[0:00] Okay. >> Traffic on the way over.

[0:02] » Okay. All right. Let me know when >> it is. You're the only one that got

[0:07] that. >> What is it? It's up to

[0:11] » All right. We're going to call the meeting to order uh for a

[0:15] » a short meeting. Um Emily, I have the roll call, please.

[0:19] » Sure. Council member Piper. Yep. >> Council member MH, Council Member

[0:22] Wilson, Mayor Prom Black. Yep. And Mayor Daringer.

[0:25] » Okay. Uh pledge of allegiance. Uh Jim, would you do the honors? Yeah, please.

[0:30] Thank you. >> Ready? Begin.

[0:34] » I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic

[0:39] for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[0:45] justice for all. >> Okay. All right. [laughter]

[0:50] And then we have no presentations, proclamations, announcements of terms of

[0:54] the order of the agenda. May I have a motion?

[0:57] » Move the order of the agenda. I second it.

[0:59] » All those in favor? >> Okay. Any oppose? No. Okay. Blue folder

[1:03] items. We have none. Uh public comment on non-aggenda items. We have no member

[1:08] of the public comment here. Um so can I dispense?

[1:12] » Actually, uh we don't have anybody here, but I do have one that I was asked to

[1:16] read into the record if that's okay, please.

[1:18] » Okay. Uh so this is a letter from Mr. Roger Hawkins. Uh, dear Mayor Daringer

[1:24] and members of the city council, as this is an important community matter, please

[1:29] read this letter into the record at the next council meeting if I cannot attend.

[1:32] I am writing to reiterate a concern that many residents share. Traffic conditions

[1:38] on our roads and trails remain unsafe with excessive speeding and near miss

[1:43] incidents occurring regularly. Despite repeated discussions over the years,

[1:47] there has been no meaningful progress towards improving road or trail safety.

[1:52] Before someone is seriously injured, I urge the council to take concrete steps

[1:56] to address these conditions. The current situation is untenable and the community

[2:01] deserves visible action rather than continued delay.

[2:06] » Okay. And that are there any other um from received from the residents? That

[2:12] is it. >> All right. Then with that um we will

[2:15] conclude the public comment and then on the consent calendars anybody have any

[2:20] items they wish to pull? >> I make a motion we approve all the

[2:25] consent calendar. [clears throat] >> All right. All those in favor

[2:29] » I no one opposed. Okay. And we have no excluded consent items, no commission

[2:35] items, no public hearings. Now for a discussion item, we have Robert Samario

[2:39] in the house and he is ready on 12A. >> Good evening, Madame Mayor, members of

[2:47] council. So I'm happy to present to you the audited financial statements for the

[2:52] city of Rolling Hills. This is for the year ended June 30, 2025. So we're we're

[2:57] about seven months in to the new year. And I just want to remind you that last

[3:01] year we brought this to you sometime in April. So we're early. And you know, one

[3:07] of the reasons that we got a favorable sort of fee from our auditors because

[3:11] they they recognize that we're not trying to get things done at the same

[3:15] time everybody else is like in the fall. So, we're willing to push it back and

[3:19] start later. So, we do that. But, I didn't want to finish earlier than April

[3:22] because I think it's more meaningful that way. Um, so what I want the purpose

[3:28] of our item is just to represent it to you and then have you, you know, receive

[3:31] and file it. But I'm going to go through it fairly quickly. You may recall that

[3:36] um a few months ago I pres brought to you our what we call the preliminary

[3:40] year and results for last year. So I already shared to you kind of where we

[3:43] thought we'd be at the end of the year. We now have final audited numbers which

[3:47] are going to be which are pretty very close to where we thought we were going

[3:50] to be before the the audit was completed. So that's why I'm going to go

[3:54] fairly quick with this. I do have we do have the auditors here online on Zoom.

[3:58] So once I'm done with mine um I'm going to turn it over to Jamie Lambert. He's

[4:02] the senior manager for Malisel and he's going to talk about their process, the

[4:07] results of the audit, the reports that were issued and I would I would

[4:11] encourage you to ask any questions you might have of them about, you know,

[4:14] their process, any concerns you have about, you know, internal controls, that

[4:19] kind of thing because I know we've had discussions in the past about that. So

[4:22] really, I encourage you to, you know, ask away and about what their

[4:26] perspectives are on in terms of their their audit work and our internal

[4:30] controls. So, why we have audited financial

[4:35] statements? They're required by the state controllers's office. Uh, I

[4:38] thought they might have been required by the city's municipal code, but I

[4:41] couldn't find anything in there. Maybe they're in there, but but it is a

[4:44] requirement that every city and county issue prepare audited financial

[4:47] statements um because we do have to submit those to the state. Um, they

[4:52] differ from what we present to you during the year because now we're

[4:55] dealing with final numbers and they are audited from an independent CPA. Whereas

[4:59] during the year we focus on how are we doing budget to actual in in based on

[5:04] what we expect our expectations were the this report which is referred to as the

[5:08] ACTER it used to be called the caffer but somewhere in South America that's

[5:12] considered a derogatory term so they changed it to ACER it stands for annual

[5:17] comprehensive financial report and one of the things that focuses on additional

[5:21] kind of to the year results but on the financial health of the city and every

[5:25] agency and I'll get more into that in a moment

[5:29] So the key components is of the acter are the management's discussion and

[5:33] analysis. This is tries to make sense in layman's terms of what the document

[5:39] says. There are a lot of numbers and and footnotes and most people who aren't in

[5:44] finance have a hard time understanding what the numbers mean and how to

[5:47] interpret them unless you're like a a grading agency. The idea of an MDNA is

[5:52] that it gives you a layman's perspective and it tells a story and and I write

[5:56] this every year, but it sort of tries to tell a story of how did we do and what

[6:00] these financial statements are trying to say. Um, it includes what's called

[6:05] entitywide financial statements. And, you know, I'm a little cynical about

[6:09] some of these things because I think that while this was intended to help the

[6:13] reader understand the the financial statements, they they sometimes can make

[6:16] it more complicated. And this was something that back in 2001 or two was

[6:22] required. But the idea was that one of the criticisms of local government and

[6:27] county government was that when you look at their financial statements, you

[6:30] really couldn't assess the financial health of the entity. When you think of

[6:35] kind of how the way they're presented, it wasn't in any term that was similar

[6:39] to the private sector. If you look at you know Apple's financial statements

[6:43] you will know whether they're about their financial condition and whether

[6:46] it's improving or deteriorating over the has deterior deteriorated or improved

[6:50] over the last year. You couldn't do that with with fund financial statements. So

[6:54] this was an attempt to say let's measure you in the same way the private sector

[6:57] does to see are you really in good financial health or not and are how are

[7:02] you doing over time. The fund financial statements are kind

[7:06] of what we've always seen for many many years. you know, you look at the general

[7:09] fund, our restricted funds at at that level. And then there's footnotes, a lot

[7:13] of words in there which kind of explain the numbers and then in the back you

[7:17] have the individual funds that are that are kind of combined toward the front.

[7:21] So you can see individual funds and how they did.

[7:24] So this is entitywide. Again, this is intended to present like similar in the

[7:29] private sector. How are we doing and what's our what's our financial

[7:32] condition? I'm not going to get into a lot of details other than to kind of

[7:36] point to you to the bottom section where it says net position.

[7:41] So net position for those of you who do have private businesses or or follow

[7:46] this stuff, it's kind of the same thing as your equity. It's it's a measure of

[7:49] your financial health at a given point in time. And for us, it's at June 30.

[7:53] And you know what you want to see are bigger numbers because it's the

[7:56] difference between how much you have in assets, all assets, and what you owe,

[8:00] all your liabilities. And that difference is your net position. And I

[8:03] just wanted to point to you that we have as of June 3025

[8:07] um unrestricted net position of $3.6 million. Most of that is in the general

[8:12] fund. That's the reserves that we have that are both assigned to for

[8:16] emergencies and those that are unassigned and and we'll talk more about

[8:19] that. We do have some restricted monies. Those are largely related to monies for

[8:23] the prop, you know, restricted funds, Prop A, Prop C, our utility fund and

[8:27] things like that. and they are in fact restricted by external forces either by

[8:31] contract or by regulation or law. Um but so it you know what I'll tell you

[8:37] is that the the important important measure is how did we do in the year and

[8:42] this says what was the changes in their net position throughout the year and

[8:46] I've highlighted what the important number that overall we saw an increase

[8:50] in our in our net position by almost $2 million in the first column of numbers

[8:55] which is the governmental activities. That's everything but our refuge fund.

[9:00] And and largely the reason we saw that is because we had substantial

[9:05] contributions to our capital program from FEMA. If you look at the top, you

[9:10] see the operating grants. It's really a little bit of a misnomer. It's a

[9:13] combination of operating grants and capital grants. But we in total re

[9:18] earned or received about 1.4 almost $ 1.5 million from the federal government

[9:23] toward our underground and utility projects. And that fund goes to capital

[9:27] and investments and so that is considered a revenue and the expenditure

[9:31] of those funds is not considered an expense on this on this statement. It's

[9:34] capitalized as an asset. So that really explains that. Um but I think you know

[9:39] the if it weren't for that we would still be in the positive and overall

[9:43] citywide we we saw an increase in our net position.

[9:48] um you'll see that they're going to have a different sense of this when you look

[9:51] at the general fund because it's on a different basis and um it's not going to

[9:55] look as stable as what this looks now. So look at the general fund here are

[10:02] revenues and showing the adopted budget actual revenues. Again, we've talked a

[10:07] lot about this, but the one thing I will point out is, and this is not because we

[10:12] have a magic wand, but it's a lot of this is that we're just trying to do a

[10:15] better job with projecting our revenues. We are only $14,000

[10:20] different from what we projected, you know, long time ago before the year

[10:25] ended. Um, there were some individual variances, but even those variances at

[10:28] the line item level were pretty nominal. Um, so I think it's good that we didn't

[10:32] see much of a departure from what we expected overall.

[10:38] On the expense side, um we did have some overages and we've explained that in the

[10:43] past. You know, the 60,000 in administration was primarily legal costs

[10:47] related to the land movement that occurred in the peninsula under public

[10:51] safety or I'm sorry, under planning the overage is because of the additional

[10:54] costs we paid to the county. Remember, we had that issue where all our costs

[10:58] went up by, you know, hundred plus thousand dollars even though and our

[11:01] revenues went down. We're still working on that, but that's why we had that

[11:04] overage. Um, but otherwise, we're pretty close to

[11:07] budget if it weren't for those two things.

[11:11] Um, this is a summary of the of all of that. I would focus on the middle

[11:16] column, which is the actuals. So, in total, we received 2.6 million in

[11:21] revenues and we spent $2.8 million in expenditures. So, we actually consumed

[11:26] reserves by $182,000 unexpectedly. Um again because of the reasons I mentioned

[11:32] our capital transfers of 344 those that's planned that's that's we set

[11:36] aside reserves for that purpose. Um but overall we use $527,000

[11:41] from our reserves to cover all of our costs including capital.

[11:48] So I'll turn it over I'll ask you there any questions about the numbers before I

[11:52] turn it over to Jamie to talk about the audit results.

[11:56] I just have [clears throat] a quick question on the you mentioned in I think

[12:00] it's your report that um page uh where you talk about the citywide analysis and

[12:06] our net position that there was uh direct charges for the uh refues that

[12:14] were 994 uh thousand. It's lower than the

[12:21] budgeted revenues and you're not sure why the assessments fell short this

[12:25] year. >> Yes.

[12:26] » So what do you are you when would we find this out?

[12:30] » Yeah. So I haven't had a chance to look at exactly what happened. You know we

[12:34] tell the county how much to charge each parcel? It's I think this past year was

[12:38] 15 for this current year it's 1585 1,585.

[12:42] And we take the cost and divide it by the 700 parcels that are assessed.

[12:47] I don't know why we came up short because the year before we were almost

[12:50] like to the dollar but this so in 24 but in last year we were short by about you

[12:56] know $11,000 or so or $12,000. I can't explain to you why that is

[13:01] whether lack of payment maybe some properties came off the tax roll. I

[13:06] don't know. I have not had a chance to ask those questions. Um but I think

[13:10] that's an unusual occurrence that we see this variance. We expect that every year

[13:13] we're going to collect exactly what those costs are because that's how the

[13:17] math works, you know. >> Does that help?

[13:20] » Yeah. So, it's not satisfying. >> Meaning they're if they're not get using

[13:25] the trash services that would do it like if they've they've no they've suspended

[13:29] it or >> Well, I mean again we we've identified

[13:32] 700 parcels that are subject that are going to be paying for refues, right?

[13:36] And we take the total cost of let's just roughly a million and we divide it by

[13:39] the 700 parcels. That's how we come up with the per parcel rate of I think it

[13:43] was 1585 and that we tell the county here are the parcels and here is the

[13:48] amount and they put that on the property tax bill and so presumably then you know

[13:52] then the idea is that they would pay that along with their property regular

[13:55] property tax bill and the county would remit it to us. I don't know why we came

[13:59] up short this year like I said it's to me I haven't figured that one out. I

[14:02] haven't pursued that yet. Um but normally we are almost exactly what we

[14:07] would expect to get. Can I ask a followup question on that?

[14:13] » So, we have parcels like like for example the fire station.

[14:22] They do trash pickup at the fire station.

[14:26] Do do we bill the county? >> No.

[14:29] » For that. So is is republic >> charging us for or not charging us but

[14:36] is republic saying we have this number of parcels and you're turning in this

[14:40] number of parcels but places like hicks ring cab ring the view state um the view

[14:50] uh spot up on crest so I can think of four or five different places and even

[14:55] here who pays for our >> trash pickup up here. Yeah.

[15:00] » Could those have something to do with why there's a

[15:03] » I don't think so. >> And I don't know. I'm not familiar

[15:04] enough with the city to to know those specific areas, but any governmentowned

[15:10] facility or property, they are not assessed for for refues. So, whatever

[15:15] the cost of those the services are get spread across the 700 parcels that are

[15:22] also receiving services but are not government agencies, if that makes

[15:25] sense. >> So,

[15:29] If >> so, we should get 100% either way

[15:32] because we're just it's just a few, you know, the spread across the 700 that in

[15:37] total should add up to the total amount that we are paying REA Republic for

[15:41] their services.

[15:45] » Yeah. >> And anybody else have any Yes.

[15:50] [clears throat] on the um general fund revenues um spreadsheet the third column

[15:56] almost the last item miscellaneous revenue I think you told us before why

[16:00] it budget six and went to 50 I I forget what the reason was

[16:03] » yeah that was the we didn't budget for a grant that we got to do the landscape

[16:07] work around here and so was I think it was $48,000 for the grant so we have a

[16:12] corresponding expense um

[16:14] » the other one was interest budgeted 140 and we actually got 184

[16:18] » how do we miss that boat. I mean that should be pretty predictable.

[16:22] » No, actually it's not predictable because you know the variability comes

[16:26] from the monies we have with um with PARS a section 115 trust and those are

[16:31] invested in a lot different way that they got invested in equities and a lot

[16:34] of things that have more volatility. >> This is just a a natural market.

[16:38] » Yeah. I mean it so yeah we and I and to be honest you know it's it's a

[16:42] conservative number so I don't I don't try to be aggressive on what

[16:46] » 140 you mean? >> Yeah. The 140 is very it's very

[16:49] conservative. Well, I'm sorry. The 140 is a conservative number. The 184

[16:53] just things just did better than we expected. I mean, again,

[16:57] » a lot better though. >> Yeah.

[16:58] » Yeah. >> I'm trying to remember why it did so

[17:01] well, but um >> I just maybe it's a super conservative

[17:06] number. Yeah. The PARS number is separate. So, I I'm sorry. I It's a

[17:10] separate number. >> I'll get back to you. I'll send you an

[17:12] email tell you how we why we ended up doing so well.

[17:15] the whoever that money was invested with probably had some projection or maybe

[17:20] not I don't know about or history of their return on investment.

[17:25] » Yeah. I mean the only thing I can think of is

[17:28] aside from the fact that I just tried to be conservative with that estimate is

[17:32] that we do see turnover you know these are all CDEs that have a fixed term and

[17:37] a fixed rate of return or interest when they mature. I don't know what the

[17:40] interest rate is going to be at that point. I can't predict that going

[17:43] forward. So if we have a maturity CD that matures that was at 3% but we get

[17:47] 4% then we're going to enjoy better revenues than we had predicted or

[17:51] thought we would get. >> Well anywhere else this would be budget

[17:53] less but you know for us it's >> meaningful.

[17:57] » Yep. >> Okay. Thank you.

[17:59] » I I have one other question on the lease revenue from the community association.

[18:05] I know that we continue to go in and say well we'll reduce their rent for this

[18:09] and for this and I just want to make sure. So, is this 58,000

[18:14] the actual revenue? >> Yeah. And that's just a timing

[18:17] difference because we just we recognize it when we get it. So, I think there

[18:20] might be I think sounds like there's two two months of revenues that aren't

[18:23] booked in there. >> Oh, I see. Oh, so it's not that we

[18:26] adjusted more things. So, that 69 would be what you'd be using for next year as

[18:31] well. That >> they pay us like $5,700 a month if I'm

[18:34] not mistaken. So, I just >> I thought this was after everything that

[18:37] closed. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. any other. Okay. All right. Then

[18:41] we can proceed to the next phase.

[18:49] » So Jamie has his own PowerPoint that he's going to share. Um we're going to

[18:52] take him off of mute. Let's see if we can get there.

[18:56] And there's Jamie in a minute. Again, he's a senior manager. So he kind of is

[19:00] the, you know, oversees the whole audit process. So he's going to share some of

[19:04] his perspectives and the results of the audit. Thank you, Jamie. Absolutely.

[19:09] Can you Can you see my screen? >> Yes.

[19:12] » Yes. >> All right. Perfect. Well, thank you so

[19:15] much for that introduction, Robert. Like, like you mentioned, my name is

[19:18] Jamie Lambert. I'm a senior manager here with LSL. Um, uh, this is now my I was

[19:23] involved with the city of Rolling Hills audit last year, and this will be my

[19:26] second year on the audit. So, um, and I appreciate y'all y'all bringing us back

[19:31] this year, me forward. Um, so, you know, LSL was

[19:36] engaged by the performed the following procedures. We performed a financial

[19:40] statement audit for the city for the year ended June 30th, 2025 in accordance

[19:44] with generally accepted auditing standards and government auditing

[19:47] standards. And we also performed a single audit over the city's federal

[19:51] awards for the year of June 30, 2025 in accordance with federal uniform

[19:54] guidance. Um our scope, you know, we we performed

[19:59] year and inter field work um you know, in a couple weeks. Uh during the interim

[20:05] field work, we kind of examined the internal control, you know, performed

[20:08] interviews with with with staff and personnel. Um

[20:13] pulled some, you know, we also reviewed these policies and procedures. We pulled

[20:17] some transactions to verify that, you know, the policies were working as as

[20:21] intended. Um provided relevant feedback. Then we performed a risk assessment to

[20:26] help plan our our our final procedures for the audit. Uh where we did our

[20:31] detailed testing of account balances and transactions. We did some compliance

[20:35] testing related to laws, regulations, brand agreements and contracts. We also

[20:39] performed our single audit and then you know some other procedures as well.

[20:43] As a result of our audit, um we issued an unmodified auditor's opinion on the

[20:47] financial statements for the city. Um and and what that means is that we were

[20:52] providing reasonable assurance that the financial statements were accurate and

[20:56] reliable are accurate and reliable as of June 30th, 2025. Um we also issued a

[21:00] report on internal control and compliance knowing no significant

[21:04] deficiencies or material weaknesses in internal control and no material n

[21:08] compliance with laws regulations or grant agreements.

[21:12] Additionally, [clears throat] we didn't have any findings in the

[21:14] previous year this year 2024 that we need to follow up on for 2025.

[21:19] Um also we issued an online opinion on the city's compliance with the

[21:23] requirements of major federal award programs as a single audit. Uh and what

[21:27] that means is we you know as a result of our procedures [snorts] we determined

[21:31] the city was in compliance with terms and conditions of their major federal

[21:34] reward programs um at the end of fiscal year. We also identified concern doubts

[21:40] and um we did not identify any fraud waste or abuse during the fiscal year.

[21:46] Um we also we had no disagreements with management about application of

[21:50] accounting principles. We didn't have any difficulty conducting the audit and

[21:54] we also determined all estimates used by management preparing the statements were

[21:58] reasonable. I put this slide in here financial

[22:02] highlights but Robert you know just went over all the highlights so I'm not you

[22:05] know go over these again kind of went through the whole thing. So um with that

[22:12] you know that's my presentation and I'll you know open up to any [clears throat]

[22:16] questions you might have. >> Does anybody have any questions about

[22:20] the audit? No. Okay. I think uh everyone's

[22:24] satisfied with your explanation in the documents. So they have no questions

[22:30] other than like where are you from? Okay. [laughter]

[22:36] » Well, actually I am from the great state of Alabama.

[22:40] » No way. >> [laughter]

[22:45] » Well, LSL a few years ago determined that we were having um and they were

[22:49] having quite a bit of difficulty uh recruiting everyone locally in Orange

[22:56] County in California who wanted to be one CPAs and also wanted to be

[23:00] government auditors. It's a this is a unique breed of people who wants to be a

[23:04] CPA and a government auditor. There's a a increasingly low number of people

[23:09] interested in that. So they started they started looking outward and the result

[23:14] has been and I've now been here for four years. I think I was our first fully

[23:18] remote employee. Um the result we have full teams were able to complete our

[23:23] audits. We're able to fully staff our audits uh and provide a higher level

[23:27] assurance in our opinion um to our clients as a result. Um, so we have now

[23:32] people in we have we have opened a location in Texas, we have a location in

[23:37] Phoenix, we have a partner in New York, I'm I'm obviously in Alabama, we have

[23:42] people um, you know, all over the country now and really has provided LSL

[23:46] the opportunity to provide to give much better service and um, also not to have

[23:53] less turnover really because government auditors get burned out really quick.

[24:00] But I am um I I do come out to California fairly regularly for

[24:05] conferences and things like that. And um the

[24:10] um partner the ultimate partner on the job is a California CPA. I'm working on

[24:15] getting my California CPA currently licensed in Alabama. Uh but you know I'm

[24:19] going to get that this year kind of reciprocity there. Um so yeah, thank you

[24:24] for asking that question and uh since you brought it up I'll just mention a

[24:28] roll tie. So, >> all right. Okay. Well, thank you for

[24:32] sharing. All right. All right. Well, thank you. If there's no other

[24:35] questions, then we can conclude that matter. And since he's three hours time

[24:39] difference, >> I make a motion we receive and file.

[24:44] » Second. >> All right. All those in favor say I.

[24:46] » I. Okay. No. >> He's wearing pants. I had a question.

[24:49] You wearing pants, [laughter]

[24:52] » Jim? Jim, >> there's a rule. Don't ask questions you

[24:55] don't really want to know the [laughter] answer to.

[24:57] » Good point. I'm glad we cut that screen off before

[25:01] that question got [laughter] to >> Thank you all.

[25:05] » All right. Thank you, Robert. Okay. [laughter]

[25:09] » All right. Okay. I know. >> All right. That could have been an

[25:11] overshare. Let's We can try to reframe. [laughter]

[25:14] All right. So, now going to matters uh from the city council. Um before we get

[25:20] into item 13A, I just wanted to let the council know that I did uh as per the

[25:25] request faithfully oppose the um the county's um I proposal for that half

[25:34] extra half cent measure that they uh wanted to put on the June ballot.

[25:38] Unfortunately, that was unsuccessful. They had uh they limited people to 90

[25:43] minutes and one minute per person. Um, and they had over 700 people that wanted

[25:50] to speak. So, I had to exercise in order to get my one minute of comment, which I

[25:57] I managed to truncate while I'm waiting online several hours to be able to get

[26:02] all the salient points in. U, but I had to contact somebody to get me up in the

[26:07] line so I could be sure to give the the comment. Uh, nevertheless, it was not

[26:12] successful, but >> you know, I just wonder. I know

[26:17] » they're going to tax us more. >> The done deal before anyone with that.

[26:20] » But anyway, but we can still try to tell our res.

[26:24] » No, supervisor Bar was the sole no vote. >> Only one.

[26:29] » She's the only Republican, you know, so just on the on the board.

[26:34] » Just gets worse and worse. It's most regressive way to head do it. So

[26:38] whatever. >> It's not the same. I mean this crap. I

[26:40] mean, every time you turn around, it just it's

[26:42] » unbelievable. But the cities are unified and they're putting out the message to

[26:46] their residents that notwithstanding the fact that this is a special tax which

[26:50] would normally have a twothirds vote disguised into a which is really a

[26:55] general tax which only requires 50% puts one um then uh which they think is going

[27:01] to assure them of a victory that if we get people to really vote no in in

[27:06] unison then you know they would have to uh dig in in their own pockets and and

[27:11] so I did get report in LASist which um I was the only one who said no to things

[27:18] that because there were other people who voiced objections including the director

[27:22] for California contract cities. Uh but um so anyway, so we we'll keep up the

[27:28] now it's to the voters. So that's that's my report on that and now we have

[27:32] anybody else want to say anything before we go to 13A? All right, we're gonna go

[27:37] to 13A. >> Okay. Well, good evening, uh, mayor and

[27:41] council members. Uh, this item is coming before you tonight at the request of

[27:45] Mayor Prom Black from last August. Uh, basically, uh, regarding the South Bay

[27:52] COG's um, annual dues, uh, as you'll see within the staff report, attachment A,

[27:58] uh, has the current dues formula, which was approved back in 2024. At that

[28:04] point, uh, the city's dues were $8,91. Um, part of the motion of the COG board

[28:11] at that time, uh, was to simplify the, uh, structure for how dues were, um,

[28:19] were, [clears throat] uh, were >> calculated.

[28:24] » Calculated. Thank you. Sorry, I'm having a having a senior moment. Um, [laughter]

[28:29] » you're not old enough. >> You'd be surprised, council member. uh

[28:34] uh and and what they did was they set a uh a CPI uh the the dues would increase

[28:41] for each city based on CPI each year with a maximum cut off of 5%. Uh the

[28:46] staff report as attached has all that information uh historically because we

[28:51] did discuss this back uh a couple years back. Um, with that said, the dues for

[28:57] this year, uh, or the the upcoming year, fiscal year 2627,

[29:02] uh, will be 8,625, uh, and that's based on an adjustment of

[29:07] 3.2% uh, CPI. Um with that said, this matter

[29:13] is really before you to discuss uh if you want to have further discussion or

[29:18] information brought forward um as it relates to uh your membership dues uh

[29:24] now and going forward. Uh with that said, available for any questions.

[29:28] » So if we [clears throat] approve this, that means we're agreeing to remain

[29:33] members for another year. This is a receive and file uh of of just

[29:38] information for you to the body to have a discussion and you can direct staff as

[29:43] to whether you want to bring back an item where you might consider uh not

[29:49] retaining membership which is why I do have a paragraph in the staff report

[29:52] about what does that look like and what is the city obligated to do under the

[29:56] terms of the uh JPA agreement. Uh so this is really a free-for-all for you

[30:03] each to have to express your thoughts and considerations related to uh the

[30:08] matter. >> Thank you.

[30:10] » Okay. Does anybody else have any question of Christian before we do it?

[30:15] Okay. All right. Um and there is no public comment because we have no um

[30:20] public I didn't call it because there's still nobody here in the audience to

[30:24] call public comment for the record. Uh so um well in terms of that um I know

[30:32] that there was a discussion and I don't know if people want to hear about some

[30:36] of that now but I don't know we have all the information about what the services

[30:40] are >> um in the staff report um

[30:44] » from the previous time this is not the time to make the motion

[30:48] to withdraw from the cog or is it >> you could actually that's that is really

[30:53] at the decision of this body >> I mean

[30:57] Do we get any value out of this that actually matters to us?

[31:04] » Is that a open-ended question or >> I'd say yeah all

[31:10] » the cog right now is administering some grants for us and it requires us to have

[31:14] reporting for recycling for the state of California and they're managing those

[31:17] grant programs for us. You can see the results of that program and in the

[31:22] material we put out for through our newsletter. So for example, organics,

[31:26] we're not required, but we are expected to put information out educating the

[31:30] residents about that. We don't >> required. You said

[31:33] » the education component. We are >> and that part is what we're achieving

[31:37] through the grant programs. They provide those services. We don't do it in house.

[31:42] We don't work with um the state of California recycling services to to um

[31:47] get these mandates. They administer that all on our behalf. All we do is to be

[31:52] able to open up our facility and educate the residents through the blue

[31:55] newsletter and presenting events here. We've had a couple since I've been here

[32:00] of those events. Um other services that you provide are um research. If we're

[32:06] looking for information that we may not necessarily have on staff, we reach out

[32:09] to the cog and they provide it for us. Um they have in-house personnel that

[32:13] again just specialties um and experience that we don't have it. We attend

[32:17] meetings for planning, engineering, um special pro projects, special events.

[32:23] Upcoming would be a housing trust. I mean, there's so many different

[32:26] components. A housing trust, it's not up for discussion this evening, but

[32:30] » we don't want a housing trust, >> right? But those are the type of things

[32:34] » telling us how to do a housing trust >> and and they're not

[32:37] » it's not mandatory for that. >> But those are the things where they're

[32:40] conducting that level of research for not just us, but for the agencies in the

[32:45] South Bay. So there are some benefits in having them. It is additional bodies

[32:50] that we do not have in house. I guess that's the most important part

[32:54] is the time spent. >> So when you said you know that have

[32:59] planning things that they can help us with. Can you get I I guess what we

[33:04] would look for is may maybe we could direct staff to give us just a very

[33:09] quick breakdown of what services apply they provide. we have been able to

[33:15] utilize this >> and what value you think it brings

[33:19] » and what value >> because if we we get out of it

[33:23] » which and you can say oh we think we are getting 15,000 or $20,000 the value let

[33:30] me show you how it is then that's a different statement than

[33:35] the perception that we get zero out of it

[33:38] » right >> and it might be the this cog versus that

[33:41] cog versus the league of whatever It's sort of the same problem across all

[33:46] of them. >> A lot of the things they think they're

[33:49] solving have nothing to do with us. >> And [clears throat] so when when they

[33:52] when they give us information like this, they I'm not saying the COG doesn't do a

[33:57] lot. you know, I trotted down the elections center that the cog arranged

[34:02] that to her and I found that very very useful to me and you know and I shared

[34:07] what the things that I saw there with the women's club and here um about

[34:14] uh election security and I found it very helpful but most things that they do I'm

[34:21] not seeing the benefit to us not saying that they don't do a lot but if we could

[34:27] find about just you know quick not in great deal but just you know we utilize

[34:33] COG for this this this and this year if we drop out of COG this this and the

[34:39] repercussions would be this this and this you know we'd need to find somebody

[34:42] to do this or something like that I think it's I don't know if you guys

[34:47] think it's worth having direct directing staff to do something like that to bring

[34:50] it back for us if or we're going to say no just out of hand we've said for the

[34:56] last three or four years. We'll do it this year again, but boy, I don't want

[35:01] to do it, you know, next year when it goes up. So, some of us may have made up

[35:06] our minds already. >> Mhm. Okay.

[35:09] » I have a question. Um, >> that just escaped me.

[35:16] » Oh, boy. That was fast. >> You don't have a senior.

[35:19] » I do. [laughter]

[35:23] » Okay. Well, I mean, there was something I know we we have a list. um of on I

[35:29] don't know what page that that is uh 140 of 155 um that there was different

[35:36] things that they did there was the >> wait [clears throat] I remember my

[35:39] question >> okay all right okay I knew once I

[35:41] started that you [laughter] would have sorry no that's okay

[35:44] » did anybody drop out this year any uh or uh resign I don't know what what the

[35:49] process would be but did did the cogs any members

[35:52] » no >> okay I think some other like the league

[35:56] in some of the contracts. >> Yeah, the league has there's nine cities

[36:01] statewide, that's it, that are not members of the league.

[36:05] » That was my question. Sorry. >> So, instead of going through the list of

[36:09] what they say, I think staff needs to tell us what value they think and have

[36:14] to monetize what it is. We used to outsource

[36:18] » what Benjamin now does. And the value of having Benjamin here to do those things

[36:23] is one, we got a bunch of stuff off the list and there's more value of of doing

[36:27] it. I'm not saying we're hiring somebody, but how does this work with

[36:32] what we can do and can't do because yeah, historically it's

[36:39] not a lot of bang for our buck. But >> and in by value, you're talking about

[36:44] like what would it cost us if we had to do this contract out? have to do the

[36:49] paperwork for the trash or for the because they keep making everything

[36:52] worse, right? >> And so they make everything I mean so

[36:56] now we have to do the the bot trash paperwork even though we don't it's like

[37:00] storm water just a waste of money but we got to do it. So if you can put together

[37:05] an outline that's clearly defined on what matters to us versus what they do

[37:10] because if we go through what they do 90% of it's nothing for us.

[37:17] maybe more and not what we should do what we're

[37:22] absolutely forced required to do. >> I don't want to do one thing more ever.

[37:29] In fact, we can put off a lot of stuff until they come at us and say, "Oh,

[37:33] you're 5 years old behind." Say, "Oh, sorry." And that's fine, too. But then

[37:38] that happens all the time. >> Except for housing.

[37:41] » Yeah. Except we get sued like like some cities did

[37:45] » um by, you know, get sued. only because we went to the meeting and and and that

[37:51] was um >> I know they went

[37:54] » and Pat Okay. Yeah. >> Yeah.

[37:56] » So, uh we kind of said, "Oh, we didn't know G." And so,

[38:00] » you save a lot of money by now. The slower we do anything is the better it's

[38:04] going to be, >> right? Well, I'm not saying we

[38:06] » save a lot of money, >> but yeah, that would be helpful. So,

[38:09] does that give you enough direction? Okay. And then and then if there's other

[38:13] things coming down the pike that are mandates that we know we're going to

[38:18] have to do and the cog will take care of us. We need to be doing it

[38:23] prognostically too, right, for the future.

[38:26] » Okay. All right. Um, so do we we don't need a a motion for that. It's just

[38:30] direct. >> Just a motion to receive and file.

[38:31] » I have a motion to receive file. Second. >> All right. All those in favor?

[38:34] » I >> Okay. None opposed. Thank you. All

[38:37] right. And so that that's all folks unless somebody has something from oh

[38:43] staff was going to make a a comment about this latest the shutdown of

[38:48] rolling hills estates. If you want to hear about

[38:51] » we can we can cancel the we can stop the meeting and if you want to tell people

[38:55] later that's fine.

[39:00] » Okay. All right. That's fine. All right. So um motion to adjurnn then let's

[39:04] sojourn. >> Thank you.

[39:05] » Okay. You you win the war, be >> no

[39:10] 15 minutes if you don't want.

City Council Meeting - February 23, 2026

Transcript