[6:42] We're going to call the meeting to order. City clerk, can you please do the roll call?

[6:50] Mayor Olsen here. Mayor Pultim Bishop. Here. Council members Lowa. Here.

[6:54] That in court, here, and Alacan. Here. We have a quorum.

[6:58] Okay, if you're able, please stand for the pledge allegiance.

[7:03] Place your right hand over your heart and

[7:05] Again, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

[7:13] One nation, one under God, an individual with liberty and justice for all.

[7:19] Thank you.

[7:20] We're not going to do the moment of silence until we have a legitimate reason to do the moment of silence.

[7:25] I think it kind of takes away from it if we just do it for the fun of it.

[7:29] So we're going to move on to the cute critter video, please.

[7:33] Oh, I'm sorry, the public code of conduct and

[7:49] less acute critter videos faster.

[8:31] Okay, thank you.

[8:32] Now, do you public code conduct please?

[8:40] All right, got it.

[8:43] Ladies and gentlemen, may I please have your attention?

[8:46] The meeting of the Palm Del City Council is now in order.

[8:49] A code of conduct will now be read.

[8:52] And we request that you comply with it to ensure the efficient administration of the meeting.

[8:57] Members of the public, it is your right to participate in today's City Council meeting and the council encourages such participation.

[9:06] However, the right of the public to address the council must be balanced with the need to ensure that public comment does not interfere with the orderly course of the council's business.

[9:17] All are reminded to abide by the following rules.

[9:20] Speakers must see speaking immediately when their time has ended.

[9:25] Public comment on agenda items must relate to the subject matter of that item.

[9:30] General public comment is limited to subjects within the jurisdiction of the council.

[9:35] Public comment does not include the right to engage in a dialogue with council members or staff.

[9:42] Please remain respectful of the form and refrain from uttering, writing, or displaying, profane,

[9:49] personal threatening derogatory demeaning or other abusive statements towards the council any member there of staff or any other person

[10:00] Members of the audience should be respectful of the views expressed by speakers, staff, and council members, and may not excessively clap, cheer, whistle or otherwise disrupt the orderly conduct of the meeting.

[10:15] Any person engaging in conduct that disrupt the meeting is subject to being removed from the council meeting.

[10:21] Finally, if you witnessed conduct or behavior by other members of the public, that disrupts your ability to remain engaged or participate in this meeting, please notify city staff.

[10:34] Thank you for your cooperation. Ladies and gentlemen.

[10:38] Thank you.

[10:40] We acknowledge the observances for the month of September.

[10:42] The city of Pomdo would like to acknowledge the following observances for September, Suicide Prevention Awareness Month, and Hispanic Heritage Month, September 15 to October 15.

[10:56] Thank you.

[10:57] City Manager, are there any items to pull from the agenda?

[11:00] Mayor, may I just make a point?

[11:07] So we have five items on our agenda that are award for contracts.

[11:14] So they have underlying procurement documents, RFPs, proposals from various proposals.

[11:20] Those five items in total, we received an email with a link yesterday at 201 p.m.

[11:29] containing 5,241 pages of supporting documentation for those five items.

[11:35] One in particular is $2,562 pages for a $30 million contract.

[11:43] I was here in the office, I was here till 730 p.m. printing all of as many of them as I could.

[11:50] I went home and had a meeting on Zoom 730 to 9. I was up till 3 a.m. reading.

[11:55] Welcome again at 7.30 a.m. again reading impossible to get through 5,200 pages of just procurement documents for those five items because we've got a variety of other items that required a lot of reading and looking into because this binder alone on top of is another at least a rema paper so another 500 pages if the agenda is posted on a Thursday evening because we've got closures on Friday.

[12:23] Then our briefings are held on Monday.

[12:27] The council meeting is then held Tuesday.

[12:30] If I have questions, my briefing was yesterday at 5 p.m.,

[12:34] which means as soon as my briefings over, essentially staff leaves.

[12:38] And then any questions that I have

[12:39] or request for information and response to those briefings,

[12:42] I may or may not get in time.

[12:44] And if I get them, I get them a minute before the meeting

[12:46] and don't have time to process and I just them either.

[12:50] This is a structural problem.

[12:52] So when we move the meetings from Wednesday to Tuesday, we made this the time constraints

[12:58] much more difficult to contend with, particularly because we have Friday closures.

[13:04] But with regard to tonight, I don't know, I think there are also some electronic issues.

[13:10] I think where you mentioned that you weren't even able to click the link or open the link

[13:15] electronically to review the documents.

[13:16] I think we've got management oversight issues.

[13:21] There's no reason why if they were agendas,

[13:24] why we should get the link yesterday at 2 p.m.

[13:28] If the items were agendas, those procurement documents

[13:31] were already available records and should have been disclosed

[13:35] when the agenda was posted so that we could have at least

[13:39] the benefit of the weekend to review.

[13:42] On an item like Chimbole, which is the centerpiece of our city,

[13:47] $30 million of taxpayer dollars.

[13:50] $2,562 pages of documents for us to review in less than 24 hours is really just unreasonable.

[13:59] So what I'm going to ask at least for the, I got through a couple of the items.

[14:03] I don't know if you would just want to, you want to postpone all five of the items to allow the council to have adequate time to review.

[14:09] The procurement documents, but item 7.4 is Chimbole, 2,562 underline procurement documents.

[14:19] And then item 5.7 is 1,159 pages also.

[14:27] The others are 500, 501, 519.

[14:30] I was able to review those three on top of the other 18 items that we've got on the agenda.

[14:36] So what I would like to suggest in terms of organizing the agenda at a minimum on Chimbole I would like for us to be able to hold the public hearing to get public comment and feedback because it was agendas and people probably are may be prepared to offer comment with regard to what the envision for the centerpiece of our city and $30 million.

[15:00] So, let's hear public comment, but let's move the action item to the next council meeting. If we could for that item at least for the others, I'd prefer as well, so that the council is fully informed, but I'm prepared to at least act on the other three items. I think item five five seven and seven four, that's total, I think, over three, over almost 4,000 pages alone. I just couldn't get through.

[15:27] I'm not in favor of postponing anything for Chimbole because we've been waiting years for this.

[15:34] We've already awarded the Design Services.

[15:36] Staff has already gone through months and months of having people bid on this job and get quotes and RFPs and proposals.

[15:48] Although I understand what you're saying, it's a very slow moving process.

[15:52] I think the, unfortunately, the Chimple A Center burned down almost three, maybe four years ago.

[15:57] I think it was 2023 during Christmas, unfortunate situation.

[16:02] However, I'm not in favor of slowing this project down at all.

[16:05] We need this, we need this bill.

[16:07] I don't think, I don't think awarding, this is pretty much just an agreement to an award

[16:12] of contract where either going to award it or not, and I don't want to slow that down.

[16:17] I agree with that. It's been a long time in the process and those are great union jobs that we should get going on now.

[16:24] I do agree that maybe there are some issues with the process but we can work that out as we go.

[16:29] But that particular item has been a long time coming in the public has been asking for it for a while and we want to get people to work.

[16:36] So because it's been a long time coming, there should have been a advance notice.

[16:39] Should have been an advance availability of the documentation because it's been in the works for so long. Why provide it hours before or meeting?

[16:46] It's 30 million dollar expenditure.

[16:49] If we had a second meeting, September would only be a two week delays to allow us to make

[16:54] informed decisions.

[16:54] That's what our job is to provide actual policy oversight.

[16:58] To review these documents and look at them from a umbrella, from the sky's view, from

[17:04] a different vantage point than staff.

[17:07] That's our job.

[17:09] If we keep rubber stamping everything without reviewing any of the underlying documents, I just

[17:14] I don't know. What is the purpose of us being up here?

[17:17] I think we can have that conversation when we get to that item.

[17:21] That's Section 7 and right now we're at Section 4, which is not a gender public comment.

[17:26] So let's do that first. Is there anybody that wish to speak on any items on the agenda that is not listed on the agenda?

[17:33] Yes, we have Alejandro Castillo.

[17:41] Good evening. Good evening Mayor members of the council.

[17:45] I'm Alejandro Castillo, founder of Boots on the Ground Alliance.

[17:50] I'm here with a person invitation to our second annual annual Valley Military Ball.

[17:55] On Saturday, November 14th at the Hellenix Center.

[17:58] We will honor our veterans and the mothers who send their children off to serve.

[18:03] Bogos work as grounded in the Perma will be model and direct physical presence.

[18:08] I personally commute to high desert state prison to teach the Perma model.

[18:12] level for incarcerated individuals because meaningful service requires us to show up with

[18:18] a need exists. We created, we created and facilitate the welcome home Vietnam veterans

[18:24] every March as well as the stand-down, bringing recognition, resources, and community

[18:29] directly to those who serve. We do not simply discuss service, we show up. The military

[18:35] bar continues the mission. It is more than a celebration. It is a bridge, connecting veterans,

[18:39] military families, businesses,

[18:42] elected officials, and neighbors.

[18:44] Let me be clear, the military boss, not a fundraiser,

[18:48] and it's not designed to generate profit for Boga.

[18:51] It is a created strictly for our community

[18:53] to honor veterans, support military families,

[18:56] and give them the recognition they deserve.

[18:59] The bridge begins before the ball.

[19:01] Boga is currently finalizing program realistic

[19:04] with local youth organization

[19:05] to teach practical life skills through the PURMA model.

[19:08] Through this work and by welcoming youth volunteers at the ball, we are helping young people

[19:14] build resilience, leadership, and personal responsibility while introducing them to the veteran community.

[19:20] The meaning of service and the sacrifice behind the uniform.

[19:24] We offer several sponsorship tiers but I want to highlight two opportunities.

[19:28] The 3,000 operation 30 includes five guests, five honor veterans, formal attire for those veterans,

[19:35] Commemorative Challenge Coins in a Premier Recognition or Exclusive 5,000 Sponsorship receives its logo on every 2026 Commemorative

[19:46] The best part, right?

[19:50] We have David Aekers

[19:55] Meaning council member staff on names David Aekers, Palm Del Freedom Coalition

[20:00] Just come here tonight to say that I'm disappointed and optimistic. Disappointed, because I was going through the agenda, as much as I could get through before coming to a meeting, and saw that once again, you're just meeting once this month to get the people's work done.

[20:16] And that's really disappointing. The Palm Delphreadic Coalition meets once a week. There's a large group that gets together to talk about ways that we can help our community. And none of us gets paid right now.

[20:27] We just show up to see what we can do for this community. I would think our council could at least show up twice a month to do that.

[20:34] So I'm disappointed and speaking of getting together to discuss what we can do in the community.

[20:39] I'm also disappointed to see there's still no discussion on having town home meetings or council members have a reasonable way to get out and hear from their community and have actual discussions which we know are not allowed here in this setting.

[20:53] At the same time, I'm optimistic, I'm optimistic because I love Palmdale, there's groups like boots on the ground, people that also meet together like PFC, they want to help this community, there's a group of men and women that want to build our community, and we're going to celebrate their chance to do that tonight.

[21:12] Avenue P might improve the traffic, so things are being done, and I'm optimistic, but I wish you'd work a little bit harder.

[21:19] Thank you for your time.

[21:22] Thanks.

[21:23] Alcanacorcus?

[21:23] We have to prepare that.

[21:26] Testing one, two, three.

[21:29] Good evening, Council members.

[21:31] I'll try to be a little bit fast because time got cut from three to two minutes.

[21:35] A few weeks ago, Eric Olson wrote a public statement that, uh, Chastise Miguel Coronado

[21:40] for using an inappropriate slur towards African Americans when referencing a Lancaster

[21:45] city council member.

[21:46] And while Coronado has made an error in judgment, it's curious that Olson took the time to

[21:50] criticize Coronado and yet refuses to investigate racism against Asians.

[21:55] Many months ago, Olsen was informed that Filipino school teachers in Palmdale were being

[22:00] extorted for money.

[22:01] The Filipino's paid, but this regular extortion fee kept getting raised higher and higher

[22:05] by school official.

[22:07] And when the Filipino teacher stated they couldn't pay any longer, they were deported

[22:10] from the country.

[22:12] Mayor Olsen did nothing about this.

[22:13] He didn't write a public statement.

[22:15] Also when Olsen was informed that a white principle that learned for life referred to a Filipino

[22:19] teachers, baby, as an anchor baby. Once again, also did nothing. Again, no written statement.

[22:25] I don't think anyone here knows about this. Then, when Steven Lee in Asian wrote a post

[22:29] on sub-steck, called the Benefit of No Doubt, which talks about this in detail and talks

[22:35] about how lower a bed and core is a racist against Asians. Using Eric Olsen's own criteria,

[22:41] Mayor Olsen did not write a statement condemning lower bed and core as he did with Miguel Coronado.

[22:46] To make things worse, Mr. Lee contacted Mayor Olson multiple times after the benefit of

[22:52] no doubt was published to be fair and to get his side of the story. Olson not only

[22:56] ignored Mr. Lee, but he talked about it with Rich Gallego, who is not a nation. It's

[23:00] rather offensive that he would discuss this with Mr. Gallego, who is not an Asian, and yet

[23:05] ignore Mr. Lee, who is, and was the actual writer of the post. Furthermore, Mayor Olson

[23:10] has claimed that dealing with schools and learn for life is not within his jurisdiction,

[23:13] And yet he has shown previously he will get involved when it suits his agenda.

[23:18] For example, he was unwilling to defy the federal government when it came to issues dealing

[23:22] with ICE, but yet Olsen was unwilling to unofficially talk to a local school board to

[23:27] a school board on behalf of Mr. Lee.

[23:29] Thank you.

[23:30] Thank you.

[23:31] And Mr. Dornandizations are respond to it.

[23:35] Mr. Lee was fired from learn for life, which is not under the jurisdiction of the city

[23:38] of Palmdale.

[23:39] I did respond to him.

[23:41] explained it clearly and I will make my response available publicly. No, no, no, no, not your time to speak. Your time is over. Please have a seat. Next.

[23:49] Well, can I just say something? I was accused of being a racist at no time in my life. If I ever been racist towards Asian or any other group in our community.

[23:58] I love all people equally and I support every one of our community members. So that's a flat out lie.

[24:03] Great. Next.

[24:05] We have Eugene Hernandez.

[24:06] I

[24:11] agree with the statements by the Freedom Coalition and the young man here.

[24:16] I think you are the center of corruption in the city.

[24:20] You know, you cut our speaking time to two minutes.

[24:24] You only meet once a month.

[24:26] Everybody used to be two, two times a month.

[24:29] I long for the days of Steve Knight, Pete Knight and Jim Ledford,

[24:34] who are real leaders, but you're not a leader.

[24:36] In fact, you have a corrupt city, city manager, who has spent thousands of dollars on his own personal trips for his closing for probably horrors,

[24:49] probably meals and having interesting things.

[24:53] And you have to take away here.

[24:55] You can't come make those accusations, because that is extremely inappropriate.

[25:03] That is, you have no factual basis to make an accusation like that, Jeanne.

[25:09] As the freedom of speech, given his time.

[25:14] The corruption of the city manager, the fakeness of the city attorney, who doesn't know the law of the basic of the law,

[25:26] should be pointed out, you know, you got rid of a run-the-petice for less things than the city manager has done.

[25:34] Thousands of dollars you spent are city money. Why did you take away his credit card? How do we

[25:40] know he's going to take another big trip? It's been a thousand of dollars. Is that okay with you? You don't

[25:46] you, you have to understand that you're not a king. People here are taxpayers. We should be having

[25:54] I am a rent control, the cost of living is sky high, the cost of gas is sky high.

[26:02] But do you care about a Chicano community?

[26:06] You have a spot at once, but you'll talk about Chicano's history that should be done here.

[26:12] You're a total fake, or what do you think you should be saying?

[26:16] They're a pudictentering.

[26:21] Great, sorry.

[26:30] my name is Rebecca I'm here okay so all that I need to just hi everybody thank you for

[26:40] how I'm here I'm here because I want to formally invite you guys my partners sunflower I

[26:48] parted up with some flower haven of cycling, and we were granted a grant with acta, the alliance

[26:55] of California traditional arts, and we want to teach the youth, the fundamentals of furniture

[27:06] report and artistic expression, connecting the youth with artistic mental health practices

[27:12] and pathways through entrepreneurship. And it's a five week art clinic and on October 24th,

[27:20] we will be holding the graduation of the cohort. And we would like to invite you to come and

[27:26] just encourage the kids to keep going. And our goal is to have them complete the tax, so they

[27:33] completed, they have instances, you know, they keep all their tools that are are used during the art

[27:39] So, again, our graduation is October 24th and it's called therapeutic tinkering, so it's, again, it's, we're trying to tie in the arts and mental health practices that may not look like usual practices with arts and crafts and French repair. So thank you for your time.

[28:04] Can you give the time and date and location to our clerks so that we can put our calendars?

[28:11] So I'm going to jump on top on in addition to that.

[28:14] Can you please provide a, by the way, thank you for all that you do.

[28:17] And for providing an opportunity for our kids to access the arts,

[28:23] our schools are limited in their funding and the arts programs are getting cut.

[28:27] And so it's, it's, what you provide is a valuable asset to our community and to our kids.

[28:32] And there are rich men, but can you also provide a list of the kids' names that are gradually or that are that are that you intend to graduate so that we can get certificates from City of Palmdale and if if I would love to be there if I can't be there Council member vet and court can be there to present them or we can make sure you get them but in any case make sure you get us a list of the kids names that we can prepare certificates that is wonderful news. Thank you so much.

[28:54] Here. We have Dr. Coronado.

[29:02] You've been in court. I know you're not a racist to me.

[29:05] Yeah, I know only for years. Eric Olson, you're asking the people of Pondo to give

[29:09] you another term. No English and no Spanish.

[29:14] On your record, you participate in decisions

[29:16] involving millions of dollars of our money. Start with the Raymond Center. Our means

[29:23] Raymond. Pondo committed approximately $10 million to this project. $10 million of public

[29:29] money, you participated in the decisions surrounding the commitment, you own your role in it,

[29:36] then they are political and organizational connections surrounding your public record.

[29:40] Our experts, he owns you.

[29:43] The Raymond Center, the Community Coalition of the Analovali, A.V. Edge, Regional Government

[29:48] to Organizations, Major Contracts and Appropriations.

[29:51] These connections deserve public scrutiny, your campaign contribution deserves scrutiny,

[29:55] Your form 700 financial disclosures the surfscrew me your future too

[30:00] You deserve scrutiny. Your vote deserves scrutiny. And then there is measure PD. You supported put in measure PD before pumped of voters. You sign your name to the proponents ballot argument. You put your political credibility behind it. You own that record.

[30:15] Eric, so call mayor. You are running for reelection in English, no, Spanish, un poco. You do not get to campaign and as though these decisions happened around you, you were there. You participated. You voted.

[30:28] you help public office while millions of taxpayer dollars were committed. I'm not sending here tonight

[30:32] ask to ask you questions. I'm sending here tonight to put your record directly in front of you and directly

[30:37] in front of the people of Palmdale. The Raymond Center, $10 million for the Paris Center,

[30:43] our repairs owns you. Community coalition of the AV, AVH, measure PD, campaign contributions, financial

[30:49] disclosures, recusals public records, lawsuits, your votes, your records, lawsuits. You want another term?

[30:56] The people say no in English, the people say no in Spanish.

[30:59] Ponto resident showed exam in the money, exam in the relationship, exam in the organizations,

[31:03] exam in the disclosure, exam in the boats, then decide with Eric Olson, record deserves another term.

[31:08] In Spanish?

[31:11] No for the speaker cards on this section.

[31:14] Mr. Zink.

[31:22] Jason Zink.

[31:23] I have to agree with all the speakers in Alec on to you.

[31:27] I think Eric, you are an ethical and a corrupt politician.

[31:33] And I think also, Bishop and Loa are illegal,

[31:39] we know this.

[31:40] I hope that's your first lawsuit when you get out of office, is to throw these two people out of office for breaking state law to hold their seat.

[31:49] Where is our $10 million from Lancaster that $10 million worth about $8 million with inflation?

[31:55] Thanks a lot for losing us more money.

[31:58] And the Paldo Magazine, there was nothing about Palmedale elections, nothing about districts,

[32:02] education or anything like that.

[32:05] This city is running so incompetent.

[32:11] You don't hold anybody accountable.

[32:15] For the end, Eric, you picked this America 250 celebration sidewalk.

[32:21] We, as one, are voices, symphony, building this country flagged that flu high.

[32:26] Our flag doesn't fly high in America no more you didn't know that none of all five of you all the educated staff

[32:35] Our country doesn't fly anymore high our flag doesn't fly high my dad was alive a Korean war veteran

[32:42] He'd go right there in the middle of the day and with the sludge hammer and break that shot that sucker

[32:48] You guys are disgraced to our country. You're disgraced to this city that's so crazy

[32:56] On our 250th anniversary, our flag that flew high past tense, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

[33:07] You all should resign. You discussed me.

[33:13] Better do something about it.

[33:16] Okay, the flag as it stands, fly as high. The poem referenced 250 years ago when it flew high. Next.

[33:24] No further speaker cards on this section.

[33:27] Okay, we're closing on agenda public comment, we're moving on to the consent calendar.

[33:35] Anybody have public comment for consent calendar items listed on the consent calendar.

[33:41] Yes, we have a scene actor.

[33:51] I mean, it's very scene actor and of course some of you guys are familiar with me.

[33:55] But I just wanted to say the room is filled today and I met some of these lovely employees of the city of Palmdale.

[34:02] And I want to say regardless of the things and the bumps that we come through that the city council members and the people that's working for city

[34:09] I was doing a great job. I want to acknowledge that McAdden's park that is one of my district parts and I support that park

[34:15] I bring my kids there reading in part and I want I'm sorry, but I would like to say continue to good job

[34:21] And hopefully we figure out the money thing. So we can ask community use that park bring our kids there and enjoy the what we as the citizen's pay for to see that

[34:30] I think that's a very important thing that not only do we see the numbers on paper, but we

[34:34] see the results of what that's brought into our city.

[34:37] Thank you.

[34:41] Anybody in the audience was to speak on the consent calendar.

[34:49] Jason Zink.

[34:50] 5.5.

[34:51] This is about a $100,000 program to do facade, a small businesses.

[34:57] Is there any report?

[34:59] Who's lead?

[35:01] You gave $7 million to rich, auto mall owners. $7 million, and then you give $100,000 to facade, probably to campaign contribution. This is so corrupt. Let's talk about the advancing communities together, 330,000 for 20 units. I looked all the documents, there's no floor plan, there's no information, there's no layout,

[35:29] site plan, nothing, no information, common sense things that any city would have in their packet.

[35:38] This city is incompetent.

[35:41] Let's go to the next one.

[35:44] 5.9.

[35:47] This is about the Union Pacific Road Road at Fonda Blomer and Sarah Highway.

[35:52] You guys want to spend $70 million on our overpass on Avenue P, Rancho Vista.

[35:57] Wouldn't be more common sense to dig a trench with the railroads underneath all the surface streets.

[36:05] So you have all the streets undisturbed with the railroad.

[36:11] You guys just don't think common sense.

[36:13] Reno did it.

[36:15] They're doing it up there in our, I believe it's Kansas City.

[36:20] What happened to the train?

[36:22] No horn zone.

[36:24] Where are you guys going to work on that?

[36:26] You've been in office four years, Eric, big court, 14 years, lower, a decade, Austin,

[36:34] bigs at nine years, Alecon, four years, you're not improving our lives, you are not improving

[36:40] the quality of life in the people of Palmdale, leaders are better.

[36:47] Anyone else wish to speak on to the Senate calendar?

[36:51] If I may, David Icters, one other thing I'm optimistic about is when I was going over the

[36:55] agenda. I saw the facades in the ADA program and I thought, wow, something for small businesses

[37:02] because of the operator for over a decade in this community. I sometimes we see the big things

[37:08] that are done. When I saw that program, I was excited that there's $25,000 grant that small

[37:13] businesses could do to improve the front edge of their buildings and I just drove by liesters

[37:18] and said, wow, that's looking really good. I know they clean that up recently. So another reason

[37:23] optimistic and I support that program and appreciate it. Anyone else? Okay, we're closing in public comment on the consent calendar council would any of you like to pull any items?

[37:35] Ready? Yep.

[37:37] five, five, five, five, six, five, seven, five, eight, five, 10.

[37:44] Five, eleven, and five, twelve.

[37:52] Five, three, five, five, five, five, six, five, seven, five, eight, five, 10,

[37:58] five, eleven, and five, twelve.

[38:00] Okay, is there a motion to approve the remainder of the consent

[38:03] element.

[38:04] Oh, make the motion to move.

[38:06] All in favor say aye.

[38:07] Aye.

[38:07] I don't even want to pose.

[38:09] That passes unanimously.

[38:10] Can we get a staff report?

[38:11] 1,5,3.

[38:26] Good evening, Mayor and Council, Jan. Samson, Deputy City Manager. Stuart Thompson.

[38:31] The City's IT Manager is here to present this item.

[38:36] Good evening, Mayor, Mayor of Pro Tem, and members of the Council. My name is Stuart Thompson.

[38:41] I'm the Senior Manager of Information Technology. Before you tonight is agreement with ABM for

[38:46] Citywide Prince Services, providing the city with a comprehensive and cost effective solution for our printing needs.

[38:53] City issued a form of RFP to replace 26 stand-alone printers and received six proposals.

[39:00] A traditional printers were added after the vendor was selected,

[39:05] bringing the contract total to 34.

[39:07] The RFP allowed for new or used equipment required fully,

[39:12] I'm sorry, fully itemized pricing for leases consumable staffing,

[39:17] software installation support and other services.

[39:20] A ward was based on the best overall selection, not solely the lowest lease price and allowed the city to negotiate terms in its best interest.

[39:30] A five-member evaluation team representing three departments determined that ABM met all RFP requirements and earned the highest overall score among the six vendors.

[39:40] Additionally, ABM is a local vendor with an office in Palmdale, approval of this contract will support five local jobs, providing additional economic benefit by keeping employment and business activity within the Palmdale community.

[39:55] And I'm here for your questions.

[39:57] Thank you so much for that report.

[39:58] That's it. You answered.

[40:00] Question that's exactly why I pulled the item. I asked yesterday how many local jobs is this going to create. And the answer is five. For those of us who have been engaged in these conversations, we ask almost every time. Why are we not awarding contracts to Palmdale contractors to Palmdale vendors? This one we are. So this is proof positive Palmdale tax dollars are being reinvested in the city of Palmdale and to support five local jobs. So thank you for that. So thank you.

[40:30] Thank you very much.

[40:32] All in favor say aye.

[40:34] Anyone opposed?

[40:35] That passes unanimously.

[40:38] It takes us to five five.

[40:41] I would like to hear the staff report on that, please.

[40:57] Good evening, Mayor.

[40:58] Council members.

[40:59] My name is Eric Gide.

[41:00] I'm deputy director of Community and Economic Development.

[41:05] I'm excited to discuss tonight's item,

[41:08] seeking approval to establish the city of Palmdale's new

[41:11] commercial facade and ADA Accessibility Improvement Program.

[41:16] At its core, this is a small business program.

[41:19] Designed to encourage investment in Palmdale,

[41:21] businesses and commercial properties.

[41:24] The program provides grants up to $25,000 for eligible improvements,

[41:29] such as storefront rehabilitation, exterior painting,

[41:33] windows and doors, signage, lighting, landscaping,

[41:37] ADA Accessibility Improvement.

[41:39] these are permanent improvements to our city.

[41:43] The objective is to help small locally owned businesses make investments that improve the

[41:47] parents and accessibility in our city.

[41:51] Our outreach messaging will emphasize targeting small businesses and the review will focus on

[41:57] applications that deserve support.

[42:01] The program will launch with $100,000 in measure AV funding already budgeted for commercial

[42:05] beautification, revitalization, and accessibility improvements. We also structured the program to provide

[42:12] an equitable opportunity for businesses throughout Palmdale. The program is available for commercial

[42:19] and mixed use areas throughout the city. Applications will be evaluated using a published

[42:25] 100-point scoring system, primarily based on the projects of visible impact, need, feasibility,

[42:33] readiness and ability to complete the project.

[42:37] If approved tonight, our intent is to incorporate the rollout of this program into our broader

[42:42] fall, small business programming and promotion, as we head into the holiday shopping season.

[42:48] This gives us an opportunity to not only promote the new incentive, but to use our broader

[42:53] fall outreach to connect Palmdale businesses with city resources and encourage residents

[42:57] to support our local small business community.

[43:00] staff recommends approval, resolution, 2026, 53. Thank you. Are there any questions?

[43:09] Thank you for your report. And again, I know you're new. And so I said, I said,

[43:13] welcome to the to the city team yesterday. This is your first staff report before

[43:17] so please don't take this personally. But it's, it's, it's not directed at you

[43:23] per se. I think the buck stops that are city manager. This is item is quintessential

[43:28] new business. There's no reason why it should be on the consent calendar. It's implementing

[43:32] a new program, adopting new policy guidelines. There's a lot to be discussed about the

[43:38] implementation of this program. So there's no reason why it should be on the consent calendar.

[43:42] Setting that aside, you mentioned in the staff report, talks about this is supposed to support

[43:50] small businesses. And I am a huge advocate for supporting small businesses, particularly in light

[43:55] of measure PD, because it incentivizes people to shop elsewhere, in small businesses are

[44:03] hurting, because people are opting to go to Santa Clarita or other locations to avoid

[44:10] the astronomical sales tax we've got here.

[44:15] Question though, there is no reference to, so I went through the policy guidelines, pretty

[44:20] specifically, there is no reference to small businesses.

[44:24] So it says that it applies to commercial tenants operating a business with the city of Palmdale.

[44:33] I think we need to be very clear about what kinds of businesses we're supporting because if this is in fact to support small businesses,

[44:40] we need to be clear on which businesses qualify for such a grant.

[44:45] I suggested yesterday in our briefing that we include definitions from micro businesses and small businesses.

[44:50] And so I don't know if you were able to pull those up and we could incorporate that, those definitions into the guidelines, I think that would be helpful.

[45:01] Secondarily, what I saw here is that it's reimbursement based. It's a reimbursement based grant program, so there's an opportunity for there to be 50% of the amount provided by the city upon execution of the grant award, but not always, is that the discretion of the city. Small businesses are struggling. They don't have money to front fund.

[45:23] So I would like for us to be able to maybe consider an alternative structure because if they're going to

[45:30] what's the point of them apply, they're struggling paycheck by paycheck barely able to maintain their

[45:35] existing one, two or three employees to ask them to front fund up to $25,000.

[45:42] I think is a big ask and really would render a lot of small businesses that are in

[45:49] a dire need of such a program, ineligible because they just couldn't, they couldn't do it.

[45:54] So I'd like to for us to consider that.

[45:57] I'm also, you, and I mentioned this yesterday too, so the budget for this program is $100,000.

[46:05] And you mentioned that this is supposed to be equitably, that one of the, one of the, one of the goals

[46:10] is that the grants are equitably distributed throughout the city.

[46:14] There are five council districts, $100,000, the grants are up to $25,000.

[46:19] I mean, in theory, that's about 25 in four districts, not five.

[46:26] So at a minimum, I would like to see that we increase the allocation of measure A.V. funds

[46:33] to ensure that there is $25,000 allocated to each council district for the grants be awarded

[46:40] up to 25,000 needs Council District, so 125,000.

[46:45] But I don't think that's enough.

[46:47] I mean, we gave big business millions, and measure AV, small businesses are the backbone

[46:54] of our local economy, quite frankly, and they're their providers of significant numbers

[46:59] of jobs.

[47:00] 100,000 or $125,000 for all of the businesses, all of the small and local businesses in

[47:07] the city of Palmdale is just not enough.

[47:09] I would like to see this, there be a more thoughtful way of upgrading more money to this program.

[47:18] How many, do you know how many businesses we have, how many small local businesses we have in the city of Columbia?

[47:23] Not at the end, but I could find that out.

[47:25] Okay, so I mean if we're, there's got to be more than four.

[47:29] I mean, and there, I mean ADA requirements are expensive, signage is expensive, all of the stuff that this grant program is intended to support.

[47:39] is expensive. So again, the funding piece is concerning to me. The total allocation, I just think is just by far not enough.

[47:47] Our population is over 160,000. I would venture to say we've got at least a thousand small businesses here.

[47:55] And the availability of four grants that are supposed to be equitably distributed throughout the city, but there are five council districts.

[48:06] I don't the math is a math thing for me.

[48:10] So there are a variety of other issues.

[48:12] I think with the guidelines, there's no definition.

[48:15] It's reimbursement based.

[48:16] Some are in some ways you require a match.

[48:21] If somebody's denied funding,

[48:23] doesn't really say that they're going to be told why.

[48:26] They're denied funding.

[48:27] It also says that you guys are going to be accepting applications

[48:29] on a quarterly basis.

[48:31] But if you're only warning for a year,

[48:34] What is it one quarter? I'm just not sure that this is this is going to have the the impact that it could and it that it should.

[48:44] This is I think a great program, but I think it's so small in micro now in concept that we need to sort of make it to scale adjusted to scale to the size of our city and the amount of businesses small businesses that we've got here locally.

[49:00] Councilmember, thank you. I know you're a small business advocate. I appreciate your engagement and thoughtfulness around your comments. I'd like to quickly address those if I may.

[49:10] I did look at based after our briefing looked at state guidelines around defining small businesses. The state of California does define small businesses both in revenue and employee count.

[49:23] And importantly there's also a car there's also it also address micro businesses which I know is something that is near and dear to your heart.

[49:31] I think this is this is something that we could incorporate into our review in the rubric pretty seamlessly with the way this is drafted already.

[49:39] Number two, the grant giving up, for awards that are approved, we would, we can provide up to 50% of money up front.

[49:55] And I really thought about this lot.

[49:57] Most, I looked at many cities that offer,

[50:00] Facility Improvement Programs, most of them. You have the people have to front pay and then they get reimbursed

[50:05] everything later, which really puts the burden on small businesses. The exact people we want to help,

[50:11] that need that money to be able to beautify their space and improve our city.

[50:16] This was an effort to try to extend all branch, to make it easier for them to get started,

[50:23] typically projects they have to put, if they're doing a construction project, they have to pay 50%

[50:28] up front and then 50% on time of completion.

[50:31] So trying to match the program with the requirements

[50:34] that the construction industry already operates by.

[50:40] The $100,000 allocated, you're absolutely right to say

[50:43] that it's small, it's not enough for the city,

[50:46] but this is really our first effort doing this.

[50:48] This is a pilot program.

[50:50] We don't know what the uptakes get a B.

[50:52] We're gonna learn a lot.

[50:54] We already are looking at other streams

[50:55] of funding including CDBG and the future from the federal government to augment this program.

[51:01] What you need is good data to be able to get those funds and project what you're going to

[51:05] spend. This pilot program will allow us to get that data to be able to chase those resources

[51:11] from the federal government to be able to supervise it and serve more of our small businesses

[51:14] here in Palmdale. We do not require a match. We do take that into account. But again, we

[51:20] do not require a match because if people don't have the money and they have their deserve

[51:25] applicant and all other respects they still deserve help so I'm I try to be

[51:31] thoughtful around this but I really appreciate the the questions you raised and

[51:35] thank you for actually going back and thinking through some of my comments and

[51:39] thoughts about the program I think some of them can be addressed if we just tweak

[51:44] the guidelines so as opposed to up to 50% maybe awarded will be awarded upon

[51:50] execution if we're going to award the grant we've had to believe in our in our

[51:53] local businesses. I don't know why they would be denied the 50% up front. So the May, I don't

[51:59] want there to be discretion in it. I want people to be confident to know that if they get

[52:03] awarded this grant, they're going to get that 50% up front and they're going to get the job done.

[52:07] And their storefront's going to look that much better, that much quicker. So I think we just

[52:11] tweak that word. It's page six under disbursement structure and make sure that we incorporate

[52:20] the definition of small and microbusinesses in here as eligible and maybe at some point

[52:26] since this is a pilot maybe at some point, create two different grants, a microbusiness

[52:31] grant and a small business grant because they do have their different size entities that

[52:38] may have different needs. I don't know, you'll figure that out in the aftermath of the pilot

[52:43] project but I do really appreciate it. Again welcome and I'm so you've been really

[52:48] responsive and I appreciate that's what we're working with you and your substantive

[52:53] responses. So Council, you've got my my comments and my thoughts I think we need

[52:59] to add a minimum increase this to 125 so that there's 25 a district.

[53:04] Mr. Walla. Thank you. Now you do thank you, Mr. Pettenquart. I do agree that this

[53:11] is a very small amount for a program to benefit small businesses and the micro businesses.

[53:20] The adoption of measure AV and measure PD, so that we could have local control over those

[53:26] monies. This is exactly the kind of program that we need to have in order to show our businesses

[53:33] in the city that we support them. $100,000 for that would serve what five businesses,

[53:41] four businesses, okay. It was just a tiny thing and it demonstrates really not very much.

[53:50] But measure PD and measure AV were adopted for us to provide returns to our tax paying residents.

[54:01] And for the large measure, we don't do that.

[54:06] You know, we dedicated to other programs, and then on top of that,

[54:09] we want to raise the rates for development and for fees.

[54:15] Instead of being more creative and trying to find how we can use these funds

[54:18] that the taxpayers have granted to us.

[54:23] And then this is, I mean, I think we should pass this,

[54:26] but I think it's a minor token.

[54:27] And by the way, if someone goes down to Santa Corita, their tax rate is 9.75, the city

[54:38] of Palm Dils is 11.25.

[54:41] On a thousand dollars that they went down to Santa Corita to purchase at the mall or groceries

[54:48] or what have you, they would say $15.

[54:50] I dare say with gasoline prices today, that would probably not be a very, not a very good economic decision.

[55:00] If they went down to Santa Cruz to buy a car, instead of buying it here, the sales tax are based on where the car buyer is living.

[55:10] So if it's a 93550 zip code and they go down there, the city's going to get those taxes.

[55:16] Which we should be using because on the purchase of a car, now we're talking a little bit more money.

[55:22] We should be using those money. In order to benefit those people who might be going elsewhere to buy the cars,

[55:28] We should have a program in the city that we could use out a PD or measure a V that reimbursees people who go elsewhere or by cars here in Palmdale and have to pay a higher tax rate.

[55:44] I believe the city of Lancaster has a program that incentivizes people to buy cars in Lancaster.

[55:51] their tax rate is like ours.

[55:56] So I don't think it makes a lot of sense if you're going to go

[55:59] down to Santa Corita and buy a thousand dollars

[56:01] with merchandise down there or two thousand dollars

[56:04] worth of merchandise and you're going to spend

[56:05] thirty dollars in gas and you're going to be saving

[56:07] thirty dollars on two thousand dollars.

[56:10] So I do agree with the council woman that this is a

[56:13] very small token and we again I urge our staff to

[56:21] start using the money that the residents of Palmdale have given us in measures PD and AV to actually benefit our residents in a more productive way.

[56:32] That's all I have to say on that.

[56:34] We need to pass this and this is to me it's just a pilot program that we need to develop further.

[56:40] Thank you.

[56:42] Thank you for this program.

[56:43] It's a good start.

[56:44] We've got a long ways to go.

[56:45] I would like to see that tripled.

[56:47] But the problem with it being only four businesses is we do have five districts and I would

[56:52] like to see something in this document that says that not more than one can be from each district.

[57:00] We don't want three businesses and one district and then nobody else gets anything from another district.

[57:06] You see I'm saying it needs to be equitable amongst all of our businesses because we each have our own

[57:16] We really need to have one for district with a guarantee that we won't pick all four of them

[57:21] or five of them from one district, that it has to be dispersed amongst the districts.

[57:26] So each district is getting equity.

[57:28] That would be my suggestion.

[57:29] Councilmember, that's exactly what I was envisioning, and that reminded me of a point

[57:34] that's in the guidelines that I would hope that we can elaborate on.

[57:37] So it says that the city may prioritize projects that revitalize major commercial corridors,

[57:43] but it doesn't define what those commercial corridors.

[57:46] means, where are they? Can we identify what we mean by those? My concern is I think the

[57:52] same as Council Member Bettencourt's. In my district, the East Side, we campaign on the

[57:57] issue of getting fair share of resources for the East Side. My concern is that all the money is

[58:05] going to go to business small businesses by the mall or all money is going to go to small businesses

[58:08] and other corridors, nowhere, maybe the east side, my district, my district is between 15th

[58:15] and 40th.

[58:16] On Palmdale Boulevard, a lot of those businesses are shuddered, and their friends, their

[58:21] storefronts are dilapidated.

[58:22] I want to make sure that my district, Eric's district, Council Member Benton, our three districts

[58:29] on the east side get their fair share.

[58:31] And the only way that we can do that is to have enough to ensure that there's 25 dedicated

[58:38] to each council district, but also if we can define the major commercial quarters to include

[58:43] the 47th Street East Shopping Center to include. I mean, of course, we're going to have the

[58:49] the EV Mall area for the west side council members, but Palmdale Boulevard for sure. I think

[58:56] council members in court, maybe you have a specific corridor in your district that you are concerned

[59:00] about, but we need to be clear that it is a citywide that we are targeting citywide major

[59:06] commercial corridors and that the money is in fact going to be distributed equitably throughout the city.

[59:13] I guess for me it's hard to argue with any of this right.

[59:17] But for me I know district one.

[59:20] I know we're elected by districts.

[59:22] I'm a district one.

[59:23] We have the mall in 10th Street.

[59:25] But for me when I look at this, I just look at where's the greatest need.

[59:29] I would imagine the city will be going out and certain businesses and saying,

[59:34] This is where we have the greatest need for ADA accessibility.

[59:39] I'm sure some areas will be much worse than others.

[59:42] And for me, if those are the places that get prioritized first,

[59:47] I think that's most important.

[59:48] I think it is important.

[59:50] We focus on districts, but when I look at something like this,

[59:53] when we look at, it's to focus on ADA.

[59:57] People who are disabled, who can get into business.

[1:00:00] This is correct. That is the focus of it. We go to we find the businesses or they apply the ones who are

[1:00:07] most in need that are having the hardest time getting their customers in for one reason or another. I think

[1:00:15] that should be the priority is finding the the greatest need. If I may, I did, I did think a lot and we

[1:00:24] deliberations amongst the staff around how do we serve the entire city. We were thinking a lot about

[1:00:31] some of the key corridors like Palmdale Boulevard, which we know can and should look better to

[1:00:36] really represent our city. That is one of the areas we had in mind, but the outreach,

[1:00:44] we wanted to be equitable and outreach across all council districts, but we don't know where the

[1:00:48] uptick is going to be, where the demand is going to be, so we didn't want to over engineer or create

[1:00:53] additional hurdles in creating the guidelines.

[1:00:56] So there's attention there.

[1:00:57] We don't know what we're going to find.

[1:00:59] That's what I was going to say.

[1:01:00] It's just going to come up with a lot of things.

[1:01:01] Who applies?

[1:01:02] I mean, we might get all of the applicants from one district,

[1:01:05] and then it would be appropriate to award them to just that district,

[1:01:09] if you don't get anything from any other districts.

[1:01:11] But I think it's going to depend on who actually applies.

[1:01:14] So we have to do outreach to all the districts to see who's going

[1:01:17] to apply for these.

[1:01:18] To us, in this point, we should spend the money.

[1:01:21] I agree, which has been the money where we needed most in my district between 15th and 40th

[1:01:26] on the boulevard.

[1:01:27] I would argue, I mean, Albee's is a local small business and maybe they need assistance

[1:01:33] in grading ADA requirements, maybe they need.

[1:01:37] I talk to him.

[1:01:38] I don't know a couple of weeks ago, and it's difficult, but it's difficult, but I think we need

[1:01:47] make sure that it doesn't all get costrated and we don't want to cherry pick either.

[1:01:52] I don't want, like, you know, Austin say, let's identify the one business over there that

[1:01:56] needs the help and then we give them the 25,000 and the one business over there. I don't

[1:02:02] know that that's the way. I can't disagree with that. We should go out and find, you know,

[1:02:06] and they're probably will be more on the east side in your district. I know the buildings are older.

[1:02:11] They were built longer a long time ago. So like it just comes down to sometimes the age of the

[1:02:16] building and regulations were different back then, it's no fault of anyone but if that's

[1:02:21] where the need is, that's where the funding should go, that truly where the need is.

[1:02:26] So I'm happy to move to approve it.

[1:02:29] I think I'm hearing sort of consensus on Adam minimum increasing the allocation.

[1:02:36] I also asked yesterday for and I didn't get it.

[1:02:39] The measure A.V. budget was told that this money was already allocated in the budget that we approved.

[1:02:45] I don't recall seeing it, and then I asked for it yesterday didn't get it, so I haven't

[1:02:51] been able to look at the percentage of money that we're allocating out of measure area

[1:02:57] of your money to small business economic development versus the larger businesses, like

[1:03:03] already been spoken about the automals. I think is what stands out in a lot of people's minds. We

[1:03:08] put millions into them, and $100,000 pays in comparison. But so I didn't get them

[1:03:15] It's hard to see, but I'd be happy to move to approve, to increase the allocation to 125,

[1:03:25] ensuring that up to 25 is distributed in each council district, and that we incorporate

[1:03:35] of clear definitions for small business and micro business into the eligibility criteria,

[1:03:41] also identifying which major commercial corridors will be prioritized and I think that's it.

[1:03:51] Okay, anybody have anything else for one second that motion?

[1:03:54] Okay, we've got a motion a second.

[1:03:56] Oh, sorry.

[1:03:57] One more, a friendly amendment to my own motion.

[1:03:59] Can we, the, the, the May to to will be dispersed the front funding.

[1:04:05] the 50% change the language, the 50% maybe or maybe dispersed, change that to will be.

[1:04:14] You accept that?

[1:04:16] Yeah.

[1:04:17] Okay, all fair to say aye.

[1:04:19] Aye.

[1:04:19] Anyone opposed?

[1:04:21] That passes unanimously.

[1:04:23] Well, you do Palm Bill.

[1:04:25] I'm not feeling there.

[1:04:26] I won't be here for a long time.

[1:04:27] You're not going to have to deal with me.

[1:04:28] Can you keep us updated?

[1:04:30] If we need to add more money to this program, it can come back later.

[1:04:32] So can you keep us updated on what applications come in and when we're close to hitting that

[1:04:37] funding cap so that we can look at adding more money to this?

[1:04:40] Absolutely.

[1:04:40] I would love that as a small business champion throughout my career.

[1:04:44] I would love to see a strong demand of great applicants and we'll keep you informed.

[1:04:48] Okay.

[1:04:49] Thank you.

[1:04:50] 5-6.

[1:04:51] Do you need a staff report?

[1:04:53] Yes.

[1:04:54] Staff report.

[1:04:55] 5-6, please.

[1:05:00] Good evening.

[1:05:05] This item is to approve the second amendment to agreement number A-8464 with advancing communities together at to allocate $333,141.25 for the completion of the dream village. This is not our proposal for a new project. Dream village is an existing city supported project that is substantially under development.

[1:05:29] The City originally approved or provided ARPA funding in 2023 through a grant to act as an ARPA

[1:05:38] of subrecipient to develop 20 interim housing units on acts property adjacent to the winter

[1:05:45] shelter. As a project progressed through design, permitting and construction, actual development

[1:05:50] costs exceeded the original estimates. The action before Council provides additional eligible

[1:05:57] permanent local housing allocation, known as PLHA, funding to address the gap and complete

[1:06:03] the same 20 unit project. Staff will continue monitoring eligible expenditures, project

[1:06:09] completion, operations, and ultimately the services and housing outcomes produced by the

[1:06:17] city's investment.

[1:06:21] Thank you for your report. So I pulled this item because it's got a long

[1:06:25] history, attached to it, and I know you're also new, and you weren't here for the original sort

[1:06:32] of actions that pertained to this item. But we originally awarded to act $781,000,

[1:06:40] essentially as a sole source, but it wasn't approved as a sole source. They submitted a four-page

[1:06:47] proposal after request of a specific staff member. They were awarded $780,000 with no competitive

[1:06:53] process, federal, urban money. That was problematic. It violates a variety of CFRs and governing

[1:07:04] regulations. In 2024, I just distributed to the Council a letter that I wrote August 21,

[1:07:11] 2024, that outlines all of the issues in the particular regulations that I don't believe

[1:07:19] were followed. Federal regulations are very clear that contracts of this magnitude must be competitively

[1:07:28] bid. There was no competitive bid process. And we're here now today. I give all that

[1:07:33] background because we're here today. I think because of the sort of knee jerk inclination

[1:07:42] to award a contract to a friendly local organization, who I vehemently support and in the letter

[1:07:50] it says, I support their mission, I support all of that and I said it during, I went back and

[1:07:55] I listened to the council and last night I listened to the council meeting in August, August 16,

[1:08:01] the 2023 when we first appropriated this money. I raised the same questions then and my concerns

[1:08:08] are that now since that time, they submitted their proposal, we approved it, August 16, 2023.

[1:08:17] Their project was supposed to be completed in November 2023. It is now 2026, almost November

[1:08:23] 2026, right? And we're still awarding the, we're going to award them another 333,000.

[1:08:30] There was also a previous amendment to award them 102. So we're nearing almost another

[1:08:35] a half a million dollars on top of the original appropriation to support this project for 20 units of these tiny homes.

[1:08:43] Love tiny homes, one of create affordable housing and opportunities to bring folks underneath under a roof.

[1:08:52] But the process that this has undergone is is problematic.

[1:08:57] like I, Austin, you, during that meeting, because I, I was concerned, well, 70, enough for this

[1:09:04] project to be delivered in that short period of time, and Austin, you said, what if it

[1:09:09] goes over?

[1:09:10] Are you guys going to have the funds to finish the project?

[1:09:13] And the response was we did our due diligence, we already got quotes from contractors, they're

[1:09:18] all going to be City of Columbia contractors, they're going to come into this work, and

[1:09:22] we're going to get it done in the next couple of months, we're going to house people for

[1:09:25] We're in anticipation of the winter season, yet we're three years later, and we're still

[1:09:31] awarding them more money, and the tiny homes are still not there.

[1:09:37] It's 20 units now, after $1.2 million after tonight, $1.2 million for $20 units, that's $61,000

[1:09:44] a unit, and they're still not there.

[1:09:47] It's just a concern, and I wanted to err it for a lot of reasons, because I think things get

[1:09:52] lost in the shuffle, and this is also on the consent calendar.

[1:09:55] This is these are substantive issues and questions that I think we should discuss and not just

[1:10:00] Sort of rush under the rug on consent. But it speaks directly to the process and why it is so important that we competitively bid the process to make sure that the contractors that we select are ready and able to deliver on the proposal that they make and the grants and the contracts that we enter into with them for.

[1:10:20] So at this point, it is going to finally get us our 20 units, the 333,000, I mean, we're already almost a million in.

[1:10:31] Yeah, I'm like, I'm doing, I will support it, but I just needed there to be a public conversation of that speaks to procedurally what the problem is.

[1:10:44] It should have been clawed back. I don't know how we got away from that not getting clawed back, but in any case, I just wanted wanted the council to have a full understanding of what we're doing here today and the history of it to refresh their recollection, but also for the public to understand as well.

[1:11:02] city attorney or city manager who ever wants to fight dance for this question.

[1:11:06] If you had a chance to review the later dated August 21st, 2024, and if so, were we out of

[1:11:14] compliance with the ARPA guidelines?

[1:11:18] There's a city council. I think our contractor Anna from avant-garde is probably best suited to

[1:11:24] answer that question she works with many other municipalities has worked with this funding source

[1:11:29] it has is very well-versed in.

[1:11:33] Well, as of yesterday, when the question was brought up,

[1:11:37] and we came back and looked into how the money was programmed

[1:11:41] because I wasn't here.

[1:11:43] And so we looked into how it was programmed,

[1:11:45] and I followed up also with how it was reported to ARPA,

[1:11:50] and I also asked for legal to review what we discovered.

[1:11:55] So, the original 23 award was not structured as a procurement of services from act.

[1:12:03] It was structured as a grant, a sub-award of ARPA, financial assistance for the development of the project.

[1:12:11] And given that the property was adjacent where the winter shelter was, and it's their property,

[1:12:16] It's a proposal to develop that in alignment with the city's goals to house interim housing for the unhoused.

[1:12:27] So, in looking at that, finance confirmed that Act was classified and reported as an ARPA subrecipient, rather than a city contractor or vendor,

[1:12:36] and that the city attorney concurred with the analysis.

[1:12:38] So I did look into that to see the city's exposure

[1:12:44] to the requirements, the ARPA requirements.

[1:12:48] Mayor, may I have the floor?

[1:12:51] Is there anyone here tonight from act or anyone

[1:12:52] from the organization who can speak?

[1:12:54] I'd like to hear from them before we go any.

[1:12:57] Oh, here, Rossi.

[1:13:00] Let's see what Rossi asked this afternoon.

[1:13:02] I appreciate it.

[1:13:03] I think of that as I was here, we just were concerns.

[1:13:06] Like I said, I don't have anything but

[1:13:07] that was done that way, but I will say over the course of the three years, the project was

[1:13:13] redefined after an apartment complex. And so what happens is now we have over $100,000

[1:13:18] in permit fees, over $200,000 in concrete work needs to be done, brick walls need to be put in.

[1:13:25] And so we were abiding by building the safety and planning and this process, and what to make

[1:13:30] a story was going to be safe. And so our original design was restructured and changed,

[1:13:34] And that increased the cost, because we didn't anticipate

[1:13:38] swales and curves and brick walls.

[1:13:41] And over three years inflation hasn't occurred.

[1:13:44] And so prices have increased.

[1:13:45] And so that's been a big part of it.

[1:13:47] So originally we've had the units sitting there for two years,

[1:13:50] three years.

[1:13:51] Right, so that wasn't an issue.

[1:13:52] It just didn't want the city.

[1:13:53] And they've been very progressive

[1:13:54] and how they want to look at this in term housing.

[1:13:56] And they should have secured space for all of us.

[1:13:58] And so that took longer to get the permitting processes.

[1:14:01] get more architects on board, go back and forth the architects in the city, playing the

[1:14:06] department, and so it took a lot longer to get to this point. But we're pretty confident

[1:14:10] now that we, you know, all our things that we told you before, we were told that everything

[1:14:14] is fine now, our plan we do have a plan, because it's on paper, it is designed with the

[1:14:19] architects and engineers to be able to move forward, where the last, where I have the elevations

[1:14:23] are in there, brick walls are already been going up, right? And so we realized that I was just

[1:14:28] to Miss Anna that we're going to the concrete and electricity work is going to be the biggest cost.

[1:14:34] So question, that's news to me that this is now going to be a building. What point was that decision made?

[1:14:40] No, I'm sorry. We didn't make it a certain so we had tiny homes. It was decided by public safety and planning

[1:14:46] to make it to make it treat like an apartment complex because it had 20 units. So therefore,

[1:14:51] in doing so we had to have the concrete and the footings and everything, the same we were doing

[1:14:57] department building so the concrete work including the

[1:15:00] Park a lot of diamonds, landscaping, all that was not part of our original design. But it's now part of the design working with the city and edge arranged in years to make sure we meet city standards.

[1:15:10] So your original proposal I'm looking at it, it included plumbing installation, electrical installation, concrete, flat grading work. I mean, all of the, all of this stuff.

[1:15:19] Yes, ma'am, we didn't, we didn't just pay swells, curves, five foot of digging, right? We're, we're going to just lay concrete on our unit because you go to LA, these same units are just laying on dirt.

[1:15:29] or later on concrete, there are not curves,

[1:15:33] Rick walls around it, there's not a whole bunch of things we had to do.

[1:15:37] So we had to adapt to what was asked of us by the city staff.

[1:15:40] You weren't planning for fully developed.

[1:15:42] You were planning for basically putting slabs down and putting out.

[1:15:46] Yeah, the builds are designed to go on dirt or just basic concrete.

[1:15:48] So we're designed to just put it down,

[1:15:50] 20 units and be done with it in two months.

[1:15:53] That's kind of how everything sidewalks, dirt, dirt, dirt, dirt, dirt.

[1:15:56] The ADA compliance, everything will be there now.

[1:15:59] Finting will be around, so it will look like a actual complex other than just the tiny

[1:16:04] on those two in there.

[1:16:05] I don't understand.

[1:16:06] Your original proposal included ADA accessible ramps.

[1:16:09] I mean, I'm looking at it.

[1:16:10] We didn't include ADA sidewalks and everything that we're going to go along with that.

[1:16:15] So again, did the council give direction to amend the scope of the project?

[1:16:21] Or was that just?

[1:16:22] We do directly with public safety and planning.

[1:16:25] So we have to, we have to submit our proposal, our design, they came back, they told us to make adjustments,

[1:16:31] make changes over the last two years we've been doing that for the public safety and playing department.

[1:16:36] So thank you.

[1:16:37] And again, not an indictment on you.

[1:16:39] We love what you do.

[1:16:39] You do transitional age juice, housing.

[1:16:41] You do all the good stuff, listen, you train our, you train our kids, you train those

[1:16:45] that need skills.

[1:16:46] We love what you do.

[1:16:47] This is just process is taking so long.

[1:16:49] And the idea that we have had the ability to deliver 20 units.

[1:16:53] but didn't because now the scope got changed because somebody had a grand idea but didn't bring

[1:16:59] it a council for approval and now we've got to pay another half a million dollars. Again,

[1:17:02] not you. The question is now to the city manager at what point did the scope of this entire project

[1:17:09] change and did we consider the additional appropriation that would be required because it was originally

[1:17:15] a grant. It'll forgive a whole grant. We were just going to give them the almost $800,000 of money.

[1:17:21] And now we're going to get we we got ready to give them a digital 100,000 and now it's another

[1:17:27] 333,000.

[1:17:28] At what point did all of that happen?

[1:17:33] I remember city council as Mr. Ross stated, it was going through the process and part of it

[1:17:39] is this is a city project.

[1:17:42] My job is also to mitigate risks.

[1:17:47] Access that may happen by city bill projects.

[1:17:50] Megan, if you may speak to the process and which we came here for.

[1:17:54] And real quick, I've imagined that a lot of this is us having to make sure we're building stuff to code, right?

[1:17:59] And making sure that we're doing things correctly and a lot of these.

[1:18:02] I mean, it probably falls under title 22 and California State law, like a lot of this stuff.

[1:18:09] I'm sure when Rosy imagined it like we all do.

[1:18:11] Oh, we can just put the houses down and we've tried to, you know, work up a project with a really tight budget.

[1:18:17] But that speaks to why an RFP process is so important so that we can set proper specifications

[1:18:24] and get responsive proposals that meet all of those qualifications and standards.

[1:18:31] We can just award off of, and then now we're at 1.2 on a four-page request for funding,

[1:18:40] and that's now it's ballooned and now the entire scope has changed, and part of the reason

[1:18:45] I'm getting upset is because it's one tax payer dollars.

[1:18:48] It's taken three years to get us here.

[1:18:50] We still have no deliverables.

[1:18:53] And then it correlates to one of the other items on our agenda

[1:18:56] that I've got issues with our caper, our caper report,

[1:18:59] our affordable house, we get CDBG money and we get home money.

[1:19:02] What are we doing with that money is most of me in that report?

[1:19:05] And it's not great.

[1:19:08] In our affordable housing, units delivered, zero.

[1:19:11] This could have been what it was.

[1:19:13] And it's been zero for years.

[1:19:14] because this project has been on hold,

[1:19:16] that we could have delivered it back then,

[1:19:18] if we kept the scope what it was,

[1:19:20] but decisions were made internally

[1:19:21] that should have been brought to the council

[1:19:23] because it was going to delay the delivery of the units,

[1:19:28] put people in homes that needed it.

[1:19:30] It was also going to cost the city half a million dollars more.

[1:19:33] So I'm a little bit upset because I'm just finding this out,

[1:19:37] that this whole thing changed,

[1:19:38] and nobody mentioned it during my briefing,

[1:19:40] that the whole scope changed.

[1:19:41] I mean, it's, it's, again, speaks to problems in the process internally.

[1:19:46] How are, how is the council left in the dark, about all of this?

[1:19:51] This is Fatter. Sorry. Good evening.

[1:19:54] Megan Tiger, Director of Economic and Community Development.

[1:19:57] I will try to respond to everyone's question.

[1:20:00] But please refresh my memory if I missed something. So the way the project was originally envisioned was as emergency housing. And emergency housing is treated a little bit differently in the building code, then permanent support of housing or transitional housing. So when we originally brought the agreement forward, the thought was it was going to be emergency housing. We're going to use certain provisions of the code to help accommodate that. As we work through the process, it became apparent that that section of state law did not apply.

[1:20:29] So, this particular project. So, we worked with the applicants to find creative ways to amend the agreement.

[1:20:36] Make sure that the site was constructed or will be constructed in a manner that's safe for everyone understanding that these structures will likely become more permanent.

[1:20:46] So, that they do require electrical infoundations and proper access and laundry facilities and kitchen facilities and all these additional things that we didn't originally anticipate.

[1:20:55] The site is partially graded now. The work has been done out there. This is just the last chunk of money that's needed to get the project across the finish line.

[1:21:05] So, I'm looking at the budget, Megan, I'm miss Taggart.

[1:21:07] It has four stackable washer dryer units, electrical installation, landscaping, outdoor lighting, ADA ramps, fencing, plumbing, concrete, flat, grading work.

[1:21:18] All of the stuff that you're saying that was changed, that was in the original proposal.

[1:21:23] But I believe it costs more to install than was originally anticipated half a million dollars more. I mean

[1:21:29] The assertion if the council was that the the code so had already been received and we had already vetted that

[1:21:36] And we have received a revised budget from the applicant and it is showing what money has been spent where they've been spent and what money is still outstanding

[1:21:43] And it is the 333 that is being requested

[1:21:46] When are these actually going to be delivered assuming we move forward because at this point like I said at this point we're a million in

[1:21:51] We got to be able to deliver. We can't have a zero on our caper affordable units for three years straight.

[1:21:59] When are these going to be done?

[1:22:01] All good for them.

[1:22:02] All right. We're going to pay right now.

[1:22:04] We're going to be doing the brick walls.

[1:22:05] We're going to pay will be done by kind of winter shelters over by April 1st.

[1:22:09] Right.

[1:22:09] Because ideally it was taken with the shelter people.

[1:22:12] Those worst people and those who can make it will go into these units.

[1:22:16] Right.

[1:22:16] So we've already said before, we talked to our brick wall guys are out, the construction guys are out for the concrete, which is, we have all the bits, our thing like I said, we did not anticipate something that came about and we understand.

[1:22:31] Open up, which would have turned to me and told me that would have been like, what is going on here?

[1:22:35] And also, this is just a state, our, our, our, our, I was incredibly, but our history.

[1:22:41] We have built a 11 unit project in the city of Palmdale.

[1:22:44] We built a dudeplex from ground up in Palmdale.

[1:22:46] We built, we rehab the fourplex for the city of Palmdale.

[1:22:49] So we have three projects we've done for the city of Palmdale all under time under budget.

[1:22:53] This is the first one we had not meet the expectation because of change that we had no control over.

[1:22:58] And so when I'm ready to put this to bid or not, it changed from emergency housing to something different under the guys of how we want to see the operate operate with us.

[1:23:07] And so we're okay with that because your job is protect the city and our job is comply with that comply with that rule and that law.

[1:23:14] So it's okay for us, we're okay with that.

[1:23:15] But it was not due to us being incompetent.

[1:23:18] No.

[1:23:18] There was lack of any ability to do the work.

[1:23:21] It was just a negotiation that we have at the city, staff, and how they want to see things done for the safety of our tenants that are going to be there, and the citizens will roll.

[1:23:31] So I'm going to just read the last paragraph of this later so that, too, your point.

[1:23:35] Good ends cannot come from questionable means.

[1:23:37] While I'm wholeheartedly supportive of the nonprofit recipient of these funds, and I'm incredibly grateful for the much needed services that they provide to our community.

[1:23:45] I do believe that the requisite competitive process set forth by the code of federal regulations was not followed.

[1:23:50] When this matter came before council, I was placing an impossible predicament as to whether I should vote against a project to house the most vulnerable in our community due to a flawed procedure.

[1:24:00] Ultimately, we got voted to support the project and following that meaning, I continue to research the matter as well to my, and it goes on and on.

[1:24:06] But it's not an indictment on you. I love what you do in which you have done for decades for the most vulnerable folks in our community.

[1:24:13] And I just wish that we were able to partner with you in a better,

[1:24:17] more transparent way to be able to deliver these units years ago.

[1:24:22] Mr. Lowe, do you have any?

[1:24:24] I think this points out a more systemic problem with our city and the way in which we treat

[1:24:31] prospective developers in a different way.

[1:24:35] But I consider being here about changes that are being required by our city and the process.

[1:24:42] impact fees, permit fees and other fees that create difficulty for developers to build anything

[1:24:49] and it's difficult to do it here. And, you know, I think that the project that you're talking

[1:24:55] about, and it sounds to me, that these were things that were imposed on you, that...

[1:25:00] We're completely different from when we first approved the project a few years ago.

[1:25:05] But I think it just points out to a different problem that I talked to you about Mr. Mendes earlier today,

[1:25:11] involving all of this process. That has to change.

[1:25:14] We have a reputation for being a difficult city to deal with.

[1:25:18] And here we have something that is urgent, necessary, humane to take people off the streets.

[1:25:25] And here we are three years later, and what do we have?

[1:25:27] Grady is not your fault, but I think that it points out the greater problem, which is the way that we process development in this city.

[1:25:39] When are we going to get it going in the right way? Sound?

[1:25:45] I mean, really.

[1:25:46] We need to change things. Mayor Pro Tem Bishop.

[1:25:50] Yeah, thank you, Rossi, for everything you've done and he's thanks for everything.

[1:25:54] Thank you for being here to explain that and educate us where the project is at and where it's going and all that you have a good reputation and you've done good work in the city so

[1:26:04] Thank you.

[1:26:05] We have a motion.

[1:26:06] We'll improve second.

[1:26:08] All in favor say aye.

[1:26:09] Aye.

[1:26:10] I want to pose that passes unanimously.

[1:26:13] 5.7 can we please get a staff report.

[1:26:16] Oh, this is the one that I can't.

[1:26:20] This is one of the ones. This one was 1,159 pages of procurement documents on top of this in the in the in the thing.

[1:26:32] So this is one of the items that is of concern that if nobody on the Council has had the opportunity to review the underlying procurement documents.

[1:26:39] I don't know how we fulfill our oversight responsibilities and legislative responsibilities without reviewing them.

[1:26:49] Staffer Park, please. Thank you. Good evening Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of Council, Brian George, City of Building

[1:26:54] Fischel. Item 5.7 for your consideration, approve agreements with Bureau of Eratos, North America, BPR consulting group,

[1:27:04] Interwest consulting group for as needed plan check and staffing services each and an amount not to exceed 750,000 for a combined total of 2,250,000 and each for a two year term with the

[1:27:18] to extend for three additional one-year terms.

[1:27:24] Building and safety division utilizes qualified consultant

[1:27:27] for outside plan review and related services.

[1:27:30] Building and inspection services when it's needed permit

[1:27:33] technician services as well.

[1:27:37] These services are meant to supplement city staff during times

[1:27:42] of fluctuation and workload when the development community

[1:27:46] submits plans and projects that are in excess

[1:27:50] of what our in-house staff can timely and efficiently produce.

[1:27:57] To ensure the continued availability of these services on February 24th, 2026, the city

[1:28:03] issued request for RFP. On March 26, 11 proposals were received, following a competitive selection

[1:28:12] process. The proposals were evaluated and established on a criteria. Three firms were selected

[1:28:18] to provide the required services and to support the city's ongoing development review activities.

[1:28:29] Two rounds of interviews were held with the top five firms, one virtual, one in person.

[1:28:35] And as a result, BPR, Bureau of Eratos and Interwest Consulting Group were still

[1:28:42] A multi-award consultant pool will provide flexibility to assign projects based on their requirements and the availability of staff, like I said, inspectors, permit technician staff in-house.

[1:28:59] This also allows us to negotiate competitively with the three firms on more complex projects.

[1:29:04] As far as the fiscal impact, 2,250,000 is comprised of 754 each agreement.

[1:29:13] Those agreements are two years with three, one year options to extend.

[1:29:18] So it's five years total, 750 or five years.

[1:29:22] Consultant compensation for plan review is funded through the plan review fees collected by the building and safety division that the applicant pays.

[1:29:33] So services are not requested of any of these consultants until the fees have already been paid.

[1:29:41] So it's essentially passed through, if you will.

[1:29:45] Funding beyond the current adopted budget is subject to future budget appropriations approved by the City Council.

[1:29:52] We have to take any questions.

[1:29:53] If I may add please just a reminder that this meet this item was

[1:30:00] Push the last council meeting. So council has had these procurement documents for over a month.

[1:30:04] But I also asked that our last briefing for specific information that was never provided to me,

[1:30:10] which is why we continued it last meeting because the documents that I've asked for were not provided to me in advance of that council meeting.

[1:30:16] And I said, I didn't get what I what I needed in order to make an accurate decision and informed decision.

[1:30:22] So Mayor agreed to continue to item still didn't get the information at my briefing yesterday.

[1:30:28] I just checked my email. I got it at today. I got it at 147 p.m. before the meeting. I

[1:30:36] clearly have not been able to review it. But part of the reason why I wanted some of

[1:30:41] at least some of that background information is this is three contracts. And yes, it's as

[1:30:46] needed. But it's three quarters of a million each contract. One of the contractors that's

[1:30:51] suggesting is a new contractor to the city of Palmdale, and they were selected for its

[1:30:59] strong local presence established relationships with neighboring jurisdictions. I asked

[1:31:04] what does that mean? And I didn't get a very clear answer that they generally do work all around.

[1:31:10] I'm not sure if that's Lancaster, I'm not sure if that's LA County, but in addition to that,

[1:31:17] But three that were selected in terms of costs, there are others that were lesserate that were not selected.

[1:31:27] And so that's concerning as well.

[1:31:30] So yes, you can make your point south that it was continued, but it was been continued because I still don't have the information needed in order to make an informed decision on this item.

[1:31:40] And again, if the council has not reviewed them, it's 1159 pages of supporting documents

[1:31:47] in addition to this probably a couple hundred pages of documents in our binder.

[1:31:52] Mayor, may I have the floor?

[1:31:55] I have questions.

[1:31:56] Maybe we could have a little bit.

[1:31:58] We really have that many builders turning in plans.

[1:32:01] We need three simultaneous plan checkers, or do some of them get busy, or some firms

[1:32:06] better like different types of project like track houses versus commercial. So if a

[1:32:12] the developer comes in and says, I want to build a strip mall or I want to build

[1:32:16] you know 100 million track homes or like, oh we have a plan checker for that. How does that work?

[1:32:21] Correct. The out of the three firms they do specialize in certain areas. For instance,

[1:32:26] we have Lockheed. Lockheed has, I'm going to be honest, some of it's equipment is just unbelievable.

[1:32:32] that's specialized. And extremely specialized. It takes an electrical engineer to

[1:32:38] plan review it. Those are the types of things that some firms will specialize in

[1:32:43] one of the firms. The other one is the ADA accessibility. Again, when I talked

[1:32:48] about flexibility, that's one thing, but availability. We're in a region where if I

[1:32:53] call for building inspectors, I need to have more than one person who may or

[1:33:02] you to the Analo Valley in times of need for a large project.

[1:33:08] There's large projects that sometimes will put a dedicated inspector on.

[1:33:12] That's no time when we have a big project that's high profile and we want to make sure

[1:33:17] that the developer can just go without interference or delay, that's no time for us not

[1:33:22] to be able to find.

[1:33:23] Having three companies in your back pocket is easy to call and get someone out there on

[1:33:26] side.

[1:33:27] Options are good and availability is key.

[1:33:29] I'm going to especially when you're trying to keep up with developers and development,

[1:33:33] I mean, development is, it's up and down, you know, the EBS and flows.

[1:33:37] It's, yeah, they say it's seasonal, I guess, but I guess on an average maybe weekly or monthly

[1:33:41] base, let's say how many developers or builders or investors come and say,

[1:33:45] I want to build this, here's my plans and here's my fees to the pay, said plan checker,

[1:33:50] you're going to hire this curious. I want to see how busy we are.

[1:33:53] Large projects, you probably, well, depends on what you do to firm as large project,

[1:33:57] But we get anywhere from 100 to 250 projects a week of varying sizes, of course.

[1:34:03] That seems like a lot.

[1:34:04] A lot of that stuff is stuff that we can check in house.

[1:34:07] Okay, we're talking about ADUs.

[1:34:10] We're talking about window upgrades.

[1:34:11] We're talking about things like that.

[1:34:13] So these are things that we can handle in house.

[1:34:17] The larger projects are fewer and far between.

[1:34:20] And that's why it's an as needed basis.

[1:34:23] There may be a month where we don't rely on these.

[1:34:26] Or maybe even two months where we don't rely on these these firms, but in that month

[1:34:31] Where diesel prices maybe in the near future will drop, right?

[1:34:36] We could get we could get bombarded with 10 or 12 big projects and that's I don't ever want to tell the developer or an applicant

[1:34:44] Hang on where we can't we can I see what you mean now?

[1:34:48] So we're not we're just allocating the money the big project comes in they pay their fee

[1:34:52] They're covering the cost of the contractor that we're hiring to go planchex.

[1:34:58] So it is truly a path.

[1:35:00] It really is. We do like I said previously. We do not request services. We literally don't email or pick up the phone to request services until the plan check fees have been paid.

[1:35:11] And we've ensured through our staff that all the documents are there and ready to go for review.

[1:35:15] And last question, these three companies, good. They qualified. Yes.

[1:35:19] Okay. Let's get enough for me. I'll make a motion to approve.

[1:35:22] First, I want to go to council number law.

[1:35:23] Is this going to have any impact on the amount of money that the permit are going to cost

[1:35:29] to the individuals that have to process through one of these companies?

[1:35:34] No, sir.

[1:35:35] Not at all.

[1:35:36] Our fee schedule did not change.

[1:35:37] Therefore, our permit, our permit valuations and our permit fees are based on valuation

[1:35:42] and the plan check fees based on the permit fee and without the fee schedule going up

[1:35:47] or valuations going up, there is no increase in fee.

[1:35:50] Well, these contracts make our permitting process more efficient.

[1:35:53] Yes, sir. Okay. Why is that? Because without them, we would be working eight days a week with two people in the house.

[1:36:04] That's it, too. Yes, sir.

[1:36:06] Okay.

[1:36:08] We have a motion on the floor by the mayor, Pro Tem, is there a second?

[1:36:11] Second. All in favor, signify if I say an aye. Aye. Anyone opposed?

[1:36:17] Okay. That passes forward to one.

[1:36:21] 5.8, staff report, please.

[1:36:41] Good evening, Mayor. May I protest against the council members?

[1:36:43] This agenda, no 5.8 is for your consideration to approve a second amendment agreement with

[1:36:49] BKF for Project Construction Management Services for the additional amount of $244,000 to

[1:37:01] 1,574,274 for the dry-town water park thrill-rike project, and also all the rides appropriation

[1:37:11] of 244,000,274 in general falls for this project. The agreement for VKF was originally

[1:37:19] approved back in September 2, 2025 to oversee the project. There have been delays with this project

[1:37:26] for construction related to health permitting, as well as subcontractor changing out their

[1:37:32] contractors, changing out their subcontractors. Originally, this was to begin in May, but

[1:37:40] the beginning of construction began closer to April. I'll see you to June on this project.

[1:37:49] The additional funds will come from general funds and any questions you may have to my

[1:37:53] best to answer.

[1:37:57] I think you so I also mean everything as for some follow-up information. I don't know. Did you send it to me today?

[1:38:04] Yes, it was spoiled.

[1:38:06] Okay, what time I don't know. Anyway, obviously they haven't didn't get a chance to look at it, but question.

[1:38:11] So the original contract expired June 2026 and then in July there was an extension, right?

[1:38:22] Time was correct. Time was. And then now you're asking for another $250,000, $250,000.

[1:38:31] In our briefing you explained that the additional money is because there was a delay in the

[1:38:37] notice to proceed. And so there was just a delay in doing the work. So my question is, if there was

[1:38:43] a delay in doing the work and this is for construction management, why do they need double the money?

[1:38:49] If they weren't overseeing anything because there was nothing to manage if the work hadn't started.

[1:38:55] Actually the work, the contract is for project management and construction management services.

[1:39:01] And this has been on board since September 2025 working on this project.

[1:39:06] So they were spending time on this project.

[1:39:10] And because of the delay, the project management also exceeded or expend all the hours a lot for this project.

[1:39:17] so everything.

[1:39:18] But if there was, if the notice to proceed was not issued, if there was a delay in several

[1:39:23] months for the, what work were they overseeing?

[1:39:25] This is a design bill contract with KPRS Bergman, so that project, they were responsible for

[1:39:32] design.

[1:39:33] So MNS was also responsible for oversight of design, all the plan reviews, all the coordination

[1:39:38] with the health department, so they were involved from September on.

[1:39:42] So, again, the contract expired with the city expired in June, then sell extended it in July, July 27, signed an extension, and then we get a letter August 24.

[1:40:00] First, was that last week asking for this $250,000, and now it's on our agenda to move. But in

[1:40:08] their letter to us, that was sent last week. It says, Mr. Issa, who is the project manager, will

[1:40:17] assume the role of the project manager for this assignment while continuing to support

[1:40:20] the dry down water park slide inflation as a result. His construction management services for the

[1:40:29] original level of effort with the service, so he's we're pulling him from one and he's

[1:40:36] reducing, I don't understand why we're doing this.

[1:40:38] That was an, that was an incorrect statement by the, um, MS or BKF. So they were providing

[1:40:46] us with a solution to manage two projects by this person because, uh, to give us more savings.

[1:40:53] so the allotted hours that he had here could be reduced more by managing two projects at one time.

[1:41:01] You're just savings, but this is essentially doubling the original amount that was awarded for a six month

[1:41:07] extension. Yes, it doubled it because of all the additional hours spent during the plan preparation process.

[1:41:16] And originally was there. I pulled the original contract to where I asked for that. I don't know if you said it in the email. I went back and I found it September 2nd, 2025 on council.

[1:41:30] There was no actual procurement process RFP or request RFQ. There was nothing. They were just selected, right? Correct.

[1:41:39] Why because staff just said, they're great?

[1:41:43] This MNS was also overseeing the project before that award.

[1:41:48] They were involved in preparing the RFQ involved in negotiation with Bergman,

[1:41:54] as well as working with Whitewater, who's the slide fabricator,

[1:41:58] to do all the prep documents.

[1:42:01] So my recommendation at the time was to recommend MNS to continue

[1:42:06] With the project management construction oversight for the project that was the action item, and that was a request in September

[1:42:12] Yeah, so I have an issue with the contractor. They changed their name. They're they were in menace for the same reasons that I've voiced

[1:42:19] Concerns about all of the contracts that were awarded

[1:42:23] It is sort of a slew of contracts awarded the wild end. I've got concerns about MNS 2 and their relationship to executive management

[1:42:32] That's a concern for me

[1:42:34] how they were single, single-handedly selected at the outset.

[1:42:39] And now we're doubling their contract for a six-month oversight

[1:42:42] responsibility for work that didn't actually start.

[1:42:47] It doesn't, again, the math is a math thing.

[1:42:50] So I can't support this.

[1:42:54] Do we have anything on our contract?

[1:42:58] There's two people essentially involved here.

[1:43:00] It's the county and the health department, right?

[1:43:02] that delayed it. And because of those delays, the subcontractors left the contractor manager, right,

[1:43:09] is that roughly it? Correct. They dropped out. So the prime contractor had to get new subcontractors

[1:43:16] in place to make sure that they're also under the CWA. So it was difficult for them to find

[1:43:21] replacement. So there's additional delays as well. Isn't the contractor unhauled or responsible?

[1:43:27] Isn't there any kind of liquidated damages? I mean, is there anything we can,

[1:43:30] because there's a couple of mechanisms that fall, but I do hate it when someone tells you the price,

[1:43:36] this is what it's going to be. They bet the job, we award it. It is a very common thing in government,

[1:43:43] and a lot of construction projects. If you're in construction, you hear the term change orders

[1:43:47] thrown around it, you know, almost the start of the first swing of the hammer. So it is a little

[1:43:53] annoying. I don't like the fact that we're having to pick up another bill for something, especially

[1:43:58] because dry time takes so much money anyway to keep operating.

[1:44:02] Yes, we've been tracking the working days for this project.

[1:44:06] So there will be assessing LDS, liquidated damage on this project at the completion.

[1:44:11] Is there anything like so anything that we can get back close to what we're awarding tonight?

[1:44:16] You think?

[1:44:16] Very close to approximately 50

[1:44:25] working days over contracted.

[1:44:28] Do you know a price-wise where that puts them?

[1:44:31] I don't know the exact amount.

[1:44:32] But essentially, like, you know, some of that, um, loss through the LDP, but we will

[1:44:37] hit them because they, they were unable to perform. How do we do that when we extend the working

[1:44:42] days in the amendments? The, not all the, this is for the contractor, KPRS correct? No.

[1:44:49] No. No, for the, for the, for the consultants, we don't get LDs from them. That's, I want to be clear.

[1:44:56] So, to answer your question, the answer is no Austin.

[1:45:00] There is an earlier liquid.

[1:45:01] It's on the list. They don't control the unforeseen conditions. The contractor is on the hook for those.

[1:45:07] Okay.

[1:45:11] All right. Yeah. I'm not crazy about it. The water slides are already there, right?

[1:45:15] Yes, we're about 35 percent complete. And now right now they're building the pump house and next month they'll be erecting the towers.

[1:45:24] Okay. All right. That's that. Anyone else? Motion, move to approve.

[1:45:30] Second, I'll second it all in favor of signify five saying aye. I don't want to pose that passes for one

[1:45:39] 5.10 can we get a staff report please. Hey, this was going to be a fun one. Sorry, guys

[1:45:46] No staff.

[1:45:51] My 10 staff report

[1:46:02] Take

[1:46:07] your time. It's going to be a fun one. I hurt we don't really need the staff

[1:46:11] I'll be here to give this a record. I just want to, I just want to, I just want to put

[1:46:17] an exclamation point and essentially the fact that this is getting done. This is for much

[1:46:23] needed improvements in Macadam Park, the one park in my council district. I've been fighting

[1:46:27] since day one of being elected for equity, indistribution of funding for rehabbing that park.

[1:46:35] We, with the council support, thank you. I have now allocated over a level. I think it's 11.2

[1:46:41] million dollars, we're getting new restrooms, new lighting, new fields, we're actually getting

[1:46:46] us neck bar.

[1:46:47] So we, so that the, I will leave us in the parents, don't have to drag, you know, fold up

[1:46:51] plastic tables and sell a caprice on out of coolers when we, we spent, I think, 1.2 million

[1:47:00] on a stack bar at Marie Curr.

[1:47:03] This is such a phenomenal accomplishment and thank you to the Council for supporting, but

[1:47:10] Thank you to staff for actually bringing it to fruition.

[1:47:14] I'm not going to be here to what I'm not going to be here.

[1:47:17] When this gets done, when I'm just so happy and thankful

[1:47:21] that it's actually coming to fruition because the people

[1:47:25] and my district to the people on the east side need green space

[1:47:30] that's safe and that looks like West Side Recreation

[1:47:35] facility, so any help thank you so much. With that some Andrea I totally feel your joy

[1:47:41] because it took me nine years to get my equipment at my park but it finally got done so I know

[1:47:46] how warm your heart is feeling right now that's something that you've worked so hard for has

[1:47:50] come to fruition so congratulations. And to the people in my district so this is actually the construction

[1:47:57] is going to start in spring 2027 and the entire park is already finished right now and so I've my

[1:48:03] to those that try to go there on Saturdays and use the, you know, practice soccer or what not.

[1:48:10] But it's all for the good. Next summer, it will be a completely renovated park and it will be a

[1:48:16] Jason to together California, which is also an incredibly beautiful foster facility and community

[1:48:23] resource center that is being built. So it's, it's an entire quarter that is being invested in

[1:48:31] I just, I'm so thankful to everybody for supporting.

[1:48:37] Yes.

[1:48:38] Move to approve.

[1:48:41] Took a minute.

[1:48:42] We've got a first in a second.

[1:48:44] On favor say aye.

[1:48:46] Anyone opposed?

[1:48:47] About one pass is unanimously.

[1:48:50] 5, 11.

[1:48:52] Staff.

[1:48:54] I've still you.

[1:48:55] Yes, yes.

[1:48:56] Step 4 questions.

[1:49:00] You pulled this item.

[1:49:01] All right.

[1:49:02] This next item is to clear consideration to approve an agreement with R.C.

[1:49:06] for construction of Boulder's ADA Improvement for a total not to see it amount of $254,617,

[1:49:15] which includes a 10% contingency. The project enhances ADA compliance and safety with the Boulder's community.

[1:49:23] The scope of the project will involve ADA ramps, concrete repair panels at both Rollers Ranch 1 and also Rollers at the lake.

[1:49:34] Bids were advertised back in June 2nd, 2026 on planet Bids for Bids were received.

[1:49:39] Our CPAC was submitted, submitted the lowest response of the bid.

[1:49:45] The funding will come from CDBG for this project.

[1:49:48] Any questions?

[1:49:50] No questions, really. I just thank you for bringing this forward. My concern as I've

[1:49:55] voiced in our briefing about this one, so one of these parks is in my...

[1:50:00] Is in My District. A lot of the residents have voice concerns about safety concern. You know rehab that's needed. This is much needed to work. What I wanted to add. I guess there is a question and I asked it in the briefing. What are we doing? The work is both to start in November of this year. What are we doing in terms of outreach, notifying the residents that this work is going to occur and getting feedback and making sure that the right away is not impacted the ingress egress from the part that the Government has made.

[1:50:29] the noise is not going to affect people, you know, in their homes, can you just speak on that?

[1:50:35] Yes, as a student, as we execute the agreement, we'll have a pre-construction meeting

[1:50:39] and our project man to be responsible for public outreach and notification, potentially

[1:50:44] and by them for virtual meetings to understand the project.

[1:50:47] And then the contractor prior to start a work, we're also be responsible to notify

[1:50:50] the residents, make sure the signs are up.

[1:50:54] You're concerned with accessibility, we'll also be addressed during construction.

[1:50:58] the make sure it's properly donated and the date I gave last or yesterday was actually a little later.

[1:51:06] We can start this project as early as it's mid October and finished before or by November 23rd.

[1:51:13] Great that the work is going to get done but all the more importance of doing the outreach and notifying the residents that they're going to have this work sort of around the clock or whenever the schedule is.

[1:51:27] What we hear from our mobile home parks often is that they're not notified of a lot of things.

[1:51:33] And we hear when they get even the the most minute of running increases that they didn't know they weren't aware they weren't part of the process.

[1:51:40] And so we want to make sure that they are informed and aware of the construction that's going to happen very soon.

[1:51:47] It sounds like it was right around the corner and so that they can make you know plans accordingly.

[1:51:53] Yes, I'll make sure that happens.

[1:51:55] Great, thank you.

[1:51:56] Move the item.

[1:51:58] We'll go through.

[1:51:59] Second.

[1:52:00] All favors say aye.

[1:52:01] Aye.

[1:52:02] Anyone close?

[1:52:03] That one passes unanimously.

[1:52:05] 5.12.

[1:52:06] Do you want to staff report?

[1:52:08] Oh.

[1:52:09] Staff report on the minute?

[1:52:10] Yeah.

[1:52:11] No.

[1:52:11] I just want to.

[1:52:16] So there are a couple of things that we need to adjust on the minutes.

[1:52:20] But I just, there are things that I just want to raise because otherwise I don't know how else to get them addressed.

[1:52:26] by our city attorney item 6.1 on the July 7th minutes was the item if you guys recall

[1:52:37] there was a 6 month extension and there was this this contractor that I found had all

[1:52:41] violations with the secretaries state. We gave them an additional 6 months. It two months

[1:52:47] have passed the item I asked in the city attorneys that they were going to do some research

[1:52:54] and figure out what recourse we've got and that the item be brought back before the expiration

[1:52:58] of the six months.

[1:52:59] I haven't heard anything on that, so we'd love to have that address or at some point

[1:53:04] added on to an agenda before the expiration of the 180 days and the contract expires.

[1:53:12] I asked for it says here, and it just confirms here, I asked for a report several times

[1:53:19] over. And the motion was approved. Motion was made by me, seconded by Council Member Benton

[1:53:26] Court, at least in this. These minutes to have a report about the mark Senate, the $10 million.

[1:53:33] I've said it every council meeting. We need to have them come and give us a report on the status

[1:53:39] of it, on revenue sharing opportunities for if it is in fact going to be open as an event center.

[1:53:45] What happened to our $10 million? Where is it in the process? What are the operating

[1:53:51] regulations going to be? What do Palmdale residents need to do? Or say if there

[1:53:56] is in fact an emergency, we had a fire today in my district or adjacent to my district and

[1:54:00] Erics. What if they had to evacuate and go over there? We have no idea and we would not be able

[1:54:06] to inform our residents how to go and access that emergency facility. So I don't know what

[1:54:13] status of that. Where are we? I keep hearing you keep telling me they're coming

[1:54:17] they're coming but they're never here.

[1:54:22] Members to see council. I've reached out to Mr.

[1:54:24] Dan Jacobs in waiting for a reply on that. He has future dates that he even offered to take the city.

[1:54:33] I just recently offered to take the city on a tour. The city comes on a tour but we express his

[1:54:38] want to come out here and we'll reach out again. So a tour is appreciated but we need to talk to the

[1:54:45] 10 million dollars went and how they're going to access the facility that it's intended to

[1:54:52] provide services for them. So a tour is great, happy to go on a tour, but we need to

[1:55:00] It's like the next meeting. We've said it time and time again, but he needs to come. We gave them $10 million. And we have nothing to show for it.

[1:55:10] Life-saving to February leaders, we talked about that last council meeting, and this motion was very clearly was approved and said that it's going to come back. In my briefing, there was lack of clarity on what was happening.

[1:55:22] So they said you guys said that it's not on this agenda because you didn't realize that there was an actual action item taken. It's in the minutes. So you guys can reference that. I hope that that's on the upcoming agenda and then the financial analysis.

[1:55:39] So this is one edit into the minutes that I want to make August 4th minutes, Madam Clerk,

[1:55:48] on the deferment of measure PDE. I want it to be clear that I preferred to, and that I placed

[1:55:59] a motion before the council to fully repeal measure PDE and to put that on the ballot.

[1:56:06] There's no reference to any of that. We had a exhaustive conversation about it, but there's no reference to my preference for a full repeal of measure peating.

[1:56:14] And so I just want to make sure that that's incorporated in there.

[1:56:17] And then six one fees. The fee structure we talked about, I think,

[1:56:22] Council number low and the council at our last meeting, we talked extensively about our fee structure.

[1:56:27] It's very clear in here. It says that we're going to table the item to September.

[1:56:32] This is the only meeting in September, and it's not on the agenda.

[1:56:37] I apparently, Mr. Mendes, you decided on your own free will that you were going to not bring

[1:56:46] it back, because you decided that you were going to not make changes to the fees schedule

[1:56:50] that besides the point, it was directed to bring back to the Council for consideration.

[1:56:55] I think not adjusting the fees schedule from last year doesn't answer or address the problems that were raised.

[1:57:03] I think it was $3,400 for a mobile home resident to file an appeal for a rent increase.

[1:57:10] The rent increases are like $50 each for them to have to pay over $3,000 in a fee to file an appeal is preposterous.

[1:57:17] I would imagine I think that that fee schedule existed last year.

[1:57:21] So leaving at the same doesn't solve the problem.

[1:57:23] so that needs to be one, and I would want to be very clear and transparent. It needs to be on an upcoming

[1:57:29] agenda so that we can address this. And I know Council Member Lowe, you had, you know, some pretty,

[1:57:36] you know, strong concerns about it as well. I sent the email a couple of weeks ago saying I'm

[1:57:42] ready and willing to work, send me the documents from the prior fiscal year's fee structures,

[1:57:47] which Council Member is going to work with me on it and you get the staff together for a meeting

[1:57:52] get it on my calendar, got nothing, I think I got something today from you with the form

[1:57:57] of yours fee structure, but that's not enough. We need it on the agenda and we need a meeting

[1:58:02] calendar with whichever council member, if anyone wants to work with me on revising the

[1:58:07] fee structure. And I think that's it.

[1:58:13] And what else? So when are we going to deal with the fee schedule as a council?

[1:58:19] I'm going to see a council. As I stated to council member, I stated that we're still analyzing

[1:58:24] the budget. I didn't say we were not changing it. So we are hoping to bring it back as soon as we're

[1:58:30] done analyzing the budget. One more thing. No. Hopefully the next meeting. Yes.

[1:58:38] I should

[1:58:39] return the two meetings a month. Just thing. Yes, ma'am. I'm willing to work with you on that.

[1:58:47] Let me know your calendar. Okay. It says that you're reviewing the impacts of not changing

[1:58:54] costs this year. Once we get that done, we will contact you. What? That's not what Council

[1:58:59] directed. It's not incumbent upon you to change Council's direction. We moved. I moved. It was

[1:59:06] seconded. We voted unanimously to bring it back. And you can't, you know, bring it back

[1:59:11] at a meeting in September. You can't, you know, laterally override or circumvent the Council's

[1:59:16] action.

[1:59:17] Thank you. Mayor, remember to see Council. Council asked me what its impact would be to our budget

[1:59:21] If we didn't move it, I'm getting those numbers.

[1:59:27] That's not what's in the minutes, and that's not what happened.

[1:59:29] A lot of wood counsel asked you to do that.

[1:59:32] I did.

[1:59:36] I wanted to know, why are we raising these fees?

[1:59:41] When we have all the money that's been generated by the sales taxes in PD and measure AV.

[1:59:47] And again, I think it's something that we could do,

[1:59:50] by the use of that sales tax revenue,

[1:59:53] to lessen the load on people who want to do business with the city, including anyone that wants

[1:59:58] to file an appeal.

[2:00:00] Because of a red increase. I mean, we have to have better use of the money that the taxpayers have given us.

[2:00:08] And so, yes, I did ask for that. And I'm looking forward to whatever you're going to come back with.

[2:00:14] All right. Do you want to define a motion?

[2:00:17] Define my motion.

[2:00:19] I mean, there it is.

[2:00:21] Yeah, it's all moved to approve the minutes with the changes of the madam clerk that I mentioned specifically with regard to

[2:00:29] The measure PDIM 7.1 and new figures on August 4, 20, 26 minutes.

[2:00:37] Second that.

[2:00:39] And I just didn't go.

[2:00:43] No.

[2:00:45] Okay.

[2:00:46] I don't care that the minute say that.

[2:00:48] It's all second.

[2:00:49] Your motion.

[2:00:50] All in favor say aye.

[2:00:52] Anyone opposed?

[2:00:53] Aye.

[2:00:54] Aye.

[2:00:54] That passes.

[2:00:55] You absolutely live in one abstenture.

[2:00:58] Okay, public hearing section six, we're going to open the public hearing.

[2:01:04] Can we get a staff report on six one, please?

[2:01:08] Okay.

[2:01:08] We take this one first, and the important thing.

[2:01:14] Good evening, Mayor members of the Council.

[2:01:17] This public hearing is to address the 2025 through 2026 consolidated annual performance and

[2:01:22] evaluation report known as the Caper for the CDBG and Home Funds.

[2:01:28] Each year, the city receives federal entitlement funding from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. We call that HUD.

[2:01:37] To maintain eligibility, the city must submit a report outlining usage of the funds from the previous fiscal year due to HUD by September 28.

[2:01:46] The caper, as we call it, measures the city's progress on the five-year consolidated plan.

[2:01:54] This particular year is year one of that consolidated plan.

[2:01:58] And the caper measures projects and programs that are funded exclusively with CDBG and our home funds.

[2:02:07] The activities that are highlighted throughout the document include capital projects that were completed.

[2:02:13] There were two that were completed with CDBG funds and they included Avenue Q12 for ADA compliance and third street ADA compliance.

[2:02:26] Saves also served over 9,000 people with CDBG funding and fair housing services were provided to 250 residents.

[2:02:36] Additionally CDBG paid for administration of the program.

[2:02:38] In home activities, the tenant based rental assistance program provided assistance to 31

[2:02:48] low income senior households and the funds also paid for program administration of that

[2:02:55] program and money was set aside for future affordable housing development.

[2:03:02] Staff's recommendation is to conduct the public hearing to hear public comments on the

[2:03:10] And to approve the 2526 Caper for submittal to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and authorize the city manager or their design need to make necessary changes and submit the 2526 Caper to HUD by September 28th, 2026 per HUD requirements.

[2:03:29] Great. Thank you. Is there a public comment on this item?

[2:03:32] Mr. Zink,

[2:03:36] Jason Zink, it's apparent to me that government is in the way of progress.

[2:03:43] With the dream village, it sounded to me, and I think from all of everybody out here, it sounded

[2:03:48] like the city was the one preventing them from preventing them from getting their project done,

[2:03:54] and then it cost $300,000 more, and then you guys given $300,000 dollars, and charge them

[2:04:00] all of these other fees and everything like that.

[2:04:02] You guys prevented drink village from happening quickly.

[2:04:08] Let's talk about the mission of hope, the 100 unit motel.

[2:04:15] There's supposed to be rapidly done in and house people.

[2:04:18] They were already homeless people live in there.

[2:04:21] Now, here it is three years later, not done.

[2:04:26] The taxpayers paid $290,000 per hotel room.

[2:04:31] You could have built an apartment complex and gave them two, three bedroom apartments with

[2:04:36] kitchens and everything.

[2:04:40] We are incompetent.

[2:04:42] The city is incompetent.

[2:04:43] The city is sloppy.

[2:04:45] How many times have I seen Alacon, Lowe, Betoncourt, as the city for documents, or a map of

[2:04:55] where our roads are going to be paved?

[2:04:57] You guys are not holding him accountable.

[2:05:00] Who, guys, are not holding the staff accountable? The people pump out deserve better. If the count doesn't exist with the existing staff, then you need to go look for better qualified counted people that have real life experience.

[2:05:16] To understand, delays mean dollars, my aunt just died, the one that just, you guys pretty

[2:05:23] much kicked out of the senior housing complex because the rent kept on going up and

[2:05:27] up and up and I asked for senior housing subsidies for her.

[2:05:31] My other aunt still lives in a travel trailer.

[2:05:34] You guys, it's because of you guys, your unleadership of accountability that is holding

[2:05:42] this city back. Anyone else wish to speak?

[2:05:47] I'm closing the public hearing council discussion.

[2:05:52] I think maybe the public would probably prefer to speak after my comments.

[2:05:58] So we'll start with what's in the staff report first and then we'll get into the

[2:06:02] substance of what's in the report itself because that really is I think what the

[2:06:06] the community should know and what raises concern for me. So on page two of the staff report,

[2:06:16] it says that the 2025-26 C2BJ allocation on the top is 1.4 and then home is 4.78,

[2:06:25] but what's in the graph below, adds up to 3.7 that doesn't add up.

[2:06:34] And then affordable housing development, allocated 207, essentially 270,000, zero was expended.

[2:06:47] A 71,000 was allocated for CHD, a set of size zero was expended.

[2:06:55] The admin money was expended.

[2:06:59] 25% of the home money that we got went to administration, general home administration.

[2:07:05] As opposed to actually service delivery for the community, that's concerned.

[2:07:10] 25% is, I think, not going great for acceptable overhead for grant expenditures.

[2:07:19] But I don't, can you make this math work out for me?

[2:07:24] Why we have so much unexpected money and how what was allocated here adds up to 3.7.

[2:07:32] But it says the 2025-26 allocation was about 1.8.

[2:07:37] Yes. So the allocation is what you receive from HUD each year.

[2:07:42] So in that particular year that 1.4 is what was allocated to the city based on

[2:07:49] formula based on LMI households, limiter income households, and some other factors. What you see in

[2:07:56] the table is what was programmed as part of your annual action plan. And that includes any carryover

[2:08:02] funds, unspent funds, reprogrammed dollars. So for the CDBG, most of the carryover came from the

[2:08:13] capital improvements that had been programmed in previous years, but we're not completed until

[2:08:19] this particular caper year. And then in the home dollars, and there's also annual caps of how

[2:08:26] you can use the funds. So for your CDBG allocation, 15 percent of your allocation can be used

[2:08:34] that fiscal year for public services, while 20 percent can be used for the administration of the

[2:08:40] program overall. And then in home funds, I think it's only 10 percent can be 15 percent can be used

[2:08:46] for administration, but there's carryover funds, because if there's not, for example, a

[2:08:51] development, then there's usually a banking of those funds that is sitting there waiting

[2:08:59] to be utilized. The affordable housing development that shows zero and the total set aside

[2:09:04] that shows zero is like, it was because it wasn't program for a specific project. If you recall,

[2:09:10] most of that was programmed in this last action plan, which will be demonstrated in the

[2:09:16] paper for next year if the project gets completed. You'll see those projected progress reports

[2:09:22] in the paper for that year. So the what's in the staff report under the allocated

[2:09:28] column includes prior year. They will finance the entire annual the annual action plan amount

[2:09:37] that was programmed that year. So the allocation is just telling you the money that you received

[2:09:42] from HUD, but there were funds that were already there that were programed as part of the Action

[2:09:47] Plan.

[2:09:47] Right.

[2:09:48] Okay.

[2:09:48] So that amount is 3.7 on page 2 of the staff report.

[2:09:52] In the paper itself, it says that together with prior years funding available, a total

[2:09:56] of 4.6 was allocated to projects.

[2:09:59] That's...

[2:10:00] A $917,000 difference. The numbers aren't, they don't match up. Look, I went, I've diced it all kinds of

[2:10:09] which ways I think this needs work with the numbers for a variety of reasons, but we can get

[2:10:15] into the substance. Table 1 of the actual paper, what I was alluding to earlier when we're

[2:10:23] about the Act, the tiny home development of the 20 units, the first row, affordable housing,

[2:10:30] 2025, 2026 program, you're expected 80 units, affordable housing units, to be delivered,

[2:10:36] actual delivered, zero. That's a problem. And it's not, it's not, it's just to know

[2:10:42] fault of your own. I'm frustrated because it's like four year, every year that this

[2:10:48] paper comes to us. I feel like a broken record. Because it's a lot of the same

[2:10:53] zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero. When are we going to be able to actually deliver

[2:10:58] for the people of Palmdale as my concern?

[2:11:00] If you'd like me to.

[2:11:02] Okay. So with regards to this particular table, the 80 is part of your five-year strategic plan.

[2:11:07] So that's part of your consolidated plan.

[2:11:10] And this 25-26 program year is your one of that five-year plan.

[2:11:14] So, for example, affordable housing development, that will be from home funds.

[2:11:19] These would be home funds that are programmed and this last action plan, which is not

[2:11:24] part of this paper, this city, they programmed homes for town homes and for link.

[2:11:31] And so that when those developments get done, those numbers will be reported in the

[2:11:36] paper.

[2:11:36] Link is the one I was referencing that it was unable to, unable to get their funding and had

[2:11:42] these delinquencies with the Secretary of State that I asked for the city attorney to give us

[2:11:46] a report on that we never got. But it says here that we allocated 271,000 in 2526 fiscal year

[2:11:55] and that we expected 80 in that same program, 80 units and then we got zero.

[2:12:03] I do see what you're saying. So I would say I would have to look at that because I wouldn't expect

[2:12:08] that 271,000 would have been for 80 households serve so I will have to look into that one.

[2:12:15] Okay, and I would appreciate, I just I found a variety of issues with the numbers in here and sort of the figures, but can you please explain to me that so this is in reference to a five year consolidated plan 25 to 2029 right there is a whole section in here a paragraphs about COVID and actions in 2020 and city of Palmdale continues to serve right.

[2:12:45] as it is affected by the pandemic, it talks about March 16th, 2020, saves adopted the national

[2:12:50] emergency model. Can you please talk about that and why it's in here?

[2:12:55] And I know that there's a schedule that has CWGCV funds, but can you please just

[2:13:01] explain? Sure. So due to the pandemic funds were distributed to, you know, public agencies

[2:13:09] municipalities throughout the United States and it was a unique support of funding that came out.

[2:13:17] And they HUD is requiring cities to report how their use will report on the balance

[2:13:24] of those dollars in their capers.

[2:13:27] So they didn't have a separate mechanism to ask communities to report back the way they do

[2:13:33] the caper.

[2:13:33] so they ask to put the report like to continue reporting and through the close out of the funds.

[2:13:39] And in this year, rather than show an amount of accomplishments that actually occurred prior,

[2:13:47] because we only had about 50,000 left in CV to expand. It's not noted as part of the main

[2:13:55] paper because those accomplishments occurred in the year's prior following the pandemic.

[2:14:02] Okay, and then so we allocated a quarter of a million dollars, $250,000 for tenant-based

[2:14:09] rental assistance, right?

[2:14:12] And our numbers show that we expected to be able to provide tenant-based rental assistance

[2:14:16] to 25 people.

[2:14:17] We exceeded that number and we hit 31.

[2:14:20] Our priority throughout here is very clear that it was for vulnerable seniors, wonderful

[2:14:26] We serve 31 people, but we also left money on the table.

[2:14:29] We only expended two hundred and two thousand of the two hundred and fifty that we allocated.

[2:14:35] Those funds will be carried forward, so it's not a set dollar amount per household.

[2:14:40] It's based on a percentage of their rent that's being subsidized.

[2:14:44] And so based on those numbers and when someone becomes eligible and gets into the program,

[2:14:49] for example, maybe they get into the program a little later in the year.

[2:14:54] So they just continue to expand the dollars until they reach the max, but they have to program out.

[2:15:00] Anyone's getting assistance for a period of time? You need to make sure you keep the bank of that amount through the year. So those funds carried over into, they weren't lost. They're going to be moved over. So you'll see actually more funds expended in this fiscal year when the caper comes back.

[2:15:15] So my concern is not that the funds are good loss because I understand that they roll over. My concern is that I know that there are more than 31 people in the city and Palmdale that need rental assistance.

[2:15:26] And if we leave, what are we doing wrong that we're only reaching 31 people when we're leaving

[2:15:34] 50, almost $50,000 on the table that was allocated for this year, are we doing the proper

[2:15:41] outreach?

[2:15:41] And this is, again, the broken record.

[2:15:43] I've said this over, at one point, I think it might have been my first year.

[2:15:47] The number was zero before, at one point.

[2:15:50] And I was so upset about that because people are struggling and have been increasingly struggling.

[2:15:59] There are, I guarantee you, there are more than 31 people in the city of Palmdale who could use a little bit of help to pay their rent.

[2:16:06] So what are we doing differently? What do we plan to do different moving forward?

[2:16:11] Because clearly we didn't do enough to maximize the expenditure and what was allocated to 250,000.

[2:16:16] What do we plan to do? What are we doing to close that gap so that we can make sure that we maximize the assistance that we provide to those that are struggling to pay the rent?

[2:16:28] So with regards to CDBG specifically for the TBRA program, that would be, again, it's a formula based on how many people you can ensure that you're going to fund through the cycle of their period of assistance.

[2:16:43] That formula has been followed according to plan, and I can only say that maybe some people

[2:16:49] got into the program a little later, but those folks are going to be extended their entire

[2:16:54] period of time as long as they remain eligible and want to participate in the program.

[2:16:59] I'm confident that at least the CDBG Tupere Funds are going to get spent the way they

[2:17:03] should be spent. With regards to other assistance, there's new programs that are coming

[2:17:08] out for measure A funds that are being used for rental assistance and those are programs

[2:17:13] that are being launched right now through Makata and then also I think there's another

[2:17:20] funding source that's also providing some rental assistance and those will be with third

[2:17:25] party administrators but serving residents here in Lancaster. So there are a series of

[2:17:31] programs that are going to be added to the T-BRA program and they all carry their own compliance

[2:17:36] requirements and you know you have to just meet those different requirements based on the different

[2:17:41] finding sources. Okay and then on page 8 there's a racial and ethnic composition of families

[2:17:46] assisted chart. I've raised this issue year after year I think one year it said zero Hispanics were

[2:17:54] were serviced and then they had to go back and recalculate because there was some some wrong

[2:17:59] computation of it because that seemed completely ridiculous to me and if it was actually accurate

[2:18:07] I mean that speaks to systemic problems but this year it shows that essentially the numbers

[2:18:16] when you add up CDBG in-home services provided to those that identify Hispanic 20% of those

[2:18:24] that received services by virtue of these funds identified as Hispanic, 80% non-Hispanic.

[2:18:34] Our population, I checked, our 2025 July 1st, 2025 population number 63% of our population

[2:18:42] is Hispanic, identifies as Hispanic, 54% other than English at home.

[2:18:51] The dynamic seam upside down and I've raised this issue before because I've been very clear that

[2:19:01] for tenant assistance for instance, just as one for instance, do we do that outreach in Spanish?

[2:19:08] Do we provide the information to the local entities that have already that trusted partnership relationship with

[2:19:16] communities of color. I don't know that it doesn't it doesn't seem very clear that that we are. The numbers are don't reflect it.

[2:19:26] And I think we've got to do a significant work to make sure that we reach that population that that's a vulnerable population too. And it's my district. It's the heart of the east side.

[2:19:38] understood. The HUD specific requirements for HUD funding and as noted like in your documents

[2:19:45] require that the applications and the reach are in English and Spanish and the staff are also

[2:19:51] bilingual so it I know that they're served through their Spanish language at least.

[2:19:58] What do they can be served is not-

[2:20:00] I know staff is we pay employees, you know, bonus for being able to speak Spanish and what not. I get that we can provide the service. Do we go actively out to the community to solve a to other entities that have those trusted relationships that already have identified, I mean, I know that they exist right. There's more than 31 I know when I go to the food distributions on Fridays.

[2:20:25] The lines are around the corner. People are struggling and so what do we do? We could have

[2:20:31] closed that gap. We could have not just used the 200 and 2000. We could have used the

[2:20:36] full 250 this year but the question and the racial composition shows me again what I've seen

[2:20:45] in the past three years that we're not doing adequate outreach to specific communities of color

[2:20:53] and specific organizations and entities that do work their trusted messengers, particularly in the aftermath of ICE.

[2:21:01] They're not necessarily going to come directly to the city and say, oh hi, I'm here.

[2:21:06] They're going to go to the organization entity that they have that trusted relationship with and say, I need help.

[2:21:12] I actually went and volunteered for Salva.

[2:21:15] They have, and I don't know, Sal was there.

[2:21:19] I don't know if there were any other council members there.

[2:21:21] There was a press conference for the eviction protection program that Salva was awarded

[2:21:26] I was at a million dollars and I actually was there I volunteered for hours working with

[2:21:32] families and actually cutting checks through Salva for them.

[2:21:37] But the city was not a partner in that and so I just what we got to do more is my point.

[2:21:43] And I just wanted to add that we can always improve upon our efforts, right?

[2:21:47] I think we can always try harder, but I wanted to mention that there is a challenge to acquiring the reporting from the recipient.

[2:21:58] So the participants have to provide the information to the program.

[2:22:04] And if they're not forced to, so a lot of times they write their name, they check a box and they sign it and they don't, they're not forced to provide this piece of information.

[2:22:14] sometimes they don't provide, they don't complete the entire form and I think that's the challenge.

[2:22:20] I don't want to speak for saves, but I know that like with programs like that where there's a lot of people coming through

[2:22:26] quickly and they're being served. They're not always reporting all of the information.

[2:22:31] So we can only provide HUD what we receive and what we can validate by the forms,

[2:22:36] the participant data forms. I'm not saying that's the only reason, but that would be one of the challenges

[2:22:42] and as far as outreach, we can certainly continue to work with our partners to make sure that

[2:22:48] those communities are reached with these programs.

[2:22:54] There's more, but I think there need, there need, the numbers are not accurate.

[2:22:59] I mean, I've, maybe I'm doing my calculations wrong by this meant like almost two hours

[2:23:04] going through this report specifically because it matters, because it's actual service delivery

[2:23:09] to people that needed the most, and the numbers didn't net up for me, and the narrative

[2:23:17] also was concerning. It also didn't include, there's a section in here, what have we done

[2:23:25] to help low-income individuals and those specifically facing potentially violence in the home?

[2:23:31] But there's no reference to, I introduced the motion and Council Member Betten Court of Seconded

[2:23:35] unanimously council adopted to allocate. I think it was about $300,000 for the development of actual

[2:23:43] domestic violence shelter here. The first domestic violence shelter here in the city of Palmedale.

[2:23:48] We did that a couple months ago. There's no reference to that in this report. I think that's an

[2:23:53] important milestone that we've set aside $300,000. Maybe there are CDBG funds or home funds or other

[2:24:01] of phones. It was that could contribute to the full development and bringing that to fruition,

[2:24:08] but that's not represented here and it needs to be incorporated.

[2:24:13] Okay, just very briefly. You know, the numbers in terms of the racial and ethnic

[2:24:18] population of assistance, this was a similar report as last year regarding the Hispanic population.

[2:24:28] And it seemed like this would have jumped out to staff saying, well, I mean, why is there such a disparity here?

[2:24:36] And what can be done about it? I mean, there may be a good rational explanation for it.

[2:24:40] But I mean, we had the same numbers last year, or maybe a little worse, but it hasn't improved very much substantially.

[2:24:47] since a very large percentage of the population of Pongolius is panic, and that doesn't

[2:24:54] just include immigrants, it includes a lot of people that have been here for generations

[2:24:58] that are a Spanish sir.

[2:25:00] And sometimes, maybe somebody won't self-identify this panic, but one of the indications might be the surname.

[2:25:08] Right? I know that, for example, in the voter rolls, when we look at voter rolls, and it talks about,

[2:25:16] because it's all broken down to ethnicities and all of that.

[2:25:19] And I don't think that the, when you register to vote, that you identify as Hispanic or African American or Asian or whatever.

[2:25:26] So those statistics come from somewhere, and I think it's just looking at the data that's there, perhaps a certain

[2:25:33] indicates who the people are, what racial group they're with or what ethnic group they're with.

[2:25:40] I'm just jumped out at us last year.

[2:25:43] It's there again this this time, and I just don't understand if there's an explanation for this.

[2:25:49] We can't change the documents that they submit to us.

[2:25:53] And what I will do is work with the program deliveries, so the subrecipients of these funds,

[2:26:01] we can talk to them about trying to encourage the participants to be more thorough with

[2:26:05] the reports and to fill them out.

[2:26:08] I've heard feedback has been that a lot of folks are afraid to fill out certain ethnic

[2:26:15] and cities on forms or to fill out the forms or to want to share any intimate details with

[2:26:20] the federal government.

[2:26:21] So, I don't know. That's some feedback that I've received from some of the folks that work in the programs, but we can

[2:26:28] Work for them. That works for some of the population, but not all of it.

[2:26:35] And so I'm just saying that if two people fill out their names.

[2:26:41] They put their names on there, but I can't change their reporting by based on their surnames.

[2:26:45] If you look at a name, for example, if it's a Asian-sounding name, you could tell perhaps that it's a Asian person.

[2:26:52] If it's a Spanish surname, perhaps you can glean from that, that the person may be Hispanic.

[2:26:58] There's some likelihood that they are Hispanic with certain surnames.

[2:27:02] I don't think it takes any kind of great detective work to make those kind of...

[2:27:08] Well, a lot of us marry into the culture.

[2:27:10] Well, it's a lot of, but it's the same.

[2:27:13] You see my left hand.

[2:27:14] I've heard it overhaul.

[2:27:15] The overwhelming population that is the majority population

[2:27:18] of the city of Palmdale is Hispanic.

[2:27:21] And it's not because they married into the Anglo,

[2:27:24] or the English marrying into the Hispanic population.

[2:27:27] The majority are Hispanics because they are ethnically Hispanic.

[2:27:34] I mean, they're either Mexican or Central American or South American.

[2:27:38] But they're Hispanic.

[2:27:39] And the names tend to indicate what that is and perhaps it's something that your staff could look at in terms of determining whether these numbers are accurate enough.

[2:27:48] It's just this small that 3968 Hispanics reserved.

[2:27:53] And then it says not Hispanic 15,838 and you know, just I don't know.

[2:28:00] And I just for clarification, the numbers don't demonstrate how many people were served.

[2:28:05] It's how many people reported their ethnicity.

[2:28:08] out of a total. So the majority are not indicating what their ethnicity is. It's possible, yeah.

[2:28:14] Okay, so that's the next information, right? But you can also tell from the names that perhaps

[2:28:20] people are being served that are not being recorded. Yes, I just can't report to had that information.

[2:28:26] Don't you have a box where you guys can put on your documentation,

[2:28:30] did not respond to question or did not fill out that way we would know how many just didn't fill out a form.

[2:28:36] I can ask the sub recipients to track that because that way we would we would have a better idea of who's actually just not putting it up

[2:28:43] A form. Yeah, but when you add up the columns, the total numbers of services so there's a variety of different tables and schedules.

[2:28:51] So if you look at one and then you sort of correlated to the next one and the next one and the next one and you can piece things together for a more comprehensive picture.

[2:28:59] And when you add up all these numbers, they correlate to that. So you know, they're in here. They're just not Hispanic.

[2:29:06] Mayor May have this.

[2:29:09] We used to get a little bit more funding from that.

[2:29:11] I remember when I started years ago, the funding from federal government and the CBDG pool

[2:29:16] was bigger.

[2:29:17] Unfortunately, it's been slowly shrinking over the years.

[2:29:21] So we have roughly a couple million dollars here to play with and a huge report card

[2:29:25] to turn in every year for it.

[2:29:28] Definitely a little bit of work on city, but as far as we're helping people get the resources

[2:29:33] they need, that's the most important.

[2:29:35] we're helping the most vulnerable, the people who are starving, the people who need blankets,

[2:29:41] and that's what saves us for. So we put a bunch of money into saves. We put a bunch of money

[2:29:46] into infrastructure projects. The money only goes so far. So I've seen over the years,

[2:29:51] well, staff prioritizes a certain couple categories of that $2 million a year. Let's say,

[2:29:57] I think they're good priorities. I wish the money would-

[2:30:00] Distretch further, it never does in government when when when we do projects, everything just costs more.

[2:30:05] But as long as the resources that we're getting are going to the people and who need it the most, the most vulnerable, that's all I care about.

[2:30:14] The people in her state are a city and need it the most, that's where it's going and I know a lot of that goes through saves.

[2:30:20] So there's no other discussion on make a motion to move it.

[2:30:23] So the report itself needs fixing.

[2:30:28] So my question to you is you in your opening.

[2:30:30] Is there an urgency to pass it?

[2:30:32] She says September 26th, right?

[2:30:35] And again, that speaks to why we need to council meetings every month.

[2:30:40] I mean, we've got city businesses to take care of,

[2:30:41] and I can't do it by myself.

[2:30:43] And I mean, I'm happy to help rewrite this thing

[2:30:46] because it matters to me, and I'm willing to do the work

[2:30:49] and put the time into it, but it needs council approval.

[2:30:52] And so I don't know how we get is there a way to get an extension for it because this is there's it's

[2:30:59] Is it technically incorrect or can it be amended like what is what is technically?

[2:31:05] Wrong if we submit it. I guess

[2:31:09] We want to fit the maybe that's why we're getting decreased more of funding because our numbers are all screwed up

[2:31:15] No, I would agree that I would look into the affordable housing development that expected

[2:31:20] 80. I want to look into that one. Okay. And with your permission, we can amend that. If there

[2:31:27] are the comments today were related to programming, they would be added into the report. So there's

[2:31:33] room to do that. This is a draft. So I can look at that definitely. If there's other areas you want

[2:31:38] me to take a look at, I can. And then if there's substantial, I can let, you know, I can let the

[2:31:43] city manager know. And then that information would come to you to determine, I guess if we're going to

[2:31:48] late and turning in the paper wait again extension on the submission of it no there's no

[2:31:53] extensions for this but and why is it come to us late like literally a week whether two

[2:31:59] week three weeks would before it's due if this is a draft it requires 30 30 day posting so we have to

[2:32:08] get it the draft out for 30 days for review on and it's posted on the city website so it it's just

[2:32:15] process of the public getting the public input. It takes it's long so it's pushed in there.

[2:32:23] So it's it's it's not late in developing the draft as much as it feels late coming here.

[2:32:29] Yeah, I mean, the fiscal year ended 230th, right? Yes. And then all the summer events have

[2:32:34] over. They have a month to get their final numbers in and then you have to have time to

[2:32:39] and analyze the data, so it's a rush.

[2:32:43] Like we finish the action plan and then we rush into the paper to make sure we meet the deadlines.

[2:32:49] So let's say we tend to leave a pass this as it is and then know that we might have amendments.

[2:32:53] Can we do that as this legally sound?

[2:32:55] Will you stand behind these numbers and say this is presentable?

[2:32:58] We do them and absolutely report back and you know that you'll know that I'll let you know if the numbers were changed and if they needed to be changed.

[2:33:07] And I will report back definitely on on the the question of that 80 and if there's any other items and if there's anything other than that then we come back and then we we look at it and we voted again, but I have confidence yeah absolutely I mean that that would be okay so clear direction every single one of your allocated versus expanded line line and go line item by line item and make sure that what is in this

[2:33:36] And what is in each of the varying tables, correlates, because they don't.

[2:33:44] So there's going to need to be a little work with the actual numerical figures, but also

[2:33:51] substanceably adding the narrative about the domestic violence money that we've allocated.

[2:33:57] I think there's like reference to stuff that we did in 2013.

[2:34:03] I mean, there's got to be more relevant, recent work that we've done to include in this.

[2:34:12] What it sound, what it felt like to me when I was reading through the narrative piece of this,

[2:34:16] it's about 20 something pages, is that this is just sort of the same old narrative that we've

[2:34:23] been submitting every year after year after year after year, and it's just, we just got and

[2:34:28] place in with it. Because there's no infusion of new information. So that's concerning. And maybe

[2:34:37] that's why there's a drop off in actual funding.

[2:34:44] But I can't support it as it's because the number,

[2:34:46] I know the number is a romp and the narrative needs fixing. Okay, so you understand the assignment? Yes.

[2:34:52] Okay, um, can I ask a clarifying question? So if, because I'm my focus is good.

[2:35:00] I'm going to be on the paper what needs to be submitted to HUD. That's what we're reporting. So I'm going to look at those numbers. If there's a discrepancy between those numbers and how it was reported in the staff report, I'm going to report that back as a summary, but does that mean we don't submit the paper or we do? If there's not a substantial difference in how the paper numbers are verified, can we submit the papers?

[2:35:23] So the keeper numbers need to be, the step report is less important because it's not an actual binding document.

[2:35:29] What the keeper is based upon is the five-year consolidated plan, the 2025-2029.

[2:35:34] That's not included in our documents, although I did request it, and I got it this morning.

[2:35:39] Again, too late for me to be able to do all of the work for it, but

[2:35:43] the keeper needs to correlate specifically to the consolidated plan. That's what's important.

[2:35:49] But the numbers in the caper itself don't match.

[2:35:54] Yes, I'm going to focus on the numbers in the caper, and as far as the consolidated, that's the guiding the guidance based on the goals that you established that we have to be.

[2:36:03] Okay, I guess that would be my motion as tenderly approve this. Have you focus on the caper, everything we're submitting?

[2:36:11] Make sure it's everything adds up and is accountable if not to report to the city manager will schedule another meeting so we can get it turned it on time.

[2:36:19] Yes, that's my motion.

[2:36:20] Through everything.

[2:36:21] Yes.

[2:36:22] Awesome.

[2:36:23] Okay.

[2:36:24] As long as you come back.

[2:36:26] You, okay.

[2:36:27] On favors.

[2:36:28] We have to roll call.

[2:36:30] Okay.

[2:36:30] On favor say aye.

[2:36:32] Anyone opposed?

[2:36:33] That passes unanimously.

[2:36:35] I know it was an honest mistake.

[2:36:37] But I don't want to let that linger any longer.

[2:36:39] No offense to the city of Lancaster.

[2:36:41] But we're proud to be the city of Palmdale.

[2:36:44] Okay.

[2:36:44] We had a couple request for a break.

[2:36:48] Yeah, she actually said, I guess.

[2:36:53] I know we have a couple requests for a break, but I want to get these men and women home to their families, being with their kids, it's very important.

[2:37:03] So I want to power through at least for item 7.1 and then we can take 10 minutes.

[2:37:08] So city clerk, can you please read the title of the resolution?

[2:37:11] A resolution of the City Council of the City of Pomda,

[2:37:14] approving a memorandum of understanding between the City of Pomda and the California

[2:37:18] Teamsters Local 986, public works, maintenance, division, supervisory and confidential unit

[2:37:23] for a five-year term from June 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2031.

[2:37:29] Great. Do we have a staff report?

[2:37:36] Could you be Mayor, Mayor Protem, and Council members,

[2:37:40] Ivette Barrios, Director of Human Resources and Respandagement?

[2:37:43] The item for consideration this evening is the adoption of Resolution CC-2026-55, which is the

[2:37:52] approving of the agreement, which is the MOU for the newly formed bargaining unit,

[2:38:00] back on April 7th, with Resolution 2026-055. I'm sorry, well 2026-017,

[2:38:10] Council had adopted the resolution to form that newly, bargaining unit and so the MOU and the

[2:38:18] agreement that is here before you is the work from that resolution. And this new bargaining

[2:38:26] unit is again going to be recognized by the Teamsters Union Local 986 as there exclusive

[2:38:32] representative for both the employee bargaining group as well as the new super supervisory and

[2:38:39] the potential bargaining unit.

[2:38:41] The terms are similar with the previous bargain unit.

[2:38:45] It is going to be five-year term

[2:38:47] with the retroactive request going back to July 1.

[2:38:50] It does include the boot allowance

[2:38:54] and the allowance, all of those are similar with respect

[2:38:57] to what was in the other bargaining unit.

[2:38:59] I wanted to highlight the differences.

[2:39:02] And that is with the Ottawa allowance for superintendents due

[2:39:05] to their required to report out for emergency weather events.

[2:39:12] And so we are allowing them $150 a auto allowance.

[2:39:16] In addition, there are some required certification

[2:39:19] and licenses that are now going to be formally

[2:39:23] requirement of their job position,

[2:39:25] as well as additional ones that are more professional development.

[2:39:28] And that comes with the corresponding stipend as well.

[2:39:31] And then lastly, the other item of differential

[2:39:33] is the administrative leave for our superintendents because they do work a significant amount of time

[2:39:41] outside of their regular 80 hours that all exempt employees get, especially during the winter season

[2:39:49] they can come out pretty much daily if depending on the on the incident and so we are

[2:39:55] recommending that they, that being increased to 96 hours. And so, total.

[2:40:00] In fact, fiscal impact-wise, we're looking for eight superintendents, one administrative assistant and two analysts, we're looking at an overall fiscal impact of 573,820 dollars. I'm available for questions.

[2:40:17] Before that, I want to go to public comment. Anybody in the audience wants to speak to us?

[2:40:21] Yes, we have Evan Armstrong.

[2:40:31] Good evening, Mayor. Council.

[2:40:32] I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

[2:40:35] I'm having an Armstrong Chief Shop Stewart for the general group, Teamsters of 1986, City

[2:40:39] of Palmdale Public Works Maintenance.

[2:40:43] I'd like to talk about the benefits of being a Teamster.

[2:40:46] First establishing this new unit improves communication and coordination.

[2:40:50] When workers with similar duties and challenges are grouped appropriately, it becomes much easier

[2:40:54] to address operational needs, safety concerns, and workload expectations.

[2:40:59] This creates a smoother, more reliable workflow, directly benefiting the departments involved

[2:41:04] as the residents we serve.

[2:41:07] Second, the new unit provides clarity and stability.

[2:41:10] Employees will have a clearly defined structure that outlines standards, expectations, and procedures.

[2:41:16] This helps reduce confusion, strength and accountability, and supports a more professional working environment.

[2:41:21] A well-organized workforce is essential to maintaining the high-level of service, our community expects and deserves.

[2:41:28] Another benefit is efficiency in problem solving. With a dedicated unit, the city and its employees

[2:41:33] have a more focused pathway for addressing issues that arise. Whether the topic is training,

[2:41:39] job duties or safety, having a structured group allows discussions to state organized and

[2:41:43] productive. This leads to faster resolutions and better long-term planning. It's also important

[2:41:50] to recognize that the formation of this unit helps ensure fairness and consistency. By organizing

[2:41:55] employees appropriately, we help create a balanced system where similar positions have similar

[2:41:59] standards. That consistency supports morale, improves retention and strengthens trust between

[2:42:05] employees and city leadership. Finally, this new unit represents partnership. It's not just about

[2:42:12] internal organization, it's about continuing to build a collaborative environment where employees

[2:42:16] still supported and the city gains a more efficient and engaged workforce. When employees have

[2:42:21] The infrastructure, clarity, and a voice in the process, they are better able to serve the public at a best and class level.

[2:42:27] In closing, the formation of this unit is not an obstacle, it's an opportunity.

[2:42:32] It's a chance to enforce fairness and proof coordination and support the essential work being done every day.

[2:42:38] I look forward to welcoming this new unit of brothers and sisters to Teamster Local 1986.

[2:42:43] I appreciate your time and attention in solidarity.

[2:42:46] Adam Dyer.

[2:42:54] Good evening Mayor. Members of the City Council. I'm here tonight to ask for your approval for the new five year agreement with California team team sir 96. Representing the supervisory and confidential employees. To put it simply, the professionals in this group are superintendents are analysts are administrative assistance are the backbone to Palmdale's daily maintenance operations.

[2:43:22] They work behind the scenes, they often, often under the radar to keep our city running smoothly and safely.

[2:43:29] Their impact is visible everywhere in the city.

[2:43:35] This team is really a dream team, a subject matter experts.

[2:43:40] They run award-winning, best-in-class programs.

[2:43:44] In fact, our programs are so successful, a lot of our neighboring cities regularly look to Palmdale for blueprints.

[2:43:54] Because of this, it's important to get this contract in place as a critical retention strategy.

[2:44:02] We've invested heavy in building a top to your talent team and maintenance, and this agreement ensures they stay right here serving the residents of Palmdale.

[2:44:12] Well, no compromises completely perfect, both sides bargained in good faith to reach a fair

[2:44:18] balance deal.

[2:44:21] A guarantee's five years operational stability protects the vital city services and signals

[2:44:27] in exciting new level of unity and cooperation with local 1986.

[2:44:32] The union is on board with this agreement and I respectfully request your approval tonight.

[2:44:37] Thank you.

[2:44:40] Pam Paul Wood.

[2:44:48] Good evening, Mayor.

[2:44:49] Mayor Pro Tim and Council.

[2:44:52] Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

[2:44:54] My name is Paul Wood and I serve as landscape superintendent.

[2:44:58] Tonight I stand here, not only us.

[2:45:00] Superintendent, but in solidarity as a steward for the teamfers local 986 representing our supervisory and confidential employee group.

[2:45:08] I am here in support of City Council approving agreement A104041 a memorandum of understanding with the California teamsters local 986 public work supervisory and confidential unit.

[2:45:21] I would like to thank the city executive leadership team for working in good faith while negotiating this first contract.

[2:45:29] Like our colleagues in the general employee group, the superintendents and administrative staff here tonight represented discipline, highly experienced and dedicated class professionals.

[2:45:40] We are individuals who live in our community, raise our families here, and have dedicated our careers to public service.

[2:45:47] We are the front line leadership ensuring operational continuity of public services, emergency

[2:45:55] response, hazard mitigation, regulatory compliance, and fiscal accountability.

[2:46:01] Every level of this organization has responsibility to our community to operate with the highest

[2:46:05] level of personal and professional discipline.

[2:46:08] In maintenance, that's our core foundation.

[2:46:13] In public force maintenance, we understand the importance of shared stewardship and transparent

[2:46:17] decision making processes rooted in collaboration when we operate in good faith, communicate

[2:46:22] openly, we become more effective, more accountable, and more successful as an organization.

[2:46:28] In my 26 years of service, it has been an honor to have worked alongside some of the most

[2:46:32] talented professionals in our trades.

[2:46:35] In fact, I would not be here today without the mentorship and guidance.

[2:46:41] When we pay it forward, we are ensuring the next generation of public service professionals

[2:46:46] carry on excellence in stewardship that our community deserves. In closing, we're

[2:46:51] making a meeting to moving forward with respect to accountability and shared

[2:46:55] focus on providing exemplary services for our community together in solidarity and

[2:47:01] all in the name of progress. Thank you. Stephen Montenegro.

[2:47:17] Good evening. Mayor Mayor Protem, City Council, Madame City Clerk, Madame City Attorney,

[2:47:24] City Manager City Leadership in the back. My name is Steven Montenegro. I proudly serve this

[2:47:30] community as the Park Superintendent. On behalf of the Superintendents and the Administrative

[2:47:35] Staff here today, I want to express our sincere appreciation and consideration,

[2:47:42] excuse me, our sincere appreciation for your consideration and support of this first

[2:47:45] MOU. When we came before you to form this bargaining group, we spoke about community unity

[2:47:52] purpose and the value of collaboration and good faith. Tonight represents your action tonight,

[2:47:59] represents the progress that is possible when we approach one another with mutual respect,

[2:48:05] collaborate through our differences and remain focused on what unites us. We are proud to serve

[2:48:10] this community and prioritize their needs above all else. We remain committed to partnering with

[2:48:16] city leadership and our colleagues across the organization in the spirit of collaboration

[2:48:21] in public service. Thank you for your trust, your support, and your continued commitment to the

[2:48:27] people we collectively serve.

[2:48:33] No further speaker cards on the section. Mr. Zank.

[2:48:42] Jason Zank. My problem with this is that the staff report, it didn't tell you how many people

[2:48:48] we were talking about. It didn't tell you the salaries or the benefits of these people.

[2:48:55] They talked about a pants and a boot allowance, a little trick, tricks, I guess you call them.

[2:49:05] Talk about a $500 bonus to each person and retroactive pay, I think, back to July.

[2:49:13] This is a question I have. How can you give bonuses to people when we still have dead city trees?

[2:49:21] These city trees have been dead since before you guys were even elected.

[2:49:29] I'm talking about Eric and Andrea,

[2:49:35] four years, but it also says something about yourselves, right?

[2:49:40] You can't even cut the dead trees in your own district and you want to be elected again.

[2:49:48] There's incompetence, all over this place, sloppiness, a lack of pride, a lack of caring, as far as I see as a resident of Palmdale.

[2:50:00] Let's see the results from paying the highest sales tax in the nation. If you can't cut dead trees down and you can't hold the city manager to cut dead trees down in your districts, then you should have no business being in a position of a leadership.

[2:50:22] Do these people deserve a bonus for incompetence, for not caring, for not cutting dead trees that they drive by every day?

[2:50:32] Do they not care about the dead trees, the dead limbs?

[2:50:36] Don't they want palm dodo to be beautiful and a place to call home?

[2:50:39] It would be proud of the $6,500 and $500.

[2:50:45] That would pay for a palm mental historic park sign, right?

[2:50:49] Thank you.

[2:50:50] All

[2:50:57] right, this is historic, as you know I'm pro labor, an SCIU-721 shopstreet for bargaining

[2:51:06] unit for our eligibility workers was represents about 55,000 people.

[2:51:12] So what you're doing here and what they presented is on the outside looking in, we're

[2:51:17] just trying to keep up with the times, with taxes, inflation, so having someone accountable

[2:51:24] and having a voice for workers who can't speak for themselves and creating and working with local

[2:51:30] 1986 and Teamsters is the best thing that can happen to the city of Palmdale moving

[2:51:34] board. Not just for the people that work here before their children who are looking to protect

[2:51:40] the workplace and create and give democracy a chance for equal pain job. That's all they're doing

[2:51:47] to represent and keep up for people who live check-to-check in this community and other communities.

[2:51:53] that's the beauty of a union so I hope that this body supports what they bring forward

[2:51:59] moving for the city as a relates to public transportation relations and any other

[2:52:04] department that they represent. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay closing public comment

[2:52:11] on that. Is there any council discussion?

[2:52:16] Me again. Hey so I said it to you guys when I walked into this room it like warms my

[2:52:22] to see the sea of orange and the teamsters. You guys are really the heartbeat of this city.

[2:52:30] You guys deliver. You guys are the, he mentioned, you guys are on the front line. You absolutely are.

[2:52:36] You deliver quality of life to our community. And I will not let, I did it last time,

[2:52:43] but I will not let anybody disparage you as individuals are ordered the work that you do

[2:52:47] leadership in Teamsters, actually negotiated, the work that you're talking about, that you

[2:52:53] have concerns about dead trees. A lot of that work is contracted out. What Teamsters is

[2:52:59] responsible for in urban forestry is very limited, and a lot of that is contracted out. Most of

[2:53:04] it is contracted out, and because of the leadership that we have at the Teamsters, they actually

[2:53:10] developed very strict liquid-day damages provisions to hold those contractors accountable

[2:53:15] When they fail in their obligations to the city and we're whole we're working on holding them accountable to all of those high standards

[2:53:23] That we set forth in those contracts, but those liquidated damage provisions are in those contracts because they were negotiated and drafted by our team

[2:53:33] Through leadership. So let's not get it twisted

[2:53:36] These are the best of the best in the city of Palmdale and I'm so proud to have them on our team tonight

[2:53:42] What we're doing here tonight really speaks to why unions are so important, particularly in municipal government, you guys know what you need.

[2:53:52] You guys organize amongst yourselves and you came to us and thankfully we've got a city structure city executive management and a council that is receptive and listens to it and that's the partnership.

[2:54:04] That's the beauty. Help us help you deliver for the city of Palmdale.

[2:54:09] that's what this is about tonight. You guys spoke your needs and we're here to respond and deliver

[2:54:15] for you as a microcosm for the way that you deliver for the residents of the city of Palmdale.

[2:54:22] Thank you from the bottom of my heart for all that you do and that's all that you continue to

[2:54:27] do. I'm happy to move this item. If there is no other discussion.

[2:54:32] Miss Katz, remember a lot? No second, but I just wanted to express Mr Armstrong and all of you that are here

[2:54:37] As I told you individually, if you're a unit breaks down, the city breaks down.

[2:54:44] There's nothing that is more central to the ongoing safety and operation of the city

[2:54:49] than what you guys do.

[2:54:51] And it's important to compensate you accordingly and you've selected to do it through

[2:54:58] Union.

[2:55:00] Now, negotiation with our team here, and you've come up with a good agreement, I believe. And I just wanted to urge and to emphasize to all of you and to everyone here, and across the city, that what you guys do in public works and other operations is essential to the city. And I thank you. Thank you, Mayor.

[2:55:22] So I want to do what both of them said, but I just want to say that I've been a council member for quite some time and I can also say that I have never seen this city look better.

[2:55:31] So your hard work, what you guys are doing out there every day really, really reflects on how you feel about the city you live in, because it looks amazing.

[2:55:40] I remember the days of bad parks, graffiti, bad roads. Everything's getting cleaned up and starting to shine like a new penny, and that's because of all the hard work that you guys do.

[2:55:50] And I'm part of a union for the Sheriff's Department, and so I really understand the value of a union and how important it is to both the management and the staff.

[2:56:01] And I don't think I would ever disagree with supporting our unions.

[2:56:08] So, thank you all for what you do. Continue to do what you do, and I totally support this.

[2:56:14] or a program. Yes, I'll be brief because it's getting late. I know people want to get home,

[2:56:19] but I'm always happy to support staff, people who come and put their best foot forward to do

[2:56:25] good work for the residents of Palmdale. So thank you to this this union and this public works

[2:56:32] team, which represents a fairly large portion of our 300 employees. But at the same time, I want to

[2:56:38] acknowledge our entire staff and just not the staff that's currently working here, but the previous

[2:56:44] staff, administration, and councils because Palmdale really is a remarkable place.

[2:56:49] It's a big city.

[2:56:50] I know things aren't perfect, especially when you've got an organization with hundreds

[2:56:54] of people.

[2:56:55] There's a lot of personality.

[2:56:56] There's a lot of overlap.

[2:56:57] There's communication, but on the whole, I think, the city of Palmdale and the staff are doing

[2:57:02] a good job present and past because if you drive around the city and you look and you talk

[2:57:07] to a lot of residents, the majority of them are happy.

[2:57:11] And I think the property values and Palm does speak for themselves.

[2:57:15] I think when you look at what's going on in our city,

[2:57:17] I think it's a fairly good set up.

[2:57:21] So thank you to the teamsters, but more so,

[2:57:26] thank you to the entire staff of Palmdale

[2:57:27] for keeping the city going.

[2:57:30] So without a doubt, you are the skill

[2:57:33] that train professionals that keep this city moving

[2:57:35] and you prove it time and time again.

[2:57:38] And I know that we have some storms on the horizon,

[2:57:41] And I'm confident that we'll weather them like we do every time because you guys put in the work to prepare us

[2:57:48] You keep the city moving. You know that we love you. So without a doubt

[2:57:52] Let's go to the vote. We've got a motion by Councilmember Alarcon a second by

[2:57:58] Councilmember Loa all in favor say aye aye anyone opposed that passes unanimously

[2:58:04] Congratulations

[2:58:09] Okay, we have a request to take a break. We're gonna do it as quickly as possible

[2:58:13] no more than 10 minutes. I know that some of us want to congratulate the teamsters, use the

[2:58:17] restroom, but we'll be quick because we know people are waiting. We got more items to go, too.

[2:58:32] Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you. Thank you for coming.

[2:59:44] That's it.

[3:00:01] We got some talk in some.

[3:00:19] Yes.

[3:00:28] Testing test.

[3:00:30] My check.

[3:00:32] My check one two.

[3:00:39] Testing test.

[3:00:42] My check.

[3:00:43] One two.

[3:00:45] This is a test.

[3:00:46] I don't know.

[3:00:47] How did you believe?

[3:00:48] Okay.

[3:00:49] It was a good one.

[3:00:51] Yeah.

[3:07:24] All right, we're missing one.

[3:08:35] It's meeting. All fair, say aye, aye, anyone opposed? Okay, we're at 74. Can we get a staff report please?

[3:09:05] This is to approve the construction agreement with Icon West, for the Chimboli Library Rear Innovation Project,

[3:09:12] PN-878, for not to atotal not to exceed 30 million, 6,000, 8,000, 8, and 64 dollars.

[3:09:20] That includes a 50% contingency.

[3:09:30] So why we're doing this is because back in December 22,

[3:09:35] We had fire, extensively fire and water damage, building has been closed since, and required extensive renovation and modernization.

[3:09:45] Just to the scope of work, this is not limited to this, this is more to it.

[3:09:50] But we're going to be doing structural improvements for the project into your exterior renovations,

[3:09:56] safety and security improvements, and also site improvements.

[3:10:00] This project will also include a new roofing system, new mechanical electrical plumbing system, and

[3:10:08] set improvements, including parking lot reconfiguration, upgrades, and site lighting, and AD accessibility.

[3:10:17] And how we get here, we started this project back in November 2020-24, city council approved an agreement with SVA Architects for the design.

[3:10:25] We brought it back on September 2nd, 2025 SVA presented the conceptual design to the city.

[3:10:33] We moved forward with that and developing the final design and also the construction documents in March 3rd.

[3:10:41] It's a staff release of request for qualifications to pre-qualified contractors as capable of doing this type of project.

[3:10:49] and August 6th. We received four pre-qualified bids.

[3:10:57] Our construction management team

[3:10:58] Cummings and our project manager reviewed the ICON West bit proposal and it was determined

[3:11:05] to be the lowest responsible bidder. ICON West has completed similar project scopes,

[3:11:14] county

[3:11:14] Dino, Orange County Community College, and Long Beach Unified School District, our team also

[3:11:21] verified the references for this company, and they all turn back positive. This project

[3:11:27] will be funded using journal funds, measure AB funds, ARPA funds, and also the congressman

[3:11:34] congressman Whiteside, your mark funds. I'm here to answer any questions. Do my best.

[3:11:39] Before we go to questions, Paula, comment.

[3:11:45] We have Kat F, IBW, Nika, LMCC, Katzenice,

[3:11:55] to all you.

[3:11:57] Yes, I'm here today as IBW, Nika, LMCC,

[3:12:02] since I wear many hats.

[3:12:06] Of course, I'm in support of this as a resident.

[3:12:10] I can't wait to see the new building in the library.

[3:12:12] it's something we've been waiting for since it's been burnt down, doing these agreements under

[3:12:19] a community workforce agreement allows us to take more residents into our programs.

[3:12:28] We have had numerous times where we, within four hours, we are filled with our applicants.

[3:12:38] So, when we know big projects coming, it even lets us bring in more people from the area

[3:12:45] of the community workforce agreement supports the fact that they're going to be local

[3:12:51] residents.

[3:12:52] So I'm very excited for this.

[3:12:54] I'm hoping you'll support it and get those guys and women.

[3:13:00] Women, it's a great thing for to work.

[3:13:03] Thanks.

[3:13:05] No further speaker cards?

[3:13:06] Anybody?

[3:13:07] Mr. Zink.

[3:13:12] Jason Zink, what's missing in all this?

[3:13:15] This whole project, $30 million project.

[3:13:20] You know what's missing?

[3:13:22] Public input.

[3:13:25] Nothing.

[3:13:26] No public input whatsoever.

[3:13:28] No town hall meetings.

[3:13:30] Didn't go before the planning commission.

[3:13:33] Give us an opportunity to talk about it.

[3:13:35] We don't even, I've never even heard one person that said they wanted this

[3:13:39] $30 million project except the council and the city manager.

[3:13:46] that's what's missing. And all of this in the whole years of you guys being on the

[3:13:52] city council, public participation, public engagement, public input.

[3:14:00] I would have rather

[3:14:01] just been a couple million dollars and put it back the way it was, set it being closed

[3:14:05] for so many years and just built a brand new building over there on the vacant land. Do you

[3:14:17] sad point. You guys just don't get it. You're forgetting the biggest part of Palmdale. It's

[3:14:25] residents and it's input.

[3:14:30] You know, when I heard the superintendents getting allowances for

[3:14:35] pants and boots, I'm thinking these guys are making over $100,000 a year. Do you think they really

[3:14:42] need money for pants and boots? Maybe you should give it to the crew. That's actually in the ditch

[3:14:46] Do in the work to the city crews.

[3:14:50] You guys are so backwards in the way you think.

[3:14:54] You're so out of touch, you're delusional,

[3:14:56] telling staffs they're doing a great job.

[3:14:58] They can't even cut dead trees.

[3:15:00] A blind man could see. You guys are delusional.

[3:15:07] I hate this project. Anyone else wish to speak on this item? I'm closing public comment. Council discussion.

[3:15:16] So I'm just going to just state for the record reiterate. My initial concerns. This is a long-awaited project. There's no reason why we should have received the documents when we did. We got an email.

[3:15:29] at 201 p.m. yesterday that contained 2,562 underlying procurement documents that I know for

[3:15:38] a fact because I confirmed before that at least three members were not even able to access

[3:15:44] the link. So they haven't looked at not one page of those procurement documents. At least

[3:15:51] I looked at some of it, but I could clearly could not get through 2,500 pages on top of

[3:15:55] of the thousands of pages that I had to go through for the other remaining items, it is

[3:16:00] incomprehensible to me that this council would be willing to move forward on such an enormous

[3:16:06] project without having even looked at the underlying procurement documents, the fact that the

[3:16:13] city manager and thinks it's acceptable to send those 2,500 documents the day before at 201

[3:16:23] before our council meeting is just mind boggling.

[3:16:29] So, one, I can't support moving forward with a $31 million expenditure

[3:16:35] without having reviewed those procurement commissioners.

[3:16:38] This is like we all discussed.

[3:16:39] This has been a long-awaited project.

[3:16:41] And yes, I'm all for job.

[3:16:42] Are you kidding?

[3:16:43] Kathy McLean, Nika.

[3:16:44] I'm not like, I think I'm probably the strongest labor

[3:16:46] at getting to have been since I was zero years old.

[3:16:49] I've been on lines in fighting for labor rights since I was a child.

[3:16:59] So I've all about delivering on jobs, but I want to make sure that our money is our

[3:17:03] taxpayer dollars are being appropriate and expended the right way.

[3:17:07] And I can't do any of that without having the opportunity to review the 2,500 pages

[3:17:11] at a minimum.

[3:17:12] I would hope that the council would do that if they're willing to move forward with it.

[3:17:17] I just, I think, I don't know, I have, I have no words for for for that.

[3:17:22] There's no need to have it done today.

[3:17:26] Again, if we would have had a council meeting in the second meeting in September,

[3:17:31] it would have just been a two week delay.

[3:17:32] There's going to be a meeting the first week of October.

[3:17:35] So only, you know, it's not that far away.

[3:17:39] There's really, we've waited long enough.

[3:17:41] There's no urgency with which we have to move this forward.

[3:17:45] blind without looking at any of the underlying procurement documents.

[3:17:50] And this is not an indictment on staff.

[3:17:53] This is a procedural problem.

[3:17:58] And the city manager, your job is to allow us to do our jobs.

[3:18:03] Help us do our jobs.

[3:18:04] Affectuate our responsibilities and sending procurement documents the day before

[3:18:10] to a 1 PM, my briefings at 5, can't get responsive information after the briefing.

[3:18:17] And then I'm here and we're going to approve a 31, we're being asked to approve a $31 million

[3:18:22] expenditure.

[3:18:23] It just seems completely ridiculous to me.

[3:18:26] Councillor Miller, hello, do you have any?

[3:18:28] Yeah,

[3:18:31] I mean, I don't like the design.

[3:18:33] I've expressed that before.

[3:18:34] I think it's inconsistent in congruent even with the design that we had adopted

[3:18:42] many years ago, which is to have kind of a Mediterranean or Spanish or Mexican kind of

[3:18:50] look with the tiles and all that. But I think that, that wasn't listened to, it wasn't

[3:18:57] listened to by, I mean, I was listened to, but there was no action. I was promised something

[3:19:01] it didn't happen. And I was told that the majority was going along with the design that we have

[3:19:06] now, or all of you were okay with the design that we have now. I still don't like it, but

[3:19:12] think that we just have to move the project forward.

[3:19:16] I think it's just once it gets completed

[3:19:18] I don't think it's going to have a good look. I think it's going to look like a courthouse and

[3:19:23] I've expressed that before and but we need to move forward. We need to have this in the

[3:19:29] in the city that's a meeting place. It's a place where people can have various events of many kinds

[3:19:36] And I guess the facade doesn't matter that much, finally.

[3:19:42] We just need to get it done.

[3:19:44] So I think we need to move on it now.

[3:19:46] And the 2,500 pages, I don't know that.

[3:19:50] Anything that there's anything in there that would make this

[3:19:54] change in any material or significant way.

[3:19:57] I mean, yes, a lot of pages and dumping it.

[3:20:00] The last minute like that is not good. Mr. Mendes. But I don't know that did you review the 2500 pages?

[3:20:11] I did not personally review all those 2500 pages, but we have staff professionals on here that I count on day in and day out to do their job. They're hired for that exact reason. They're hired to do these bids. They gone through significant education for this. They are more than competent to do what they're doing. That's why they are part of this team.

[3:20:30] So as Mr. Torres, did you review the 2500 pages?

[3:20:34] No sir, the project manager and also the construction manager did all the review of all the documents.

[3:20:39] And are they anybody here from most of them?

[3:20:41] They're here, coming through, the construction manager's here.

[3:20:44] Come on up sir, please,

[3:20:48] but you don't work for the city.

[3:20:50] No, I do not.

[3:20:52] I work for the management.

[3:20:53] We're the construction management company.

[3:20:56] We're hired by these teams to do the construction.

[3:20:58] Okay, did anybody in the city review the 2,500 pages? That's what I guess they should have.

[3:21:04] Yes, the project manager Harriet, she's a way for a run emergency. So she's not here today.

[3:21:10] Can we get a summary of what those 2,500 pages are about? Roughly.

[3:21:14] So the reason why the 2,500 pages are important is because on the other procurement items,

[3:21:19] I U.S. can tell that when I read through those procurement, the underlying procurement documents for the other contract awards,

[3:21:25] I can identify issues of concern and I've raised those over the course of this meeting.

[3:21:30] I continue to I've raised them in prior meetings on other contract awards.

[3:21:33] Those underlying procurement documents are important.

[3:21:38] Sure.

[3:21:39] 4,500 pages.

[3:21:40] I don't know exactly the 2,500 pages that you've received, but I can tell you that we did receive

[3:21:45] four bids and they're extensive.

[3:21:50] As a public agency representing a public agency, we ask for a lot of items.

[3:21:55] It talks about references, their legal status, it talks about previous projects, it talks about

[3:22:07] any number of things.

[3:22:09] It's a lot.

[3:22:10] There's no doubt about it.

[3:22:12] And that's what our job is, is to review those documents and report up to Harriet and Lee on

[3:22:17] the response and the responsiveness of those documents.

[3:22:19] It talks about costs.

[3:22:20] it talks about sub-contractors that they've partnered with and all of those relationships

[3:22:26] and partnerships that they include in their proposals are important and we should, that should

[3:22:32] be part of our policy consideration. Staff has its role. They review things for responsive

[3:22:37] responsible bidder or look at proposals based on this whatever 100 points scoring in those various

[3:22:43] categories. We look at it from a different vantage point. That's our job. They do what they do.

[3:22:50] They check the boxes, make sure that all of the forms have been submitted, that all of the

[3:22:55] signatories, you know, the proper signatures are where they need to be, that all their

[3:22:59] licenses are in place.

[3:23:01] They have that role.

[3:23:03] Our role, our function is something different.

[3:23:05] And without access to access to time, to review those documents, which is not an unreasonable

[3:23:11] request, which is why it's so much more frustrating.

[3:23:15] This is not unree, I'm not asking for anything unreadable.

[3:23:20] But anyway.

[3:23:22] I, so no one, no one that's here from the city, not city manager, not Mr. Torres,

[3:23:30] and the person that's out on emergency.

[3:23:32] No one has actually reviewed this documentation.

[3:23:37] And yet the recommendation is that we approve it.

[3:23:41] And you know, I mean, we need to get this project going,

[3:23:43] but I mean I think the Councilwoman has been concerned and I don't know how to deal with it

[3:23:49] frankly but I would think that somebody would have been here from the city to say yeah I've

[3:23:53] looked at every single page here and I can guarantee or I can assert that recommending the passage of

[3:24:00] this thing is going to be appropriate and but we don't have anyone that's actually seen the documentation

[3:24:06] here. Yes, the product manager's not here.

[3:24:11] Family member passed away, so it's under was heard like an assistant to the project manager,

[3:24:16] or that's the team is coming as a group and also SBA, that's for a project team.

[3:24:25] I remember a busy council and I also want to point out that these procurement documents that we are sharing

[3:24:31] is a complete, big package. This was, these are new documents we hadn't given before.

[3:24:37] This is the scoring matrix. This is there. Like like the gentleman stated, this is everything.

[3:24:44] Everything that we've ever been given through through these processes.

[3:24:48] The most important thing I think are the specs and the big sheets and all that information.

[3:24:52] And that's been viewed.

[3:24:55] Yeah, that's true. I mean, the specifications and the drawings could be part of the packages you've received, which...

[3:25:00] Also, extent to the set of drawings is not small. Neither is a so-so specification. But we were hired to do this. This is our job. The company that I represent does this every day on multiple projects. I've done this for 20 years. I've reviewed many of these types of solicitations. So yes, Harriet, it's not here. That is correct. We've gone through all the documents with Harriet. You said you hadn't reviewed the documents.

[3:25:24] I didn't say that. I've reviewed the documents. My team has reviewed the documents. I don't work for the city, though. So, yes, we've

[3:25:31] leafed through all the documents. I've spoken to Icon, West, we've spoken to all the bitters on all of this stuff.

[3:25:36] We hosted a precon conference. We did everything.

[3:25:39] Public Contracting Code.

[3:25:41] Except for provide the public policy decision makers with the ample information in advance. It's not your fault. Not your fault.

[3:25:48] And my concern also is city manager, your position, I don't, you're not even saying yes.

[3:25:54] I should have provided it to you earlier, you're just, you're trying to defend it and it's just, it makes no sense to me.

[3:26:01] Mr. Olson, I think maybe we should take it up in October.

[3:26:04] Give everybody an opportunity to look at everything.

[3:26:07] And it is a big project.

[3:26:09] 30 million is a significant number.

[3:26:12] And just to make sure that everything is appropriate, I'm sure it is.

[3:26:16] But the thing is we don't have someone here to save from the city.

[3:26:20] I laid my eyes on everything and I can say that we need to move forward with this project and it's a okay.

[3:26:27] So I would move to, or second, the seller comes motion to continue it over to the next meeting.

[3:26:32] Thank you.

[3:26:33] Okay. We have a motion in a second.

[3:26:35] All of a favor say aye.

[3:26:36] Aye. Anyone opposed?

[3:26:38] We're tagling it.

[3:26:39] Thank you. Thank you, Bill.

[3:26:41] City manager's report.

[3:26:44] for the City Council. We have two summer events to go for the concert series. This Saturday

[3:26:51] September 5th, we will have the Gene Simmons band. Also in October, October 2nd, we will

[3:26:58] have our finals item which is going to be fluffy the comedian. Mark your characters for Tuesday,

[3:27:05] September 22nd at 2.30 p.m. for the State of City event. Please, please look at our visit

[3:27:11] Pondale, excuse me, please visit our Pondale Playhouse website to reserve your seat.

[3:27:16] Having exciting news about two new businesses opening up later this month on the east side,

[3:27:22] one which will be Ross that's going to be opening up on I believe it's S in 25th and the

[3:27:28] other one is Handle's ice cream, right, does your second location in the city often 47th. We're

[3:27:33] excited about those new businesses and welcome them to the city of Pondale.

[3:27:45] All right, let's move on, we're going to close sessions to do interviews of city attorney applicants if they're still here.

[3:27:55] It looks like all of you stay through, okay.

[3:27:58] You still want the job?

[3:28:00] Presentation by city attorney.

[3:28:02] Good evening Mayor and members of the city council tonight.

[3:28:05] We have item number 10.1, and we are ready to go into close session when you are.

[3:28:10] No, I got to take public comment, Mr. Zink.

[3:28:14] Yeah, when you go in here, I really want you guys to really think about lawsuits.

[3:28:18] Like this project right here, 31 million.

[3:28:21] And you guys don't even know what the hell's going on in it.

[3:28:24] The public hasn't even seen it.

[3:28:26] It wasn't even in this magazine.

[3:28:28] If there's nothing on it on our website, we don't even know what it looks like.

[3:28:31] We don't know the floor plan.

[3:28:33] And you guys are approving this.

[3:28:36] This is insane.

[3:28:39] The public has no idea what you're even talking about.

[3:28:43] Spinning 31 million dollars of heart money on.

[3:28:47] And I guarantee you, if you don't really look into this thing like she wants this too,

[3:28:51] and though agreed, this project could balloon to 50 million dollars.

[3:28:57] And I can't even get a damn park sign.

[3:28:59] We can't even cut trees down.

[3:29:02] Mr. Zank, we've tabled that, and that's not related to close session, this is your time to speak on the close session.

[3:29:12] We've tabled that item, so many fraudulent documents in the city's received.

[3:29:21] There are small businesses that haven't been paid in six months, small businesses in six months, there should be a policy in 90 days, anybody that does a contract with Pondo

[3:29:32] get paid. So you guys have a good reputation. Right now, Ponda has a worse reputation ever.

[3:29:38] I'm telling you, small businesses are hurting because the city is at pain them.

[3:29:43] I keep telling you guys this, there's something rotten in the city, figured out.

[3:29:49] Please, and Eric, the American flag flies high.

[3:29:56] Anyone else wish to speak? Okay, we're adjourning to

[3:29:58] session.

[3:30:02] Except for when I'm previously waived at flu time.

[6:17:25] If we could get the report out, please?

[6:17:30] Good evening.

[6:17:32] E that barrios reporting out on behalf of City Attorney for item 10.1 public employment, City Attorney

[6:17:40] recruitment, there is no report of lack.

[6:17:44] Okay. Thank you. We are adjourned in two until October 6.

City Council/SA

Agenda

Transcript