03:41] and three citations we received from code enforcement,

[2:03:43] regarding concrete in our frightening yard.

[2:03:46] October 2, asking us to remove a basketball

[2:03:49] who vehicle concrete pad.

[2:03:51] I contacted Chris McCray, who requested a site plan.

[2:03:56] I sent, never heard back.

[2:03:58] First citation was December 19, $200 fine,

[2:04:01] to have our RV vehicle removed from the concrete.

[2:04:05] I explained the RV was only there for a few days for the holiday that I was still waiting

[2:04:11] for her response.

[2:04:13] On January 2nd, Chris replied, apologize for the delay and said that the concrete exceeded

[2:04:19] 40% limit, even though our home built in a cult to sack with a three car garage exceeded

[2:04:27] when it was built.

[2:04:29] She said, if we remove the RV and vehicles, the fine would be waived.

[2:04:34] We complied.

[2:04:35] January 6, I informed her we hired a construction company to remove the concrete mid-march.

[2:04:41] She responded fine.

[2:04:43] On March 12, I let her know rain delayed the job.

[2:04:48] Until July 25, she responded received, thank you, despite this second citation dated March

[2:04:54] 27, we received it on March 31.

[2:04:57] First, this signed $400.

[2:04:59] My husband, Wayne, frustrated by the situation

[2:05:02] called Chris, then spoke to Tom Webb on April 1st.

[2:05:06] Hoping somebody would help us.

[2:05:08] Tom said he would investigate it,

[2:05:10] but we never, and he'd follow up and let us know.

[2:05:13] Haven't heard back from him.

[2:05:15] Third citation, dated April 4th, $800.

[2:05:18] We received it May, I'm sorry,

[2:05:20] we received it in the mail April 14th yesterday.

[2:05:24] Oddly four days after my husband spoke with Chris

[2:05:26] in Tom. It's now seems excessive.

[2:05:31] I really hope that this doesn't have to do

[2:05:34] anything with my husband due to his work. King's County Sheriff's Office, he is

[2:05:38] actually the chief deputy corner, but so frustrated and I'm so sorry. Ever since

[2:05:44] he spoke with both of the employees, it seems like it has escalated rapidly and

[2:05:49] unfairly.

[2:05:51] We poured the concrete five years ago, we have four kids that are driving.

[2:05:55] a share of take home car, we keep the cards off the street, park them out of the way of the neighbors,

[2:06:02] none of our neighbors have ever complained.

[2:06:06] It's just becoming frustrating. We have a date set

[2:06:09] for the removal of the concrete, but yet we keep getting cited.

[2:06:16] I'm so sorry, I've totally lost where I'm at in my spot,

[2:06:20] but I just really wish that we can get this situated on why we are getting

[2:06:27] cited all the time. And we have a date set to get it removed. It just doesn't

[2:06:32] make sense. Thank you. Thank you.

[2:06:41] Good evening, Bob Ramos. I live here in the city.

[2:06:45] Incidentally, measure H. Part of that money is going to hire another

[2:06:50] their code enforcement officer.

[2:06:52] I've been coming to this podium for many years,

[2:06:55] well over 14, but like that.

[2:06:57] And I've never heard some much issues with code enforcement

[2:07:00] as there is in the last couple of years.

[2:07:03] It seemed like they're like a stumble of some sort.

[2:07:06] They're hitting these businesses.

[2:07:08] The flag issue, the other flags.

[2:07:10] I see them all over town.

[2:07:11] In fact, there's one on city property

[2:07:13] at the new electrical place on Lacey Boulevard.

[2:07:16] It just seems outrageous that we're hitting the public, the people that we depend on to pay those sales tax and spend money and so forth.

[2:07:27] So it just seemed like higher than other ones going to even increase that particular problem.

[2:07:34] back on another issue, a back on June 21 to 21, on the agenda that evening was a close

[2:07:43] session regarding our city attorney, Mr. Facility there, and they were looking at his

[2:07:52] performance evaluation and so forth. You guys haven't done that, but you did call for

[2:07:57] And soon after that, there was a consensus to go out for a new attorney, I think in

[2:08:04] 22.

[2:08:06] And they did the work and they came back with about four people, three people to replace

[2:08:11] our existing city attorney.

[2:08:13] And somehow another had got stopped in the process by Mr. Sequentes, based on some kind

[2:08:19] of leakage of information or so forth that I heard, I don't know exactly, but it terminated.

[2:08:23] And then a couple of weeks ago,

[2:08:27] three council meetings back,

[2:08:29] you have a consensus to bring this forward again

[2:08:32] to shop for a new city attorney.

[2:08:36] And that hasn't come to the agenda.

[2:08:38] And I want to know why.

[2:08:39] This needs Mr. Mazzotti has been here since 2007

[2:08:44] way beyond the time that most cities have an attorney on staff.

[2:08:49] We need to see what's out there,

[2:08:51] give some other city attorneys a chance

[2:08:53] to present their abilities to the city council, see what the prices are, and all that.

[2:09:00] So you need to do that back to the, back in June of 21 I believe is John Doyle stood

[2:09:07] right here about annexations and about the, if you have certain things when you get annexed

[2:09:15] it will stay the same.

[2:09:16] If you take them down, you can't put them back up, example, a cow.

[2:09:20] If you have a cow in your backyard like some of those areas could have had or did if a cow was there

[2:09:25] He could have as long as it lived once it died. You couldn't put another cow in

[2:09:28] And so what he said if you go back to Bank of June of 21 right here at this podium

[2:09:34] I'll say a session that he talked about the annexations and

[2:09:37] Things that were still the same that means that those flags and the on this annex

[2:09:43] Position that the car lot should stay there. Thank you

[2:09:46] Thank you

[2:09:54] Good evening, and well, first of all, thank you

[2:09:57] first time here, thanks for the opportunity.

[2:10:00] It's going to sound repetitive,

[2:10:01] but it is about the feather flag ordinance.

[2:10:05] I am Jorge Casas representing Shogun Auto Center.

[2:10:10] Vehicle dealer has been serving the local and surrounding

[2:10:14] communities for over 22 years.

[2:10:17] It is a staple for us, for the car business in general,

[2:10:20] those feather flags, balloons, and certain other things

[2:10:22] that kind of signify that we're open to the public,

[2:10:25] but they can come in and look at the vehicles, they do bring attention.

[2:10:30] In our specific case, we have four, and just like the people at Hanford Auto Sales,

[2:10:36] we keep them nice and clean and neat.

[2:10:38] And ours are actually inside the lot, not in the street.

[2:10:42] But the code enforcement lady came in and told us that we still had to take him down.

[2:10:47] Funny thing, she is a previous customer of ours, and her words were, please forget my face

[2:10:53] when I come back to buy a car.

[2:10:55] that leads me to understand that even she thought it was kind of ridiculous and

[2:10:59] pointless but however I know she doesn't make the code but if it can be taken into

[2:11:06] consideration that will be wonderful we need every tool and help that we can get

[2:11:12] so we can generate more money and therefore have a bigger impact in our local

[2:11:15] economy. That's pretty much it, but we would love to get heard about this. Thank you.

[2:11:24] Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak?

[2:11:31] Frank Santano, Utilities and Engineering Director. Mr. Mayor Staff would like to pull item F off the consent calendar.

[2:11:38] F is in Frank. Thank you.

[2:11:45] Item F pulled.

[2:11:46] Judy

[2:11:49] Scott Hanford wasn't really going to say anything tonight, but I keep kind of like Bob said, I keep showing up here and just about every city council, someone's complaining about code enforcement.

[2:12:03] I hear tonight looked at all your goals and your objectives and what you guys want it. You want us to be happy.

[2:12:12] And this isn't the way to do it.

[2:12:14] You either need to change the code or get the code enforcement.

[2:12:20] People on the right page.

[2:12:25] I hear people trying to do the right thing after they've been told that they can't do that.

[2:12:34] But then I hear that, oh, here, get more money, more money, more money.

[2:12:38] I don't think that's the right way to operate.

[2:12:42] I really think that you guys need to take a look at this and I know what's going on because

[2:12:49] if it's just one isolated incident, maybe not, but I don't see that.

[2:12:55] I see it as a big problem.

[2:12:57] Thank you.

[2:12:58] Thank you.

[2:13:02] Anyone else wishing to speak?

[2:13:07] Seeing none, we'll close public hearing, public comment section and we'll move on to consent

[2:13:12] and calendar, consent calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion.

[2:13:20] There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless the separate request is made

[2:13:25] to pull an item from the consent calendar and discussed and voted upon separately.

[2:13:30] And item F has been pulled and in any other items, council.

[2:13:36] Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to approve items A through G, admitting F.

[2:13:43] Okay, we have motion, second,

[2:14:00] motion passes, 5-0, item F.

[2:14:08] Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, staff would like to provide you a more accurate

[2:14:14] at number on the total purchase price of the generator described in your report.

[2:14:22] The purchase price in your report indicates a cost of 283,908.

[2:14:29] The new price or the new cost would reflect sales tax.

[2:14:35] That's the new at the new rate of eight and a quarter.

[2:14:37] and then there was also a slight increase to an accessory unit, a transfer switch.

[2:14:43] That increase was 2,323, so the updated cost for the generator, including taxes, is 309,000.

[2:15:02] And that concludes my report unless there's questions for staff.

[2:15:07] Requested to council.

[2:15:12] Motion.

[2:15:16] I'll second.

[2:15:20] I have motion and a second.

[2:15:33] Motion passes, my vote. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

[2:15:39] It this time we'll go on to our public hearing. Community development, public hearing to accept comments regarding proposed modification to plan unit development. Request to modify the live vote, master plan.

[2:15:54] unit development to delete requirements for decorative lighting, for liboque, east tracks,

[2:16:01] 865, 881, and 912. Modifications of resting, uh, tentative track 865, 881, and 912. Request

[2:16:13] to remove the requirement for decorative lighting from the tentative track resolution

[2:16:21] condition consistent with changes proposed to be made to the ribogue master plan.

[2:16:27] Location is 865-881 and negative 912, generally located between NUME and Houston Avenue's

[2:16:39] east of 12th Avenue.

[2:16:43] Sam, I'll open up the table.

[2:16:47] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:16:49] Yeah, so I'd like to provide some context. So you know, we sort of described the track locations, but this shows a map of generally when we're talking about this this development project and the request we're referring to this area that's that's outlined and read there.

[2:17:04] It's part of the live oak master plan. It's a residential, low density residential subdivision.

[2:17:13] The Live Oak Master Plan was originally approved by Council in 2009.

[2:17:18] It's a planned community of 390 acres, 1,560 dwelling units.

[2:17:23] And in addition to that, there's park space and other amenities.

[2:17:27] If you go back, you can kind of see this right here, aligns with this right here.

[2:17:33] So that's the part of the development that we're looking at.

[2:17:39] The request is sort of twofold.

[2:17:42] The first is an amendment to the LIBOC master plan and the associated plan unit development and tentative track resolutions, and those are listed below.

[2:17:51] The second part is a request to eliminate the decorative lighting requirement and offset the sort of value associated with that with 150,000 contribution from the developer towards amenities into the LIBOC park, which is located right here.

[2:18:11] So some history behind this master this agreement the requirement for decorative lighting is found within the live oak master plan so the document that council adopted in 2009 indicated that this development had a specific type of decorative lighting that was different than sort of the standard by the new scene of subdivision.

[2:18:31] As noted by the applicants, the Glendora sidewalk pool in Acorn Light is no longer offered

[2:18:37] by Southern California Edison, so by the time they were installing lights, this particular

[2:18:41] light was no longer available from Edison.

[2:18:44] Request is made to staff to replace that light with a different decorative light.

[2:18:49] So decorative light for decorative light.

[2:18:52] Provided the description of that light below, but it's a decorative light.

[2:18:56] So since the request could be justified as being substantially similar, staff was able

[2:19:02] to administratively approve it.

[2:19:04] So the document allows the director some leeway hay if there's minor modifications and it's

[2:19:08] not major, you're switching one decorative light for another one, we could sign off on it.

[2:19:13] So that was sort of the original request and the attached memo shows that.

[2:19:21] Later on there was an updated lighting request from the developer to eliminate the decorative

[2:19:27] of lighting altogether in favor of a city standard light. So this would be sort of a typical

[2:19:32] light that you see in a subdivision. In the portions of the live-out tracks were their

[2:19:37] developments taking place. And I'll go back to the map because I think it's kind of important

[2:19:41] provide context. The development is very, very large. Their portion, the development, sorry,

[2:19:48] is on the east side here. So the request to change the lighting to just the regular lighting

[2:19:55] would just apply to the side east of that 12th by my street right there.

[2:20:04] Yeah, just to make clear, this request for an amendment to remove the decorative lighting

[2:20:11] requirement would just apply to their portion of the development and not to the other portion

[2:20:15] of the development that's included in the master plan.

[2:20:20] The requirement for decorative lighting is referenced in several places.

[2:20:24] One is the planned unit development 2005-04 resolution.

[2:20:29] So, what we had to do in why there's so many actions up here is the reference to the

[2:20:35] decorative light is found in a lot of places, right?

[2:20:37] It's found in the PUD, it's found in the development agreement, it's found in some resolutions,

[2:20:41] so we're having to go back and we're modifying those to make it consistent.

[2:20:46] So in the PUD, you'll see that area highlighted in red is where the modification takes place,

[2:20:53] So it indicates that the decorative lighting is required except as modified for Live Oak East

[2:21:01] tracks 865, 818, 912, so it carved out that exception.

[2:21:06] Later on, there's another section that's part of a resolution that also sort of strikes

[2:21:12] language out and indicates that it's been modified to show that we're making, there are requests

[2:21:18] to make an exception for the decorative lighting requirement for this particular part of this

[2:21:22] subdivision.

[2:21:26] Due to it being a change to a several changes taking place, it had to go

[2:21:32] to the Planning Commission first before it came to Council. The staff presented the

[2:21:37] Planning Commission on March 25th, 2025. We received two comments. One was in favor, Nick

[2:21:44] Peters, who represents the applicant, and there was no one opposed at the meeting.

[2:21:53] We did

[2:21:54] 5.0 vote from the planning commission.

[2:21:58] As a case with all sort of evaluations, we looked at the

[2:22:01] environmental side of things. The changes proposed to live oak in this master plan

[2:22:07] doesn't would not require an additional environmental assessment. There was an EIR done in the past.

[2:22:13] So consequently a supplemental EIR or ISMNB is not required in this case. So no further

[2:22:20] or major environmental assessment.

[2:22:24] Again, the conditions of approval here,

[2:22:26] if Council were to move forward with this,

[2:22:28] is it would eliminate the requirement

[2:22:31] for decorative lighting in this subdivision,

[2:22:34] and it would also have a requirement

[2:22:37] that the developer would contribute 150,000

[2:22:39] towards park amenities in that neighborhood park.

[2:22:42] And that number to sort of discuss where that came from

[2:22:45] is we looked at the value of the decorative lighting

[2:22:48] and the value of the standard lighting

[2:22:50] in the gap between those two numbers with the polls that had already been installed

[2:22:57] came out to about this number. That's where that number came from.

[2:23:03] With that, I'm happy to answer any questions and here's the motions that would be associated

[2:23:07] with this if it were to be approved.

[2:23:09] I do have one question. Yes.

[2:23:12] And this is directed for Brad. You probably would be the person that would be deciding how

[2:23:16] that those funds get spent because they're being directed to the park. What do you anticipate

[2:23:20] doing with that.

[2:23:26] We haven't gotten to that level of detail yet. Several things we

[2:23:31] could do. You could add on to play structures. You can do different age play

[2:23:37] structures. You could put our shelters. There's a variety of ways you could use

[2:23:44] that 150. But we have not landed like you will do this. There's some of the thoughts

[2:23:50] you have okay yeah just to enhance the existing park question to them and this isn't necessarily

[2:23:59] the specific instance but is well do we does the city of hamper build the park in this new

[2:24:07] neighborhood or do they or does the builder build the park the developer would develop her build

[2:24:12] the park so then Brad wouldn't really see that money because we're just telling the developer that

[2:24:18] that they would need to point out a part that was a value of 110,000?

[2:24:22] So in this case, the discussion has, or the action would be that they would contribute 150,000

[2:24:27] toward park amenities.

[2:24:28] Certainly, it would be a discussion about the value of the amenities with the developer who

[2:24:33] would install the amenities, but you would figure out what that value would be with them, if

[2:24:38] that makes sense.

[2:24:39] But you would have control over what that energy got used for.

[2:24:46] Yeah, so we'd have a discussion with them. We would talk about costs. We would arrive at something that's 150,000. Brad might have specific things

[2:24:52] You'd like to see and we would look at what the overall cost is and we'd have 150,000. But that park is already built. Yes, so it would be an additional amenity in that existing park.

[2:25:01] You would be able to stay in that park. It stays in that park, correct?

[2:25:06] We go back to the

[2:25:10] map of the development. Oh, yes.

[2:25:14] one before. Now currently there are definitely in those being built and the

[2:25:22] park is being built. Now is there any decorative or how many decorative

[2:25:27] lights are currently installed or is it all the street lights? Are there

[2:25:34] street lights currently? Did you give us like a little breakdown of how many

[2:25:38] different types of lights are we going to see in one development?

[2:25:41] Yeah, so so right now the standard street lights are installed on the property the developer wanted to be able to move forward with the development. This was seen as a measure to allow them to

[2:25:52] Develop and close home so they installed the standard street lights. So right now there aren't any decorative lights. So

[2:26:00] The requirement is if you know

[2:26:04] So the requirement right now is to have decorative lights, right?

[2:26:07] So the city has the ability to indicate, hey, these lights need to be replaced.

[2:26:11] These were meant to be sort of temporary and replaced with decorative lights.

[2:26:15] It was the hold up in stone because according to the plan, they were supposed to put in decorative lights.

[2:26:22] Was the hold up, but they put in regular street lights.

[2:26:28] Where did it, where did it, was there a communication?

[2:26:30] they know about what the PUD stated and everything or was there because those

[2:26:36] acorn lights were no longer mean so they did it and I'm just trying to

[2:26:41] understand the whole yeah as I recall and we do have a representative from the

[2:26:47] developer here that it was initially going to be a temporary thing with the intent

[2:26:52] to sort of come back and replace it with decorative lights once there was a

[2:26:56] determination made on an adequate replacement, right?

[2:26:59] We know these lights are unavailable.

[2:27:01] At some future date, when we know they're available,

[2:27:04] we could swap them out.

[2:27:05] They needed lights there before they could start selling help.

[2:27:08] Yeah, the way I understand it.

[2:27:13] Any other questions?

[2:27:15] So I guess that's my question, Jason, is when the developer

[2:27:22] originally submitted their plans for that development,

[2:27:25] There was a specific requirement requiring a decorative light as I understand it.

[2:27:33] Went in, shared their development, started building homes, didn't order, either didn't

[2:27:40] order the decorative lights or miss ordered the lights, what I don't know, but the standard

[2:27:47] lights show up, they installed the standard lights.

[2:27:50] So now we're aware of the dilemmas that they haven't honored, I guess honored as a word

[2:27:56] I would use that the requirements of the development for the decorative lighting that was agreed

[2:28:02] upon part of the development taking form and in construction being done, correct?

[2:28:09] So yes, that sort of decorative light requirement associated with this development was established

[2:28:14] you know, in mid 2000, 2005, 677, something to that effect.

[2:28:20] And so now that they've put in these regular street lights,

[2:28:25] now they're asking for an exemption, basically,

[2:28:28] and that the standard street lights are in,

[2:28:31] they're working, they're functional,

[2:28:34] instead of replacing all these street lights

[2:28:37] with the requirement for the decorative lighting.

[2:28:40] Now, I guess, is that my, is my assumption they're correct?

[2:28:45] Yes, and I would add for the additional caveat that it would it would also apply to the rest of the undeveloped

[2:28:54] portion of the subdivision. I don't want to give the impression that it would

[2:28:58] moving forward that there would be decorative lights. This would allow for non decorative lights

[2:29:03] in the rest of the subdivision on this side. So the individuals that went out and purchased these homes

[2:29:09] may or may not have known that

[2:29:12] deck of the lighting would have been part

[2:29:13] of the aesthetics for that neighborhood correct.

[2:29:17] They were potentially could of.

[2:29:19] I mean, they may have had, you know,

[2:29:21] may have asked the question like, hey, what, you know,

[2:29:23] what's there?

[2:29:24] Or they may have been told,

[2:29:27] the street lights are temporary.

[2:29:28] We're going to put in decorative lighting.

[2:29:30] We just, you know, we couldn't get them ordered.

[2:29:32] I don't know.

[2:29:32] I guess we're just now being asked to make the change.

[2:29:36] I mean, you know, I guess I struggle with the conditions of the agreement and what we're

[2:29:44] trying to achieve is RSE aesthetics goal for this, not only this development moving forward,

[2:29:51] but I know that we're looking at potentially developing the property on the west side of 12th Avenue.

[2:30:00] Are they going to be given the same option of not having decorative lighting and they can put in normal streetlights or but by the code or by the agreement, it's decorative lighting, correct? Correct. So there hasn't been any requests from any other developer property owner to sort of go with the non decorative lighting. So as of right now, you know, the decorative lighting requirement would still apply to the property, the properties west of west of 12.

[2:30:29] My thought is, I mean, I'm good with switching to the other street lights, I think it's not going to matter that much to potential residents or current residents aren't going to care as much as long as they've got lighting that makes them feel safe, but I like the idea of getting the $150,000 extra to use for park.

[2:30:47] That one's coming forward. Do we have the ability to because they're going to save money because they don't have to do those do we have the ability to take and get extra funds for those coming going forward.

[2:30:58] That could be used for extra amenities for the parks.

[2:31:02] I would assume not because that money is really tied specifically to the lights that were already installed right if there is an assumption that they were supposed to be a decorative light.

[2:31:12] There's a standard light, there's effectively a loss there, right?

[2:31:17] If you look at the price gap and so that sort of park amenity, those park amenity dollars are associated with that.

[2:31:25] It's not associated with future light changes or anything like that.

[2:31:28] If I would think that if there was a request in the future, get rid of that requirement all together,

[2:31:36] I don't know if we would be in a sort of similar position.

[2:31:39] I assume, I mean, Councillor could make requests, but I think that's where I'm kind of going

[2:31:44] here is, is it make the exception here, right, then we're going to be making exceptions

[2:31:48] for any other development that occurs moving forward.

[2:31:53] We don't necessarily have an option on this because the lights that they were going to use

[2:31:57] aren't available anymore.

[2:31:59] What they've done is they've managed to take and pull $150,000 for us.

[2:32:05] If it is, there is decorative lighting available.

[2:32:07] Yeah, it's my understanding that staff went ahead and gave the developer a comparative alternative

[2:32:16] from what was initially that correct.

[2:32:19] I mean, yeah, so we found another decorative light that was, you know, SE had available

[2:32:25] that and, you know, we staff in the developer agreed that it was close enough or decorative enough

[2:32:32] that we could still claim it was decorative lighting so there was an alternative to sort of what was originally in the master plan and the developer did agree to that yes that new decorative lighting was that assigned agreement or was that something that was just

[2:32:50] The amendment was placed to the current, you know, the current, because this is the third amendment desired. Is that correct? Yes, there's been previous amendments.

[2:33:02] I don't recall what the details are. They predate me by some time, but yes, there have been amendments in the past. I think most of them are design related if I remember correctly.

[2:33:11] Yeah,

[2:33:14] I don't, I don't, I don't want to give my, I'm sorry, Mr. Vice Mayor, I don't want to give my eye off the ball.

[2:33:18] I mean, I understand the importance of maybe yet, you know, or some concern of, that means some additional park funding, but the park's built.

[2:33:28] It's there. It's, it met the criteria of the developer at the time they developed it.

[2:33:33] It really were just coming down to, you know, the lights and the agreement that was what style of lighting would be in that development.

[2:33:40] I just I'm just afraid we make an exception on this one. We're going to be asked to make exceptions moving forward when we're trying to get

[2:33:50] Councilman Kyrus. I completely agree with what you're saying is that I don't I don't want to establish a precedence that we can

[2:33:57] Enter into agreement and all of a sudden we keep on changing as this being the third time

[2:34:04] And we're only speaking of right now the current development is what's in the red?

[2:34:10] correct the next picture there's an expansion is that will that be built by

[2:34:17] the same developer or is that going to be up to bid for other developers to look

[2:34:23] into that may appreciate and like the decorative lighting mode to fancy up

[2:34:30] that the streets yeah it could be as I understand the property and you're it's

[2:34:36] going to find developer or developers to develop the homes there.

[2:34:41] And it could be, you know, I suppose any developer that's willing to sort of move forward with

[2:34:45] the map.

[2:34:48] So if they had to go back and replace the existing light that are there with a decorative

[2:34:52] light, what would that cost them?

[2:34:56] You know, I'd have a hard time estimating what that cost would be.

[2:35:01] You know, if the applicant, I know applicants here, maybe they have something.

[2:35:06] Well, we talked about 150,000 for the park.

[2:35:08] So, I mean, is it, is it, is that the number we're looking at?

[2:35:12] It would likely be higher because that's the gap between sort of the value difference between the differential.

[2:35:16] Yes.

[2:35:17] What the, sort of the base value of each poll is off the top of my head.

[2:35:21] I don't recall, unfortunately.

[2:35:26] I think the developers trying to get anything on this.

[2:35:29] I think it just was a situation of the light poll that was intended as it was no longer available.

[2:35:34] They, like, it just sounds like some people made some decisions that were necessary to

[2:35:40] be made.

[2:35:41] For me, it doesn't seem, I think it's a good job to get something in return for our concession

[2:35:48] to them by saying, yes, that's okay, the light.

[2:35:52] I don't know.

[2:35:53] It just seems like if we, you know, in being a city that is good to work with, it seems like

[2:36:00] that would be being a little difficult.

[2:36:01] You're like, man, I think you should take those out

[2:36:03] because of them an a-corn on the top

[2:36:05] that it seems like they'll develop her friendly.

[2:36:08] It seems like being kind of tipped for tat to me.

[2:36:12] I'd just rather take the hundred and fifty

[2:36:14] use it in the parks for the kids

[2:36:15] and just all that a day.

[2:36:18] Well, I take my problem with it is the agreement

[2:36:19] of what in the conditions of what the agreement

[2:36:22] the developer had initially to put in.

[2:36:25] It's not, I don't want to take my app to ball.

[2:36:28] I don't want to get into the $150,000 for the park.

[2:36:30] I'm more worried about making concessions for something that, you know, we have in place the standard. They were they were contacted.

[2:36:39] They were given an option, you know, they for whatever reason, I don't know why they chose to go with the standard light and put them in. Maybe they were back ordered.

[2:36:50] I don't know, I can't answer why that happened, but to me, I think in order as if I was a property owner there, I don't want to be made whole, right?

[2:36:58] I would, I purchased in that neighborhood with a certain expectation of a design or decor, whatever the case may be, I would like to know that, you know, my commitment as a property owner purchasing from them was I was going to get a and I think they should be honored with that.

[2:37:18] I think, you know, I don't want to, 150,000, you know, I mean, it isn't a lot of money for,

[2:37:24] I mean, when we were talking park money, I mean, you could do some things, but we're not talking

[2:37:28] any large scale. And again, I think we're taking eye-eye off the ball, and that is the requirement

[2:37:33] of what the lighting was, was to be decorative lighting, and they put in standard lighting,

[2:37:38] and now they, I mean, when I'm gathering, just simple terms, they don't want to go back and

[2:37:45] put in the required lighting.

[2:37:46] Jason, what are the other neighborhoods using for lighting?

[2:37:49] Is it similar to what they're using?

[2:37:52] As what's currently in there?

[2:37:55] The non-acorn lighting.

[2:37:57] Yes, that would be.

[2:37:58] To me and everything else,

[2:38:00] I feel like this probably puts up more light

[2:38:04] than the acorn lights.

[2:38:05] The acorn lights typically don't produce as much light.

[2:38:07] I don't think we should say that, Kimler.

[2:38:09] We don't, we have no knowledge, the light production.

[2:38:12] It's not measurable, right?

[2:38:12] We don't have that added.

[2:38:13] But I just think I established a precedent for future developments that you can go into

[2:38:23] an agreement and then all of a sudden change their mind halfway through the phases of

[2:38:31] the project.

[2:38:31] I know the development that I live in halfway through the big huge housing market crash

[2:38:39] happened and then all of a sudden everything's changing so the houses that we're supposed

[2:38:44] to be built it doesn't look they don't look the same or have the same

[2:38:48] amenities as the first phase and so I mean I just think that the establishing of

[2:38:54] the precedent for future developments I think and changing midway through is

[2:38:59] probably just something that I don't think we as a city should be forward with.

[2:39:04] But the lights are no longer available so no matter what they were going to be

[2:39:07] changed. No they are available. And there's a decorative life that was agreed upon by

[2:39:11] both parties the city and the developer to move forward when the initial decorative lighting

[2:39:16] was not no longer being built. There was an agreement for another set of decorative lighting

[2:39:23] that was agreed upon by both parties. Do you have a picture of that light, Jason?

[2:39:28] Yes, it's on page 191 and 182. Yeah.

[2:39:35] I just know that we are we are considered

[2:39:39] And from being in the working in the housing industry for 23 years, I know that I hear a lot

[2:39:46] of people, a lot of builders that a lot of developers say that we are not as business-friendly

[2:39:51] or builder-friendly as some other towns are.

[2:39:55] And I just, to me and everything else, the cost that it would take to have a builder go

[2:40:00] back through and change all of the lighting through an entire neighborhood, I just feel like

[2:40:04] would be better off. Again, taking and doing something extra for kids in the park.

[2:40:11] I'm with Kimber on this one. Yeah, it just seems like I've seen a lot of good faith

[2:40:17] in the history of this. I don't think anybody was, I don't think a builder is trying to take

[2:40:22] advantage of us. I don't think we're setting some precedent that now builders are kind of come to

[2:40:26] hand front and do whatever they want. I don't think it's that. I think this is just a unique situation

[2:40:32] that happened and I felt I think the city and this ask for 150 grand was just trying to

[2:40:42] you know get some comparable value for the home purchasers of it and really that and also I

[2:40:50] don't know is that even our business between the builder and the purchaser of the home like what the

[2:40:56] the builder promises, the purchaser of the skin,

[2:41:00] we don't have a time that I can't get involved in that.

[2:41:03] But we do set the standards for development.

[2:41:06] But a lot of times whenever a developer

[2:41:08] is doing a subdivision and they have a certain tile

[2:41:12] or a certain counter or a certain back splash

[2:41:15] in a model home, that may become no longer available.

[2:41:18] So then they have other options and everything else.

[2:41:21] And nobody is not going to buy a house in that neighborhood

[2:41:23] because it doesn't have acorn lights.

[2:41:25] It's not going to be a deciding factor to people one way or the other.

[2:41:28] As long as it provides much lighting, you know, but I mean, like I said, I commend Jason and whoever else was involved coming up with $150,000 to be used.

[2:41:40] You guys did a great job. That's the way I see it, but they were also given an option with a second decorative light to put in which they agreed to.

[2:41:51] I would rather have more park facilities for kids.

[2:41:56] So that's what I'm saying, so that's what I'm saying, but we set a standard for a development standards for development in our community.

[2:42:02] So we're saying now that those standards don't apply, you know, if a developer decides to change its mind and doesn't want to follow the, you know, and put in regular street lights, that's okay.

[2:42:13] I don't agree with that.

[2:42:16] I think there was an agreement between a developer and the city and the development was going

[2:42:22] to be developed with a certain design and a certain look, and it needs to be honored.

[2:42:27] And there is an option.

[2:42:28] It isn't like they weren't given an option, even though the original E cornlight wasn't available.

[2:42:34] They were given an option and agreed to the second option of the other decorative light

[2:42:38] to have it installed.

[2:42:39] They agreed to that.

[2:42:40] But that creates a pain in the butt for them walking belly homes.

[2:42:46] Okay, but it would not take and be business friendly to the builder we want the builders to take and work with us.

[2:42:51] We want we just we've just got to be more business friendly is how I see it.

[2:42:56] I have a question Jason for future housing developments will there be a new contract with each builder for each track subdivision.

[2:43:07] So where all of this will be worked out for each new thing, so if it doesn't each build or have its own contracts.

[2:43:16] So this development agreement applies to the entire.

[2:43:20] Yeah, I understand to that specific area.

[2:43:22] So they wouldn't have a specific agreement.

[2:43:24] So they would be subject to a development agreement that was adopted.

[2:43:29] No, but I'm saying Mark's talking a lot about this setting of precedent for future.

[2:43:33] I'm saying that isn't every future building I'm talking about things we don't even know ten years from now

[2:43:39] Won't that all be a brand new contract at that time entered in between

[2:43:44] Whoever's building the home and

[2:43:45] He's got the land in the city. We wouldn't have a separate

[2:43:50] Sort of something that sits outside of this so it's me. Yeah, each each project has its own

[2:43:56] Not necessarily so this was so wait a minute

[2:43:59] So if we're going to build another subdivision five years from now, we're going to go off of these plans.

[2:44:04] Correct.

[2:44:05] Those requirements, not the plan.

[2:44:07] Correct.

[2:44:07] Yes.

[2:44:07] The lighting required.

[2:44:09] I don't think I'm clear on this whole sub this concept right here.

[2:44:12] Sorry.

[2:44:12] Yeah.

[2:44:13] So I'm hoping people in the audience don't understand this.

[2:44:16] If you're not somebody who lives in this world, like I did not know.

[2:44:20] I thought we were talking about this specific subdivision.

[2:44:23] I didn't know we were talking about lighting for every other subdivision.

[2:44:26] that was going to happen. It would be lighting for publishing a precedent for all future.

[2:44:31] Glad we cleared this up because I was very happy. Jason I have a question. Yes.

[2:44:35] Once the agreement between San Joaquin Valley or the developers and the city on the new decorative

[2:44:41] lights.

[2:44:43] Why the change? Are they not in stock? Are they not? And what was what's the rationale for all

[2:44:49] of a sudden that we just want to go to the standard street lights and no longer have that

[2:45:00] Probably, I would assume, I mean, that would be a good question for them. I would assume cost probably played a role. Right, so maybe we, Mr. Mayor, if we can go to the public comment and maybe then after I would like to clarify council member houses questions. So, so these decorative lights. Yeah, I understand it's, it's pretty complicated. The decorative lights, the requirement associated with the decorative lights applies to this map that you're seeing right here.

[2:45:28] So if a subdivision was built in another side of town, they would just use the city standard

[2:45:33] lights because there's not sort of a, this area has like an additional plan that sits

[2:45:38] on top of it.

[2:45:38] It says, hey, you have a different set of rules here, and here's your set of rules that

[2:45:42] are outlined.

[2:45:43] And this is our first CFD, correct?

[2:45:45] This was our first CFD, correct?

[2:45:47] Now I feel like that's back to the way I thought I understood it.

[2:45:50] I'm so confused right now.

[2:45:52] This is so embarrassing.

[2:45:53] I don't...

[2:45:54] Well, the development...

[2:45:55] I'm just you're done. Yeah, I'm sorry. So anyway, let's just take that corner over there on 12th and Fargo when whoever goes to build their they do not have to follow these light

[2:46:07] specifications is correct. So then what is Travis talking about and mark time out with this precedence. So that's the part where I don't know what that's the part I'm confused on each in what I'm talking about when we're talking

[2:46:19] and presidents is the continuation

[2:46:21] of the rest of this development.

[2:46:25] So right here, if we look, if we go,

[2:46:37] I'm talking, my precedence is right there,

[2:46:39] the finish to complete this,

[2:46:42] because we have this agreement for this, these lots.

[2:46:48] And that's what I'm saying.

[2:46:49] If we change it now, it's a,

[2:46:51] we're, we're,

[2:46:52] residents is for the yes.

[2:47:01] I mean this is going to take what by 10 maybe depends on the market how many years to develop so when we're talking we're talking future that's what I'm talking about and there's no way that you can get those extra funds from them because they would be saving money on the lights.

[2:47:19] Could you try they're not saving money. It's my understanding they're not because they're just putting the differential into the park.

[2:47:27] No, but I'm saying that other future park area they're able to use cheaper

[2:47:33] lights than they initially had in the plan. Would you try? You know I wasn't

[2:47:41] something that that we did we discussed with them.

[2:47:46] Anyway either way I'm for

[2:47:48] taking a hundred and fifty and telling Fred do something nice. I don't even know

[2:47:59] And so if we decide, go ahead with the lighting,

[2:48:04] they change.

[2:48:04] That doesn't mean that we've got to go

[2:48:06] that same thing that happened with the second section.

[2:48:10] Is that correct?

[2:48:11] That's correct.

[2:48:11] It would only apply to the area east of 12th,

[2:48:14] west of 12th, the development agreement,

[2:48:16] and the master plan and all those things still apply.

[2:48:19] You would, you're still subject to the decorative lighting.

[2:48:22] So say a different developer as this west side portion,

[2:48:26] and there are held to the original UD.

[2:48:33] Yeah, and development agreement and multiple resolutions there.

[2:48:36] And then they would have to go and negotiate

[2:48:38] if they didn't want street lights, they would have to come back to the council

[2:48:41] and say no, we would like to choose a regular street light

[2:48:45] as opposed to the decorative light going through this whole process again.

[2:48:51] We would undergo the same process.

[2:48:52] It would be fine commission and council because council

[2:48:56] is the final say on the development agreement.

[2:48:58] So yes, it would be the same process,

[2:48:59] but we're different areas.

[2:49:01] Zill initially have to do the decorative lightings

[2:49:04] according to the point, okay?

[2:49:07] We could, if they have, if they come back to us,

[2:49:09] we could still try to get the additional funds

[2:49:13] if we wanted to, because we had already set a precedent

[2:49:15] on that, possibly.

[2:49:20] I'd have to see how that would work, possibly.

[2:49:23] I'd have to think about that one a little bit, okay?

[2:49:26] Okay, we'll go ahead and open up for any public comment.

[2:49:31] Anyone wishing to speak in favor, please vote to Mike.

[2:49:38] I'm Nick Peters, representing San Montgomery Homes.

[2:49:42] So I'm here to answer your questions or to shouldn't lie down

[2:49:46] anything you need to kind of edit in context of this request.

[2:49:51] We've been building out there for a little bit

[2:49:54] over three years. We purchased the master plan from the people who put it together.

[2:50:00] It was originally put together back in what 2000, I think it was originally circulated

[2:50:06] right around 2007 and then re-approved. So a lot of the premises for this master plan

[2:50:12] predate current development standards. So when they originally developed this master plan

[2:50:18] what there was a trade-off, the trade-off was we get higher density lots, 5,000 square foot

[2:50:23] lots in exchange for all these additional amenities that we're adding and at the time it was really

[2:50:28] a good deal. Now where where we are in a 5,000 square foot lot is a standard in hand fruit so we can

[2:50:34] build those anywhere. So as far as the the development is concerned we're our trade off though we didn't

[2:50:43] intend when we originally intended when we originally started building this we were unaware of

[2:50:48] the street light standard and we built the first phase and then we were all the way into the second

[2:50:52] phase before it was found out. And then that's kind of when we discovered, okay, well we're going

[2:50:57] to have to go back, rip out all of the, all of the footings, all of the cabling in the ground.

[2:51:02] It's going to come out. Everyone's front yard's got to come out. So as we can get all the cabling back

[2:51:06] in, we have to redo the spacing, redo because the acorns are like every hundred feet as opposed to

[2:51:11] 250 feet. So there's quite a few more footings involved and then there's, yeah, to go through

[2:51:18] So there was a lot of legwork that would have to happen to retrofit this back to the original light that was called for and again, it wasn't even available at the time.

[2:51:28] So we were trying to come up with a solution and this is a little bit of the background of where we came up with that temp where we're like, let's just let's get something that would fit right on top of the other one.

[2:51:38] right and then we can we can make that happen but that even though that that

[2:51:43] light is available it also would require that we rip out all of the old lights

[2:51:49] and Sasko wouldn't take those lights back and we couldn't reuse those lights

[2:51:52] anywhere so we'd wind up with 68 lights so we don't have anything to do with and so

[2:51:57] that's kind of where we're like well it's the same light that's everywhere else in

[2:52:01] Hanford let's try and see if we can you know work with the city and we work with the

[2:52:06] staff to come up with what we thought was an equitable trade to get to where

[2:52:11] we're at today. And that's the agreement that we're talking about.

[2:52:15] I feel it's a win-win situation. You guys do build a very nice house.

[2:52:20] Thank you. Yes, ma'am.

[2:52:23] You said when you said that housing development was first bought and planned in 2007.

[2:52:33] I can't remember the original.

[2:52:35] And then you guys and start building on it when about five years ago we started working on it. Okay. Thank you

[2:52:43] It's it's a very old master plan. So a lot of the like usually when you're doing a master plan with the city

[2:52:50] They're intent of that is I want something special. So I'm going to give you something special

[2:52:54] So there's kind of this trade off and that's part of that process of developing what the master plan is and in this case

[2:53:00] like we built that park that park is an oversized park we paid for half of it so that was like done in conjunction with the city

[2:53:07] So there's other different things that we've done out there as well that would normally not have been done if it was developed anywhere else in

[2:53:13] Hanford right like we built we built homes up on the north side of a pan for to we built parks for you up there

[2:53:18] But those were part of the Diffie program this one, you know, we we covered half the cost of it

[2:53:24] As part of the deal in order to get this thing going so

[2:53:27] Did I hear you correctly when you said you guys started to put them in when you

[2:53:31] realized that they weren't the right ones and you realized the footings would

[2:53:34] have to be different that that you actually need more acorn lights cover the same

[2:53:39] area than a standard or did I hear miss your that no you're you're correct we

[2:53:45] we installed all of the all of the lights and phase one and had ordered and

[2:53:53] and installed all of the conduit in footings for phase two

[2:53:57] before we were informed that they were the wrong lights.

[2:54:01] So we were all the way into phase two

[2:54:02] before we realized that.

[2:54:04] So that's helpful.

[2:54:05] When you were informed about who informed you about the line?

[2:54:08] One of the field inspectors was inspecting the phase one

[2:54:13] to get us try and get out of it.

[2:54:16] Like we were trying to get our NSE on phase one,

[2:54:18] and at the time he realized that there was a,

[2:54:22] that page and the master plan that everyone had overlooked.

[2:54:25] So was there, sorry, was there an oversight

[2:54:27] then on behalf of Sam Joaquin Valley Homes?

[2:54:30] And everyone involved with the original?

[2:54:32] Yes.

[2:54:33] Everyone involved.

[2:54:34] And just so I can understand this, the timeline,

[2:54:39] you were in phase two is when you found out

[2:54:42] about the requirement.

[2:54:44] Yes.

[2:54:44] When was the agreement, the second agreement

[2:54:47] or the decorative light that we currently have

[2:54:52] that San Joaquin Valley in the city has agreed upon.

[2:54:55] I believe it was obvious in that year,

[2:54:59] so it was...

[2:54:59] Maybe not the date but the phase.

[2:55:02] When was that agreed, the new agreement that

[2:55:06] this decorative lighting is no longer being manufactured.

[2:55:11] Here we agree, staff comes with like here's

[2:55:15] a comparable decorative light, when was that agreement solidified in what phase?

[2:55:22] That would be kind of in between phase two and three, so in the process of building

[2:55:28] phase three.

[2:55:29] So in

[2:55:36] a sense the city is saving San Joaquin Valley homes, a lot more than $150,000 by this

[2:55:45] decision because you would not have to tear up the sidewalk but the new

[2:55:52] footings and everything is that correct.

[2:55:56] That is correct, but I don't think

[2:55:58] that's a holistic understanding of where we're at. That single point of analysis

[2:56:06] is true, yes. So the cost of us ripping out the front of the sidewalks and

[2:56:11] redoing all of that work would be enough to sink the subdivision. So that's

[2:56:15] and it's just where it's at.

[2:56:18] So whatever just decided upon tonight,

[2:56:21] if it goes not in your favor of what you desire,

[2:56:24] you would have to go back and change those 68 lights

[2:56:29] with the new decorative lightings

[2:56:31] that you're currently agreed upon.

[2:56:33] And that would not be something

[2:56:35] that the city would pay for, correct?

[2:56:39] No, I can't imagine you would.

[2:56:42] Okay, so that's the point of being saying that

[2:56:46] whatever this this outcome is and if we're saying okay, we're gonna allow the

[2:56:51] street lights to be changed. We're in a sense saving you a lot of money.

[2:57:03] Yes, okay. I have a question. You said the acorn lights you have to have them

[2:57:12] like twice or they're a lot closer. Yeah, there's a lot more than the lights you're

[2:57:17] using do actually truly put out more light than the acorn light. The light that

[2:57:22] We're installing as a standard and for street light. It's the same one that's on every other street man for it and every seven, but do you know about the lighting output of it?

[2:57:31] The spacing is almost I think it's a little over double double the distance between each light. So I figure it probably puts out a lot more light does. It's a lot. It's a lot.

[2:57:41] Okay, you know, I mean to me and everything else. I mean if if I were a builder, okay, and I have a contractor's license, but if I were building a subdivision.

[2:57:50] And was faced with a situation like this to where a city council did not work with me and allow me to take and

[2:57:57] Basically come to an agreeable plan. I would think really highly about wanting to build in that town again

[2:58:03] And I feel like we need to be build your friendly and work with you on it

[2:58:07] And I mean like I said I'm I'm all for taking the 150.150,000

[2:58:11] Making the park even a better park than you've already made it and everybody continuing on and doing business together. That's

[2:58:19] We're ready to make a motion. I would like to make that motion.

[2:58:22] I just have a public question.

[2:58:25] We're not in time. We're still in public comment.

[2:58:30] So, if you had to go and replace these lights with the decorative light,

[2:58:34] Mr. Mayor, just really quick, if we're in public comments that we probably,

[2:58:38] I know I was felt, we shouldn't be engaged in discussion.

[2:58:42] We should just hear all the public comments or and I made that mistake.

[2:58:46] Okay. So, do we get to ask questions of the committee?

[2:58:50] I don't know.

[2:58:51] Well, I think he's answered the questions that we have.

[2:58:55] We've posed him.

[2:58:57] I don't know if I was out of line and asked if you have any other questions.

[2:59:00] I was just curious as to what the differential, the cost differential would be.

[2:59:04] I mean, if we if we left it the way it was versus if they had to go in and take out those

[2:59:08] in those 64 lights or whatever that number is, I mean, what are we talking?

[2:59:12] How much what would that set you back as a developer?

[2:59:16] It's a really hard thing to tell you from the, like, from the, the diet is here, but I'm not, I'm not holding, I don't want to hold you.

[2:59:24] I mean, but I mean, are we talking to a million dollars, are we talking, you know, sufficiently enough money that it would probably end the subdivision.

[2:59:34] When you say, and that's why I was coming back to that question because you made that comment earlier and the subdivision, what do you mean?

[2:59:40] We wouldn't be able to continue building the master plan, we'd have to walk.

[2:59:45] Meaning the rest of the second, the rest of the build up, right?

[2:59:49] And just that section, that Westside buildout is not City County Valley homes right now that the other side isn't us yet.

[3:00:00] Right. I want to make sure I have it right.

[3:00:06] It's that's turning on.

[3:00:13] We've built that upper right corner already. That's already built. But yeah, there's there's a little bit more left here. And we, I think you, like I said, I think the single point analysis that you're asking is not necessarily the right question here. We are we fully intend on developing

[3:00:31] developing the rest of this master plan, unless it becomes cost prohibitively expensive to continue developing here.

[3:00:37] That's the case for every subdivision in your city. Developers will continue building as long as it's cost, as long as what we're doing ends up making ends meet, right?

[3:00:48] So you're asking me how much money is it going to cost to go back and rip out all of the sidewalks, all of the curb, redo all the footings, buy new street lights.

[3:00:57] That's that's an outrageous amount of money to go back and get that done, right? And so I'm not

[3:01:04] When you're talking about the scale of things, we're completely ripping out the right of way on both sides of the street to get the conduit back into the

[3:01:10] Pull the lights to the right place. I

[3:01:14] Guess I was where I'm where you found and

[3:01:18] About the decorative lights in phase two. Yeah, but in phase three

[3:01:23] You agreed to a new set of decorative lights.

[3:01:28] Yeah.

[3:01:29] Why did you agree to that new phase?

[3:01:33] We thought that would work out.

[3:01:35] We definitely we intended on putting those lights in and then when we started looking at what's it going to take to put those lights in, it kind of fell apart.

[3:01:42] Right. So it's the same kind of cost one.

[3:01:44] Yeah.

[3:01:44] cost for it up significantly and then the idea of going back and resetting the

[3:01:50] you know the the the previous stacks and then having you know a bunch of lights that can't be used

[3:01:55] anywhere else essentially eating the cost on on all 68 lights that we installed already.

[3:02:04] Do you have a question to council?

[3:02:08] Anyone else wishing to speak in favor?

[3:02:16] Anyone wishing to speak?

[3:02:24] I don't know where I'm at but I have I have this I have this thought you're

[3:02:30] encountering like a complicated issue and you haven't got all the information

[3:02:33] it just seemed to me since we're in public comment our public hearing time

[3:02:38] this should have been a study session issue to get out all the information so you

[3:02:43] can make a better better decision because right now I think you're not sure if

[3:02:48] if you're making the right decision.

[3:02:49] We don't want to cost this amount a lot of money,

[3:02:51] but yet at the same time,

[3:02:52] you want to fulfill the needs of that community.

[3:02:54] So I feel that this should have been a steady session issue,

[3:02:57] just my thoughts.

[3:02:59] Are you neither in favor nor opposed, correct?

[3:03:05] Anyone wishing to speak in opposition?

[3:03:11] In none?

[3:03:14] Back to council.

[3:03:15] Back to council.

[3:03:16] I make a motion that we graciously accept $150,000

[3:03:21] to be used towards the park.

[3:03:22] We appreciate what Nick is doing in San Joaquin Valley homes is doing here in our community. We hope that they continue building here for a long time and

[3:03:32] continue. I would like to make a substitute motion that substitute motion is I would like to go back to the drawing board. I'd like to table this. I think we need to

[3:03:44] to potentially make sure that we all have a good understanding

[3:03:53] of what's taking place and bring it back in two weeks.

[3:04:01] I'll second that, Mr. Royce Merrick.

[3:04:04] Okay, we have motion in

[3:04:10] a second.

[3:04:10] In a second?

[3:04:11] Mm-hmm.

[3:04:12] Where the substitute motion is that one?

[3:04:16] What substitute measure is that correct?

[3:04:18] Substitute motion.

[3:04:20] that we will bring it back in two weeks after having a greater understanding.

[3:04:43] Okay, we have a 5.0. We'll bring it back in two weeks.

[3:04:49] Thank you very much.

[3:04:50] Is there specific information that Council would like to make sure that's provided or just sort of place it out a bit more?

[3:05:00] I mean, if I can speak for myself, I would love to meet with you.

[3:05:05] Okay, we have an individual one-on-one meeting, would you kind of get, and I would encourage

[3:05:09] my colleagues, and you do the same, to get the background, get the information.

[3:05:13] And then that way, we're, you know, better prepared to have a further discussion.

[3:05:21] Appreciate that.

[3:05:21] Thank you.

[3:05:22] Yes.

[3:05:22] Appreciate that.

[3:05:23] Thank you.

[3:05:25] Okay.

[3:05:25] Moving on to General Business.

[3:05:27] I

[3:05:32] am a minor development discussion of the historic and

[3:05:38] architectural merit of the contributing building located at 103 North

[3:05:42] County Street in accordance with the hampered municipal code, 17.48.170.

[3:05:50] Substandard building.

[3:05:56] So council out of the abundance of caution I'm going to recuse myself in this

[3:06:00] matters since our firm represents Mr. Boish and other matters.

[3:06:06] Thank you.

[3:06:14] Thank you, Council.

[3:06:16] As mentioned, the purpose of this item is to look at the historic and architectural

[3:06:21] merit of the building that was recently declared substandard by the building.

[3:06:27] By the way, I should mention, Tom Webber, our building official sitting next to me.

[3:06:31] So, but prior to, you know, sort of having a discussion with Council, I want to provide

[3:06:37] some sort of background on it and, you know, allow for Tom as well to provide some input

[3:06:41] on his opinion on the structure.

[3:06:45] And our municipal code, 1748 170, substandard buildings, and this is found within sort

[3:06:51] of the historic portion of the municipal code.

[3:06:57] So this is specific to historic buildings.

[3:07:00] When a designated historic building or structure within a historic district is declared

[3:07:04] substandard or dangerous by the building official or fire marshal, the city council must evaluate

[3:07:10] the structure's historic and architectural merit and provide recommendations to the building

[3:07:14] official within 30 days of notification.

[3:07:17] So a couple of weeks ago, building official, we had discussion notified that this building

[3:07:23] is indeed substandard.

[3:07:27] 103 North Dowdy, this building that we're discussing, as mentioned March 24, 2025, the building

[3:07:33] official determined that a structure, which is a designated contributing building.

[3:07:39] And what that means is there are certain buildings within our downtown that have a contributing

[3:07:42] designation, which means there's some type of historical value or character associated with

[3:07:46] it.

[3:07:47] That presents a safety concern.

[3:07:49] And this determination was made based on an inspection of the building in addition to

[3:07:55] structural observations from a third party, there was a structural engineer

[3:07:58] who went in the building as well.

[3:08:06] So the historic merit of the building will

[3:08:08] start there. So the building is a once-story unreinforced brick masonry

[3:08:12] structure, baiting back to 1890s. So it's gone over multiple alterations and

[3:08:19] iterations throughout its lifetime. Originally there were large folding doors on

[3:08:23] both Doughty and Sixth Street facades and then at some point they were replaced

[3:08:28] with glass storefronts. The original brick exterior has been covered with

[3:08:34] stucco, so that occurred in 1971. That occurred at some point, and then in

[3:08:39] 1971 the artificial rock work that you see on the exterior of the building was

[3:08:44] added. It served several historic uses. We have sort of a record of what people

[3:08:50] have told us that it was used for, and I guarantee you there's things that are

[3:08:53] here. It was a saloon, a tailor, barbershop, baggage storage, butcher shop, sewing shop, plant shop,

[3:09:00] auto part store. It's been several things throughout this history. For when I could tell the saloon

[3:09:05] was the first thing, but it could be wrong.

[3:09:10] So this provides some context. This is the current

[3:09:14] exterior of the building as it exists right now. And here's another angle from a different side

[3:09:22] of the building. So that provides some context to sort of the architectural merits of the exterior

[3:09:29] of the building. You can see sort of the brick work that was sort of stonework that was added in

[3:09:34] the 1970s.

[3:09:38] This is just some of the highlighting some of the damage on the exterior of the building.

[3:09:42] The parapet up here is leaning and then you see pretty sizable sections of the stucco as fallen off

[3:09:51] the building and I could be wrong if I'm talking might be associated with the

[3:09:55] leaning cracks and stuff that caused the succote.

[3:10:02] Here's the current interior of

[3:10:05] the building. I should mention as far as we know it hasn't been occupied or

[3:10:11] maintained for some time. Certainly more than 15 years as far as we know and I

[3:10:19] I could, that could be on the lower end,

[3:10:21] it might be over 20.

[3:10:25] Here's some more interior photos.

[3:10:28] This is part of the tail here,

[3:10:31] but this is some exterior brick wall

[3:10:33] and it's fresh air is getting in there,

[3:10:37] it goes to the outside.

[3:10:40] Here's some of the roof.

[3:10:44] This, for example, some of the brick,

[3:10:47] the exterior brick wall.

[3:10:48] And again, this is unreinforced masonry,

[3:10:50] so this is what's holding up a lot of the building.

[3:10:56] It has a subfloor underneath, so if you go under,

[3:10:59] if you lift up for the plywood, it's, I don't know how deep is it.

[3:11:07] And I didn't go down there to investigate what it looked like

[3:11:10] to do, I can't remember if you went down there, okay.

[3:11:12] We looked in to kind of get a sense what it looked like.

[3:11:15] It's deep and it was dark and stuff down there.

[3:11:18] So, but it just gives you an example of underneath the subfloor.

[3:11:21] It's not, you know, it's not a concrete pad or something like that. Right. It's, there's a hole.

[3:11:27] So the substandard determination was made based on several sort of findings or

[3:11:33] or things that we noticed or that Tom noticed in the architect and engineer noticed.

[3:11:40] I'll kind of go over briefly and I'll let Tom sort of elaborate on each one.

[3:11:45] So roof and water intrusion. So there seem to, as from the pictures, you can tell there's water damage. So there's water getting in somewhere.

[3:11:54] The individuals, the engineering firm noticed wood rot during certain areas because, you know, water's running down and there's, you know, the wood was, was giving away.

[3:12:06] And as mentioned, there's recalls and mortar failure as well. And I'll let Tom elaborate a little bit on both of those based on his observations.

[3:12:19] The water intrusion has come in through many places in the roof you saw where the ceiling

[3:12:23] was falling down.

[3:12:25] The roof structure, the rafters are sitting on the unreinforced masonry and over age and

[3:12:33] as they get wet, they rot, so the bearing points are rotting as the wood as well as the brick

[3:12:40] themselves that it's sitting on is giving way, the roof is slowly sagging down.

[3:12:48] The brick and

[3:12:50] mortar, you saw the pictures where the bricks were falling out, those older buildings are usually

[3:12:56] three courses wide of the brick. They've got, and they turned them, so it gave them some structural

[3:13:03] integrity, but as they fall out, and it's the lower bricks that are coming out,

[3:13:07] the bearing possibilities of those walls are deteriorating, deteriorating quickly.

[3:13:14] The stucco that was falling off on the outside started off at about the size of a brick about a year ago.

[3:13:21] Now it's at large almost four foot square area.

[3:13:26] The wall that goes down the center of the building is actually leaning out.

[3:13:32] I put a level on it and it was an inch and four feet, which as you go up I think is like 14 feet

[3:13:39] ceiling. So it's a couple inches leaning out and that's what causing the parapet staying here

[3:13:45] and the walls pushing it out. So it's got a kind of a V shape in it now. That's what's popping that off.

[3:13:52] Some of the roof tiles as you progress on the pictures they're falling off. Those could fall down,

[3:13:59] hit somebody the stucco could fall down hit somebody the wall could go at any

[3:14:04] time the parapet wall it's very weak building then you know the other two

[3:14:12] items in Tom mentioned one on that south wall that's where the parapet's

[3:14:15] located that there's structural weakness there you can see usually that there

[3:14:19] it is. Also mentioned the subfloor so underneath the subfloor there is

[3:14:26] Settling in the center of the building and there's this placement with the floor and the interior post the post that Tom mentioned

[3:14:32] That were in the middle that are kind of leaning there and it could be related to the subsurface condition

[3:14:36] So you have you know the poster in the ground. I don't know how they're what they're sitting in or are you know?

[3:14:43] Jason is that a live bearing wall the one that's in the center? Yes, and so that's the one that you're saying that

[3:14:50] It's moving over a couple inches. Is that correct?

[3:14:55] That's the one that you were talking about, it's the load bearing wall, that's plant.

[3:15:01] And these are things that were mentioned, you know, a building official and then as well as the third party that went through and looked at the building. So wanted to kind of talk about what it means for a substandard designation to exist on a building. What that means is it could result in the building being demolished. If the owner doesn't address its current condition. So the city has some obligation when there's a building that poses a risk to the public.

[3:15:31] look, we want to get it addressed.

[3:15:33] It's not preferable for us to go in and address it by demoing it or trying to mitigate it somehow is much more

[3:15:40] preferable for the owner to do what they're going to do, right?

[3:15:44] Prepare the building, fix the building, whatever it might be.

[3:15:46] We have worked extensively with the owner and we've discussed several mitigation measures or things they could potentially

[3:15:53] do to the building in order to sort of fix the issues.

[3:15:57] And we've been having this discussion, oh, I don't know,

[3:16:00] probably pushing two years, 18 months, two years at this point.

[3:16:04] And nothing has been implemented.

[3:16:07] There was discussion about rehabilitation.

[3:16:10] They were going to do that.

[3:16:11] And then there was discussion about well, they were going to demo it.

[3:16:13] And we kind of indicated what that process looks like.

[3:16:15] And the things hadn't really progressed past for those discussions.

[3:16:22] So council's role in this, according to municipal code,

[3:16:25] is once the building official notices council or council's notice notified that the building

[3:16:33] official has deemed it to be substandard, the city council shall evaluate the historic

[3:16:37] and architectural merit of the structure and shall provide recommendations to the building

[3:16:42] official.

[3:16:43] So, you know, we're here today to sort of fulfill the aspect of it.

[3:16:47] So, we're here to get council's comments as it relates to the historic and architectural

[3:16:52] mayor of the structure and willing to hear any recommendations that that council may have and I'm we're also happy to answer any questions that council may have about the bill.

[3:17:05] Council.

[3:17:07] Questions.

[3:17:08] Mr. Mayor if you remember we go back two years ago almost now on the subject when we originally brought the council and

[3:17:15] the direction I believe at the council at times to kind of get with the property owner and try to figure out what was you know can it be the best course of action moving forward.

[3:17:25] We are now almost two years later still in the exact same condition, although worsening and I know we've had, I know staff has had multiple contacts with the owner about whether or not he's going to refurbish it, tear it down, whatever.

[3:17:47] I know I had a minimums to waters out of the morning and I asked him, I said, hey, you know, what's this, what's the value here?

[3:17:54] I mean, it's an old building, it's been around a long time, but

[3:17:59] I think we all know, looking at the pictures, I mean, this is a complete

[3:18:03] tear down.

[3:18:07] There's enough money or anybody would invest that kind of money to go in there and try.

[3:18:11] I mean, even if you wanted to upgrade this building at the current condition, it would be just,

[3:18:15] the cost would be exorbitant.

[3:18:19] And again, I think some of the conversation with the owner about having to demolish and having him handle it and not get us involved in it.

[3:18:32] We've kind of kicked this can down the road quite a while.

[3:18:35] So, I mean, we've had a professional building inspector go in, represents the city, it's been declared substandard.

[3:18:45] I don't want somebody to get hurt at that corner.

[3:18:48] I don't want somebody, you know, that anything breaks off, falls somebody hits somebody.

[3:18:52] I know it's not our property, but, you know, I mean, we need to do something with it.

[3:18:56] So, I'm in favor of supporting Tom and his recommendation to declare the substandard.

[3:19:03] and give the owner the opportunity to at least push it, you know, kind of like hey, we need a decision here what you're going to do.

[3:19:11] You can, if you want to make the investment in the property that's fine if you want to, you know, have it demolished, that's fine too, but I think that's what we need to do.

[3:19:20] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:19:22] Anyone else?

[3:19:24] Mr. Mayor, Jason, in the staff report, it stated that the builder had a concept for structure improvements.

[3:19:38] Have they stated any current plans besides we have a concept and was there a timeline mentioned of the long term plans for this building?

[3:19:49] I mean, what was their goal for this building?

[3:19:53] So, they had received and they provided me with a quote that they've received.

[3:19:57] I think it was maybe 2017 or 2019, I'm trying to recall from a local architectural firm that had provided them a quote with,

[3:20:05] hey, if you want to fix these things, here's for the costs associated with it.

[3:20:10] They obviously didn't pursue it back then during our discussions about what their future plans might be.

[3:20:16] They brought this up and said, hey, I did get a quote, and maybe this is something you might pursue.

[3:20:22] It didn't go as far as seeing any detailed plans or anything like that.

[3:20:24] It was just a quote from a third party architectural and engineering firm.

[3:20:29] There's a concept, but no action plan to move forward, no desire to.

[3:20:35] Yeah, and there's been changes.

[3:20:37] You know, at one point, the owner was, hey, intent to demolish it.

[3:20:41] And then that said, well, maybe I can save it and I'm going to do this.

[3:20:43] and then a more recent discussion was, no, maybe I'm going to demolish it.

[3:20:48] So there hasn't been, nothing's really moved forward.

[3:20:51] You know, there's been ideas, but nothing has proceeded.

[3:20:53] And was the owner notified of this meeting?

[3:20:55] They were, yes.

[3:20:56] And they indicated that they were unable to make it tonight.

[3:21:02] If something were done between the owner and the city,

[3:21:05] if we're the owner, just said, you know what, just take it.

[3:21:07] I don't want it.

[3:21:08] I know it would become a headache for the city.

[3:21:10] I know we'd have to take and it come down.

[3:21:13] But what could you see as a usage of that property if it were vacant lot?

[3:21:18] So what would you see?

[3:21:20] If that were to happen, I think what the city would have to evaluate is what the cost to

[3:21:27] the city would be, because if it is a tear down, for example, if that's the determination

[3:21:32] that's made, there's a cost, and I think the staff report indicated it'll be over 100,000

[3:21:37] for the city.

[3:21:38] I mean, it will be north of 100,000, probably pushing 150.

[3:21:42] We would have to look to see if there's a dirt lot left there after what's what's the value of that right?

[3:21:49] You know, I think we the city would have to do its due diligence and its homework before even accepting it for free

[3:21:55] The owner is sort of indicated that they're not

[3:21:58] You know, they they intend to keep the property as I understand it. I've got a question for you

[3:22:02] We've had all these businesses here and other homeowners here basically complaining about

[3:22:07] different fines that they're getting from code enforcement. Are they getting fines?

[3:22:11] They are getting fines and those fines are very high right now.

[3:22:20] So yeah, in the tens of thousands.

[3:22:24] Okay.

[3:22:29] When was the last time you had any communication with them?

[3:22:33] The owner emailed me on Monday.

[3:22:36] I mean, what was there indicated that hope some resolution they hope to move forward with something?

[3:22:47] They'd established any desire, what was their desired resolution to this?

[3:22:52] It's changed multiple times.

[3:22:54] I think the most recent thing they sort of indicated was there was a re-evaluated the building about what it would cost to tear it down.

[3:23:02] The original quote that they got was no longer apple pole because it's enough times past.

[3:23:06] They also think there's lead paint in the building, which ups the price of the demo.

[3:23:11] And so it was more an indication of, hey, this is where I am now.

[3:23:14] I'm looking at the demolition, but it's going to cost way more than I thought,

[3:23:17] because there are other things that weren't considered in the original quote,

[3:23:21] which is the quote that council has in their packet.

[3:23:24] That was the last communication.

[3:23:25] It was about that specifically.

[3:23:28] But this individual is a developer as well.

[3:23:30] I mean, he has the resources and the, you know, the ability to permit and demo this building on his own.

[3:23:38] It's his property.

[3:23:39] They've indicated that they do have the ability to demo the property, yes.

[3:23:47] So have they considered that?

[3:23:49] Mowing the property?

[3:23:50] Yeah.

[3:23:50] At one point, that was the avenue they indicated that they were going to pursue, but just didn't involve through it.

[3:23:57] That

[3:24:01] was one of the questions.

[3:24:03] Should mention, if their intent is to initiate a demolition, there is a council process

[3:24:08] associated with that that's separate from this process.

[3:24:16] Yes, if there's any recommendations, you know, should make it clear that the building

[3:24:19] official is the one who declares, or the building substandard, and that decision has been made.

[3:24:25] I think what staff is seeking is if council has any input or advice on sort of how possibly

[3:24:29] to proceed with the owner, or things that you may want us to consider before we proceed

[3:24:33] with the owner.

[3:24:33] I

[3:24:37] think we've gone way long enough on this one.

[3:24:40] I think we've got not only our city official that's declared it's a standard.

[3:24:44] We've also had, there's also been another firm that has looked at it through the owner that basically said that the building is non salvageable.

[3:24:54] Or if it was, the cost would be so outrageous, so it just isn't worth doing it.

[3:25:00] So at least my position is to let's inform the owner that demo that building before something seriously happens we get somebody hurt a second that

[3:25:11] right I agree I say yes I think staff's intent will be to immediately reach out to the owner probably establish some some deadlines and things like that I think our approach so council's clear is that they take care of they initiate the process I think is preferable for everyone for them to move forward with it and I think that's the route.

[3:25:32] Now, we're going to go with some established deadlines on there.

[3:25:36] So what's the timeframe on some like this?

[3:25:38] I mean, we control the timeframe now?

[3:25:42] We certainly can, you know, with a substandard designation,

[3:25:45] that enables the city to initiate demolition if we wanted to.

[3:25:49] And so we can certainly, you know, establish deadlines for the owner.

[3:25:53] And if it doesn't proceed in a manner that is sort of acceptable,

[3:25:58] the city can initiate our own process.

[3:26:00] Yes.

[3:26:00] And that's what I would ask the staff is we go forward to present to the owner and let

[3:26:04] him know.

[3:26:04] I mean, give him a reasonable, I mean, but I don't want to, I mean, me personally, I just

[3:26:09] don't want to see it, wished out any further than it needs to be.

[3:26:13] Understood?

[3:26:17] Thank you.

[3:26:17] Great.

[3:26:18] Yes.

[3:26:19] Great.

[3:26:20] Thank you very much, Jason.

[3:26:24] Moving on, item B.

[3:26:29] Council consideration of the draft council expenditure policy and direction

[3:26:33] from council as warranted.

[3:26:55] Good evening, council.

[3:26:56] Chris Tavarez here.

[3:26:58] This item is being brought back to city council

[3:27:02] after council's discussion on January 21st,

[3:27:07] which is in follow-up to Senate Bill 329,

[3:27:11] which became effective last year,

[3:27:14] and which amended a section of government code,

[3:27:17] which it would allow for the first city council member

[3:27:20] pay cap increases in nearly four decades.

[3:27:23] Ultimately, Council directed staff to revisit that item later this year.

[3:27:30] However, as part of that direction too, it was asked to have staff come back and

[3:27:37] bring to Council for consideration a Council expenditure policy.

[3:27:44] So what this policy, draft policy would enable is for

[3:27:49] council related activities to be reimbursed. It would apply to conferences, civic events,

[3:27:54] approved meetings, public purposes must be served, community support or recognition.

[3:28:02] It does, it would exclude political, religious, entertainment and gambling events and staff

[3:28:08] would propose after council's last discussion a $2,000 discretionary light item per council

[3:28:17] member. There would be oversight by the city manager and mayor for month non-budgeted

[3:28:22] items. And then really if there was anything questionable, both of those positions would

[3:28:29] need to approve those expenditures or reimbursements.

[3:28:37] So this policy would support council attending

[3:28:42] meaningful events for the community on behalf of the city. And again, it provides that reimbursement

[3:28:50] which otherwise may not be available now through other Council approved budget items throughout

[3:28:57] other departments.

[3:28:58] So this would be, the budget would be housed in the City Council or or division as you

[3:29:05] look through the budget.

[3:29:06] There would be a specific line item for each Council member there, total of 10,000 per

[3:29:14] Council member.

[3:29:16] After legal review, this does align with state law and the public's interest.

[3:29:25] So just to recap there, what would be eligible, civic and community nonprofit events, recognition

[3:29:31] of local achievements, and promotion of public and nonprofit facilities.

[3:29:37] And again, not eligible would be political and religious events, events for individuals

[3:29:42] or specific teams, or entertainment, sports, or gambling events.

[3:29:52] So use of these funds would be up to each council member, so...

[3:30:00] District A could be different than council C throughout the year. It would be up to what the interest of each specific council member is in regards to the community and how to benefit the community by being engaged in that activity.

[3:30:16] Department heads would be able to prove service-related sponsorships through their own areas of oversight and again council approved budgets, so there is the potential for other reimbursements there, but those are probably more delicate.

[3:30:36] These what we're talking about with the draft expenditure policy would be establishing that $2,000 line item per district for discretionary use.

[3:30:46] The draft policy does say non-budgeted expenditures would require city manager approval and it also does have in there the mayor as well.

[3:30:54] Reembursements would be processed through the city manager's office.

[3:30:57] So if a council person went to the event, they would pay up front and then submit that claim for reimbursement through the city manager's office and then a check would be cut to the council member.

[3:31:11] each check run is usually within two weeks so it might be up to two weeks before you get your money back but your money back would be forthcoming very soon.

[3:31:25] At this time would open it up for council discussion and direction on how to proceed.

[3:31:32] I will add in that staff would be ready to add this into budget discussion for the next council meeting.

[3:31:40] just depending on the outcome of the discussion and direction tonight.

[3:31:47] I'm cool.

[3:31:49] I'll start off, Mr. Mayor.

[3:31:50] I'll be brief.

[3:31:52] Thanks for putting it together.

[3:31:55] Where I stand, I just, I don't see a need for this personally.

[3:32:00] I think the way things that are, you know,

[3:32:04] if the city were to sponsor a table at an event,

[3:32:07] Council was invited, that's already covered.

[3:32:09] I just don't know that we need to have an expense limit for things like that.

[3:32:15] I mean, if it's something that we want to go, you can make the recommendation through the city manager currently to get approval for something like that.

[3:32:22] So, I just don't see, I just think there's too many opportunities here when you start talking about events and individuals and teams, and you know, and then you start crossing lines with nonprofits, and I'm in opposition of this.

[3:32:37] That's all, that's only common I have to make.

[3:32:42] I agree, I agree, I feel like if there's something

[3:32:48] that I want to go to and everything, I can think of what might.

[3:32:54] It's $2,000 that we're talking about, is that different

[3:32:59] than what we pay for League of Cities, ICSE?

[3:33:03] Where is that the same, is I think currently right now

[3:33:07] we are at $2,000 for the conferences that we go to?

[3:33:10] Is this an additional to be an addition?

[3:33:16] I mean if we go if we go to one of those events and everything else something like that where we go out of town and everything else our expenses are somewhat covered for that and I'm fine with that because that's something that we have to do but to take and go to things here locally I don't I don't agree.

[3:33:32] I

[3:33:45] think having council presence is very important in community events.

[3:33:50] Some can afford, some cannot afford the number, the amount, but as I just want some clarification

[3:33:57] that there's something that we could already request from the city manager to get a reimbursement

[3:34:06] on something or where does that come out of our current $2,000 for our conferences.

[3:34:12] if we ask for a reimbursement?

[3:34:15] That would be the primary area.

[3:34:17] It is possible to, if there's an event related to perhaps a make up something on the fly

[3:34:26] here, public works conference, that might be in Russ's department's budget.

[3:34:32] There would be the possibility there.

[3:34:34] That's what the policy and the staff report refers to, something like that.

[3:34:39] Yeah, so there could be the possibility, but those line items aren't necessarily specifically made for additional purposes.

[3:34:52] So it's possible, but not it'll be there type of thing.

[3:34:59] I could see us as a council putting this as like, yeah, the two additional thousand dollars, I don't think is necessary.

[3:35:08] I could see it being $500 or something like where we have instead of like our what we have for conferences increasing it to $2,500 or to $3,000 because of cost playing, you know, rent a car, yes, mileage, all of that stuff.

[3:35:26] I know, Mr. Councilman Kairos and myself are on the state policy committee where we either go up the night before or travel that morning of but the city is renting us cars.

[3:35:36] with their reimbursing us for food and all of that stuff.

[3:35:41] So I could see it maybe that increasing up to possibly like $2,500 or $2,750 and within that budget right there,

[3:35:51] if we want to seek out a reimbursement for something, it would be.

[3:35:55] But I don't see us doing each of us doing that.

[3:35:59] If we were talking about money being tied, I don't see us like allocating $10,000 for us just to,

[3:36:05] to, we're all council members just to go to events.

[3:36:10] I think we could be measured.

[3:36:12] And if it's just, we increased that 2000 up to 25 or 27, 50,

[3:36:17] I would be in favor of something like that.

[3:36:23] Is that something we want to bring back?

[3:36:27] Can you give me the amount, perhaps?

[3:36:32] It's a mirror I think that's separate from what we're talking

[3:36:34] about here, they're looking for a direct run

[3:36:36] to the policy draft or the proposed policy draft

[3:36:44] I would say let's drop the $2,000 and put it at $500 instead of $2,000, put it each for 500 for anything that we have during the course of the year that we may seek an reimbursement, or we could also use that $500 towards some sort of conference that we were wanting to go to.

[3:37:06] out

[3:37:11] in my two cents. I think I know where Travis is, well, like the way I see it is this. If I think what Travis is trying to, and don't let me speak for you, but as a council member, he's saying it's nice to be able to go to places, and that might not be, and we, and when in fair and equitable society, we can't assume that a council member has X amount of money to do these things. So he's saying it would be nice if they could come back and get reimbursed so that they could, I feel

[3:37:41] are you saying in essence, really fulfill their full council duties by going to social events

[3:37:46] within the community that fit these top eligible parameters, not the not eligible? So I see where

[3:37:54] you're going with this and I do think that that matters and I do think it does matter that

[3:37:59] the way our political system continues to run that it is equitable and that cost is not prohibitive,

[3:38:06] For instance, so I can I see where you're going with it.

[3:38:11] And there's some events that I personally turned down because I wasn't going to you know wasn't able to put $150.

[3:38:18] You know, and I was just like well.

[3:38:20] And I hear that and I see that and I think that's a very valid point and I don't think so I can see the need for that.

[3:38:29] And I think also at the same time if the money's there, I had a one-on-one with Jason this morning since Mario's gone.

[3:38:36] And I ask the question where does that money go if it's unused and it just goes back into the pot?

[3:38:43] So, you know, just because let's say we increase it to $2,500 just speaks to $2,500 is there per council member does not mean that we will be taking it and

[3:38:52] personally not asking for reimbursements because it's too much trouble and I don't need it and I feel like that's a way I can

[3:38:58] get back to the city. But I don't want anybody else up here, a fellow council member, to feel like they can't go to something, there's that just doesn't feel real good.

[3:39:10] So I think that that option should be there. And I think it's up to, you know, people can make their decisions in and there. But I think if we're talking on a policy level, I think it's, and I've said this before, I think it's important to think not just of ourselves and our own financial situations, but of others.

[3:39:28] and it just seems to me that it would be nice if we allowed a little extra wiggle room.

[3:39:36] I don't know, that's my due sense.

[3:39:40] So I have a question, is that like 2,000 or 25 or 2,750 per year per person?

[3:39:46] Per fiscal year, correct.

[3:39:49] It's currently it is at 2,000 for legal cities, you know, whatever conferences that we go to.

[3:39:56] And that's mainly for the conferences.

[3:39:58] And like legacies is included out of that $2000.

[3:40:02] Correct.

[3:40:04] That's expected out of that.

[3:40:05] Yeah, what's being proposed would be in addition and have more council member discretion

[3:40:10] where it's used.

[3:40:12] You said it would be in addition to that?

[3:40:14] Correct.

[3:40:16] And that's where it came up.

[3:40:17] Instead of dropping it from the $2000 drop it down to $500, let's see how that goes.

[3:40:24] Let's see how much is being used.

[3:40:27] because I know that we have an all-used all of our current $2,000 each for

[3:40:33] conferences and stuff like that and so.

[3:40:38] Well it's in a right now the way I mean

[3:40:41] everybody's different so like Mark and I are going to League of Cities next week

[3:40:44] so that's you know we're doing that you guys aren't but you guys might like

[3:40:48] everybody's gonna spend their money differently as my point and that's okay.

[3:40:57] Okay, I'm talking to any other comments.

[3:41:03] Are we just providing direction or we need to vote?

[3:41:06] Direction is fine and like I mentioned, staff could include that in the upcoming budget review.

[3:41:17] Is there any objection of increasing, just dropping our decrease in from 2,500 to 500?

[3:41:26] Because I honestly didn't know that we, until right now, seen up here.

[3:41:30] I didn't know that this was already in place.

[3:41:33] I didn't know that you could seek a reimbursement for one of the eligible items on there.

[3:41:38] I thought so that was my misunderstanding.

[3:41:40] I thought that so I agree that your increase of 500 seems a lot more feasible than a 2000.

[3:41:47] Because did you know that we had?

[3:41:49] I knew that we already had our 2000.

[3:41:51] That was the reason for my questioning was is this 2000 in addition to the 2000 we currently?

[3:41:58] I'm glad you clarified that because I yeah, and the current is for travel for conferences. Yes, Mr. Mayor

[3:42:05] It's 9 p.m. I'm just gonna request counsel to extend 10 minutes

[3:42:09] In council. I agree. Okay, okay, okay, so

[3:42:15] We gave mr. Mars direction 500

[3:42:19] Okay, thank you very much

[3:42:25] Okay, moving on council reports

[3:42:27] It's brief information only reports from City Council and or staff including committee reports and report by City Council related to meetings attended at City's expense any comments, councils.

[3:42:42] Mr. Mayor fellow council members and particularly councilwoman Regan.

[3:42:47] I wish to take a brief moment to address some of my actions during our last council meeting.

[3:42:51] The professionalism I displayed as a hampered City Council member should at all times be above reproach.

[3:42:57] Having self-reflected over the last two weeks I should have conducted myself better during the open dialogue with council and moving forward

[3:43:04] I'll be mindful of my comments to show respect to each and every council member city staff and the residents of this great city. Thank you.

[3:43:11] Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Anyone else?

[3:43:18] We'll move on to future agenda items, yes sir.

[3:43:22] All right, I just would like to, on May 1st, will be the 25th anniversary of the Thursday night market, and I approached, I believe, Mario at the time wanting to present them with a certificate, but I also think that coming forward and looking at our Council of Handbook, I think that we could, but there are 25 years of service like to update it to upgraded to a proclamation of sorts for what they have done for our downtown.

[3:43:52] down businesses and everything, and I would like to see if I could get gathered council's

[3:43:58] consensus, but also invite the council and we can all be there on May 1st to present

[3:44:05] that to the third-stant Michelle Brown and the third-stant Mark.

[3:44:09] I would like to take and see if we can take, and I think I can probably locate him, Craig

[3:44:15] Charten, and see if we could get him to come.

[3:44:17] And could you, I'm not familiar with-

[3:44:19] Craig Charten is the first person that started Main Street.

[3:44:21] Well, that'd be wonderful too.

[3:44:24] And I know Supervisor Robinson was on the first ward of Main Street, Hamford and Instrumental

[3:44:30] and so maybe, you know, I don't know, expanding this, but I just wanted to seek out Council's

[3:44:36] consensus if we could do a proclamation on that and then we can notify, I'll notify or

[3:44:42] we'll notify the City Clerk and we can add done.

[3:44:45] Okay, I would like to take and see if on a very near close to today, the first as fast as

[3:44:53] it could get put on the agenda, I can see if we can take and revisit the flags.

[3:45:00] The feather flags, because I have been approached by about eight to ten different business owners this week or in the last two weeks that have that basically feel that the feather flags do help them generate business. And my attitude is, if it helps them, even if it's just a perceived brings business to them, we need to take and support our businesses because they support us. And if it helps them bring in revenue,

[3:45:29] it helps spring in tax dollars and we have got to be more business-friendly, okay?

[3:45:34] And then I would like if we could take and find some way to where our code

[3:45:39] enforcement department is somehow we've got to take and be more community

[3:45:46] friendly to where it's not people don't feel like they're being attacked because

[3:45:50] it seems like every single meeting we've got people coming here upset because of

[3:45:55] it. And I know that they're just doing their job but one way or the other we've

[3:45:58] I just got to take and find a way to all get along.

[3:46:03] Do we have a consensus?

[3:46:10] Also, I'd like to garner a consensus on our landscape assessment districts and looking

[3:46:15] at those districts that have the money for upgrades, for improvements that are necessary,

[3:46:22] but also look at some sort of criteria for when developers build a neighborhood park that

[3:46:31] there's certain establishments. There's a lot of our neighborhood parks that do not have lights.

[3:46:36] So there's no

[3:46:40] ability for people to, they have walking paths, but they can't walk at night because there's no lighting.

[3:46:45] They don't, you know, it's the safe lighting. I think there's, there's rusted water faucets.

[3:46:50] There's broken. We don't have anything put in place for the playground equipment and the

[3:46:56] to re the upgrades or the new playground equipment.

[3:47:02] And so establishing that and garnering consensus

[3:47:05] to just have that conversation

[3:47:07] and see what we need from staff.

[3:47:09] And I see our calendar goes all the way back through August.

[3:47:13] So I know that we are going through in June or July, Brad

[3:47:18] with Will Dan and the levying and everything that goes on,

[3:47:23] Whether we have time to get that done beforehand so that can do you know something of that nature so I'm that's

[3:47:31] A future agenda item one one thing I'd like to say really fast are you Denise?

[3:47:37] okay

[3:47:38] I drove by her property okay and looked at it and she does have a substantial amount of concrete in the front okay

[3:47:46] But she did it to be courteous to our other neighbors and in all of most of the brand new neighborhoods

[3:47:53] They're taking and focusing on hardscaping and whenever they're doing hardscaping it means that they don't have a lot of grass.

[3:47:59] I don't know if there's a way that we could take and have it to where maybe her concrete in the yard got stained or if there's a way to take and do it to where

[3:48:08] because it is hardscaping. It means that she's using less water in her yard and I think that there should be a way to take and look at it.

[3:48:16] If we could take in possibly work with her instead of spending at least a couple of thousand dollars to rip out all that concrete.

[3:48:28] I just I just want to remind council that you know we're coming into budget and I know we want things like on the agenda right now, but I mean if you look at the next couple months of what is going to be on the agenda and what you know I mean I'm all for started meeting earlier or whatever to get though you know for you guys want some additional stuff.

[3:48:49] done, but I just think we just have to really be aware that some of the items that we're looking

[3:48:54] for, maybe to the expedite, just probably or may not happen to laughter July when the budget

[3:49:00] is done.

[3:49:01] And that's what I suggested, but we're just giving it on the future agenda, because I know

[3:49:07] our last one is August 5th, and so if it's any time, it would definitely be after budget.

[3:49:13] So that's where I'm garnering consensus for the landscape assessment district is with

[3:49:19] respect to staff and what we're dealing with budget, but I also know that our contract

[3:49:25] or the landscape assessment districts is usually in the last and June in first or second

[3:49:32] week in July.

[3:49:33] And that's when it comes to support you out there, Mr. Priceman.

[3:49:37] Okay.

[3:49:37] Anything else?

[3:49:38] In fact, two fastings.

[3:49:40] Jason, I'm asking you, okay, and possibly tie.

[3:49:43] Is there any way possible that we could take and put a hold until we can go back to the business owners with the flags to where temporarily we could give them a pause and allow them to have the flags up and them not continue to be fine and the same thing with the concrete situation is their way that that could be held and give her time for us to take and go back and reconsider it before she rips it out because in that in that call to sector she lives there's no parking already.

[3:50:13] And she did that to take and be courteous in everything to her neighbors.

[3:50:18] Yeah, so I guess I'll indicate so, you know, code enforcement is enforcing the municipal code as adopted by city council, right?

[3:50:27] So we'll start there.

[3:50:30] As far as putting a hold on that, you know, a lot of the complaints they receive are, a lot of the enforcement is a complaint based.

[3:50:37] So it's an individual calling about something they see

[3:50:40] or concerned about.

[3:50:41] Is the request that they don't pursue certain things

[3:50:47] or is the request that ones that are already in the process

[3:50:52] are no longer, because as I understand,

[3:50:55] no one's received, at least in the flag,

[3:50:57] zones received like a citation or anything like that.

[3:51:00] Have you received a citation?

[3:51:07] So are they still allowed to have them there or not?

[3:51:10] They were notified of the municipal code and were asked to remove it so I understand that's where it was left.

[3:51:16] If they were just annexed into the city and they've been using them for 31 years, can they continue using them?

[3:51:22] Just same thing as if you had a cow. You could keep having a cow.

[3:51:26] I don't think it would apply for temporary signs. I would have to think a little bit about it.

[3:51:33] That's a good tie question, but I would think temporary signs since they're not permanent in nature

[3:51:37] and it's not permanent used to get moved back and forth.

[3:51:40] My gut would save that, you know, the grandfather wouldn't apply in that case,

[3:51:45] but I would have to think a little bit about that.

[3:51:49] Is there, I mean, I'm just thinking right now, like those businesses that have the A-frame signs,

[3:51:54] that they put them out, like in the sidewalk in downtown and then they remove them at night,

[3:52:00] is that signage similar to these feather flags signage that is advertising their

[3:52:08] business and what they sell and there is there a commonality that it's okay to

[3:52:13] have an a-frame sign that's opposed to a feather flag sign. So there are, depending

[3:52:18] on the city, every city has different rules. There are some cities that treat

[3:52:20] temporary signs regardless of the type the same whether that being a frame or a

[3:52:24] flag, usually the requirements are strict number, strict usage, strict time frame, those

[3:52:35] type of things.

[3:52:36] I mean, there's no one rule for any of these things.

[3:52:39] It's bannum, some allow them, some restrict them, right?

[3:52:42] And so I think the intent, at least the staff's approach for that future agenda item is we'll

[3:52:48] talk broadly about how reinforcement operates and talk more specifically about the feather

[3:52:53] fat flag thing.

[3:52:53] So because I could understand I'm just on the similar or the correlation between those

[3:53:00] a frame signs that advertise a business they're removable, but there are feather flags in

[3:53:04] this city that they stay up 24 seven, you know, and then there's feather flags that it

[3:53:10] taken down every single single day and is there a combination, you know, something that do

[3:53:17] we need to add something like that to the ordinance or go through that process and revisit it.

[3:53:22] Those are just thoughts and so whenever we bring it back up. That's I'm just

[3:53:26] Yeah, just what's going on through my head right now. I think staff's intent would be to present to council

[3:53:32] Multi-alternative based on the others have done. Yeah, so

[3:53:38] Clarification purposes are they allowed to have them right now or not so

[3:53:42] Proud of municipal code. They're in violation of the municipal code as

[3:53:47] Adopted now whether or not how that

[3:53:50] That procedure works as far as when citations are issued and stuff like that there's some there's more flexibility in there with staff working with them, but you know staff doesn't have the ability to say this is no longer I mean this code violation right in regards to the grandfather to enter not grandfathered in okay we don't know whether this the supplies are not in regards to the grandfathered in and if they've been doing it for 31 years that we as a council voted.

[3:54:18] I didn't. I didn't. It was before it was. I were here. I think it was in January of this year, but I couldn't.

[3:54:25] In January of this year. In January of this year. And we all voted to approve. And I believe it was 5.0. That we all voted to approve the ordinance with the feather flag.

[3:54:34] It must have been.

[3:54:37] Oh, that's it. Okay. So it went 4.0 with one absence. Okay. Well, then I definitely want to go back and change it.

[3:54:49] If I voted just for it, it gives me the right to take and go back and bring it back up so we can take and change it.

[3:54:55] We'll have to go through the whole process all over again on the ordinance process.

[3:55:00] Okay.

[3:55:00] But until then it's my understanding.

[3:55:03] I mean, those businesses are under the new ordinance that we all, minus Councilman House,

[3:55:12] we all agree upon.

[3:55:13] Is that in my understanding what you're saying?

[3:55:16] Yeah, it is in the municipal code and code enforcement enforces the municipal code as written.

[3:55:22] And grandfather didn't, doesn't matter.

[3:55:24] I don't know if it would apply in this case.

[3:55:26] Can you find that out?

[3:55:28] Yeah, I can do some research, I think.

[3:55:29] Okay, so does that mean they can continue finding the flag until you make that

[3:55:33] the municipal code? No, until it is revisited until it is revisited and you know

[3:55:41] if there's a new adoption process that changes it then council can undergo that

[3:55:45] process.

[3:55:47] All right council. We're wearing a green light there. Well we'll wait for

[3:55:53] your input and to see if that could be grandfathered in that's just my

[3:55:57] thought and then once we know that we can notify businesses and if we have

[3:56:04] consensus to start the process all over on this it'd be a little bit more

[3:56:08] detailed and refined on that ordinance then we'll move forward with that that's

[3:56:12] just my big sense okay are you good yeah

[3:56:20] as quickly as quickly as I can I'll have

[3:56:33] I am 15, the next city council meeting will be May the 6th of December during the meeting.

[3:56:41] Thank you very much for coming.

Apr 15, 2025 City Council

Agenda

Transcript