[0:05] Recording in progress.

[0:09] Let us stand for the pledge of allegiance.

[0:16] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which

[0:22] it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

[0:52] And the

[0:52] Call, please.

[0:53] Thank you.

[0:54] Council Member Cruz.

[0:56] Council Member Ponce.

[0:58] Here.

[0:59] Council Member Panada.

[1:00] Here.

[1:01] Vice Mayor Xavier.

[1:03] Mayor Pavón Alvarado.

[1:05] Here.

[1:05] Council Member Ponce and Panada.

[1:08] Vice Mayor Xavier.

[1:10] And Mayor Pavón Alvarado are all present in.

[1:13] Council Chambers.

[1:15] Council Member Cruz is absent.

[1:18] Thank you.

[1:21] Next item.

[1:22] Next item. Oral communications? This is a time for comments on any item within the Council's

[1:30] subject matter jurisdiction. If such item is not listed on tonight's agenda. The Council

[1:35] may not engage in discussion or take action on any item that is not specifically listed

[1:42] on the agenda. Your item may be referred to city staff for investigation report or placement

[1:49] on a future agenda.

[1:51] Persons addressing the council are required to limit their remarks to three minutes unless

[1:56] an extension or decrease of time is ordered.

[1:59] Speaking time may not be transferred.

[2:02] For in-person comments, speaker forms are available at the rear of the chambers and should

[2:07] be submitted to the city clerk before close of oral communications.

[2:13] For remote commenters, please use your raise hand feature and Zoom speakers will be called

[2:21] in the order received when your name is called the City Clerk will give you permission

[2:27] to speak.

[2:28] A notification may also appear on your screen indicating it is your turn.

[2:33] Please state your name for the record before beginning your comments.

[2:37] We have one oral communication speaker.

[2:42] Alexander Sanchez.

[2:44] Good

[2:56] evening councilmembers.

[2:57] My name is Alexander Sanchez and I'm very grateful to have the opportunity to speak with you today.

[3:02] I recently graduated from UC Davis with a degree in mechanical engineering.

[3:07] And one of the biggest challenges I face after graduating was finding that first opportunity to begin my career in engineering.

[3:13] You can work hard in school, earn your degree, and be ready to start your career, but getting

[3:19] that first opportunity can still be difficult.

[3:22] Employers want experience, but you need someone to give you that first chance to gain it.

[3:27] That's where the City of San Pablo and the EDC program made a real difference for me.

[3:32] The program, with the program I was connected with Ida Sama who became my mentor and helped

[3:37] guide me through the process.

[3:38] having some other to help me navigate those first steps after college giving

[3:42] the confidence and help me see that there were opportunities available to me. I'm

[3:47] very thankful for the time ESM has spent helping me and for the support I

[3:52] received through the program. It made me process entering the workforce and made me

[3:58] feel less overwhelmed especially when I was trying to figure out how to take the

[4:02] next steps with my degree. That opportunity ultimately led me to my current

[4:07] position as a project engineer with GSW construction. This is my first job in the engineering

[4:14] field, so it means a lot to me. It's my opportunity to finally take what I've learned throughout

[4:18] my years at UC Davis and apply to real projects while contributing and learning as an engineer.

[4:24] Being able to say that I am now in the working field I studied for is something that I'm

[4:28] very proud of, but I also recognize that getting that first opportunity is something that not

[4:33] everyone gets so easily. That is why I sincerely thank the city of San Pablo and everyone involved

[4:38] in the program for investing in people and creating opportunities like this. Sometimes

[4:43] someone has education, motivation and willingness to work hard. They just need someone to open

[4:48] that first door. For me, the city helped me open that door. I'm very grateful for the opportunity

[4:54] I was given and I'm excited to see where this first step in my career takes me. I hope

[4:58] per my education.

[5:00] I think I can also show the impact that programs like this have on someone's career and future. Thank you for your time, and I thank the city of San Pavel for believing in programs that help people take the next step. Thank you. Nice. Good job, right? I love hearing that. Next item. Next item, ceremonial matters, proclamations, item number one, file ID, 26-4056,

[5:29] Sixth, consider approving and presenting proclamation honoring the life and service of Latonya, L.T. Fisher, city manager.

[5:39] Thank you, Madam Clerk.

[5:41] Mayor, members of the city council at this time, our protocol ordinance is scheduled a formal presentation on the proclamation honoring the life and service of Latonya Fisher who served as our HR management analyst executive assistant to the city manager.

[5:58] and senior admin secretary, among other various administrative positions in the city.

[6:04] As we all know, Latanya tragically suddenly passed last month and many of us were able to attend her memorial service this past Saturday, September 5th.

[6:16] Tonight in our audience is Derek Fisher, husband of Latanya Fisher, as well as extended family members are here tonight for the City Council to officially present a

[6:27] and her life and service to the city of San Pablo.

[6:31] There.

[6:32] Okay.

[6:33] Thank you.

[6:34] I am going to go around the diets and see if anyone wants to say,

[6:43] give them a moment.

[6:45] Can't remember.

[6:46] Ponce.

[6:50] Okay.

[6:50] I'm going to try to get through this.

[6:54] And I know what I'm going to say so that I don't lose my thought process.

[6:58] I'm going to talk to, I'm going to take this moment and talk to Latanya directly.

[7:06] Latanya, I never thought I would be here speaking about your passing.

[7:12] I attended your service on Saturday and the panel was titled, A Life So Beautifully Lived.

[7:19] It was such a fitting title, but words cannot fully express just how beautiful you live your life.

[7:27] There was filled with people who loved you, care for you, and who will truly miss you.

[7:31] It was a service I will never forget a farewell fit for a queen, the queen that you were.

[7:40] Your son spoke so eloquently and your husband spoke from the heart.

[7:45] The proclamations were inspiring and I found myself wondering, how did you do it?

[7:51] How did you,

[7:55] how did you do so much for so many,

[8:01] your daughter, a mother, a wife, a coworker,

[8:05] a friend and so much more to so many people. Your letter to your family and friends was captivating.

[8:13] That is a letter I will hold close to my heart because losing you so soon

[8:19] hurts and you're absence leaves a void in the lives of so many people.

[8:24] I will miss seeing you around City Hall but I know your spirit lives on.

[8:28] And so please know that you will never be forgotten.

[8:32] And thank you to your family for being here today and for allowing us to celebrate

[8:37] and honor your beautiful life, Latanya.

[8:41] That's all for me.

[8:42] Thank you.

[8:43] Thank you.

[8:44] Councilmember Pineda.

[8:50] I echo the comments of my colleague here and I want to thank the family for being here

[8:56] for joining us.

[9:00] I want you to know, I'm sure you may have heard this, this time is already, but Latanya

[9:06] with somebody that's truly special, not just to the people that work in this

[9:12] building, but to the entire community. I've known Tanya for a number of years

[9:18] now, even I remember when I first joined Council, I was 26 years old,

[9:26] she was

[9:27] ready willing and able to, you know, be there for me, offer advice, and she has this

[9:36] way of approaching situations, I think she's always been a very critical thinker. She's

[9:43] not one that if there's something on her mind she'll find a way to communicate it. I've

[9:51] been thankful for all the years that she has just been a light for our city.

[10:00] I'm even recalling, you know, we're talking about how do we create and maintain safe working environments, and how do we create a space for people to feel comfortable to share what's on their mind, what's on their heart. And I know she cared very deeply about that. And I know that she created a lot of friendships along the way. And also, I'm very mindful that she has mentored, loved, and supported a lot of people.

[10:28] in the years that she's been here and myself included in, she will be deeply missed.

[10:37] She will, but

[10:40] I'm also thinking about, you know, continued impact.

[10:44] Every single one of us, our lives have it in a rich and one way or another

[10:48] because we have got a chance to know her, to spend time with her, to share conversations with her,

[10:54] to think critically about issues with her.

[10:56] And I think that we as individuals, we as a city, we as a community, we will continue

[11:06] to find ways to not just uplift her message of like building community and the importance

[11:13] of creating and maintaining safe and welcoming environments.

[11:18] We always are here to continue that legacy, to always fight for folks, to speak up for folks,

[11:25] to defend them, to be a voice for them, and if not be the voice for them, create that

[11:30] space for them to have their own and for them to feel comfortable, confident, and empowered.

[11:37] My condolences to the family, seriously.

[11:42] I know that this is a loss, this is a loss that's impacting all of us, I won't say impact

[11:48] that it's impacting, but that's the kind of person that she is, that kind of person

[11:54] who makes an impact, who makes waves.

[11:57] Thank you to the family for sharing her all these years with us, with this community.

[12:03] We are grateful, we appreciate you all, and now we are thankful for all her years of

[12:08] service.

[12:09] Thank you.

[12:11] Thank you.

[12:14] I was a good friend for many years.

[12:21] I keep going over all the memories I have of her, times we've shared, things we've

[12:31] talked about, laughs, photos, lots of photos.

[12:37] Latanya used to ask me to come to city events and take photos back when I used the camera

[12:45] on the phone and I have those photos to cherish.

[12:54] I loved everything about Latanya.

[12:57] She was absolutely wonderful.

[13:01] Everybody working for the city of San Paolo loved Latanya.

[13:07] She was such a big part of the city, and we lost her fur to as soon.

[13:16] My heart goes out to all of you, Derek, dear to you and Dominic, and the rest of the

[13:23] family.

[13:24] My heart is with you, and it's all I've been thinking about since Saturday at the

[13:30] funeral.

[13:32] It's just, you're all amazing people.

[13:40] I hope for you.

[13:43] I love all of you. I especially

[13:45] love Latanya and

[13:50] may you have, may you be able to get through this as easily as possible.

[13:58] It'll be hard.

[14:02] I love you and we cherish Latanya. Thank you.

[14:17] So I can't sit here and say that Latanya was my best friend or was my friend or anything

[14:24] like that but I can tell you I know that when I first came into council she was the one

[14:30] that helped me with the paperwork and her spirit was just so amazing and every event that

[14:39] there was for the first two or three years right before COVID she would be part of the

[14:47] these events that year after year it was I didn't I never thought it would be better it was always

[14:56] She always planned and did the best...

[15:00] Halloween events, the best. I mean, she dressed up and she won awards. I mean, she was just such an incredible person. And I always always secretly in awe of her. Right.

[15:18] As so many people, I'm sure my

[15:25] son died unexpectedly about two years ago. And what

[15:33] brought me solace, so just that place where I had to hang my hat, is that I trust God with my life.

[15:41] life, and I trust God with my son's life,

[15:47] because if he says who he says he is, my son is

[15:52] in heaven, and so is Latanya, because she was a beautiful, beautiful, beautiful person

[16:00] and a beautiful, had a beautiful spirit about her.

[16:04] I don't,

[16:11] I remember her laughter still.

[16:14] my condolences to you and to all the family and I just again just I will

[16:24] re-emphasize if we trust that there's a God we have to know that God has the

[16:29] ultimate plan for our lives.

[16:33] With that said I will read the proclamation

[16:39] of

[16:42] the city of San Pablo honoring the life and service of Latinia Fisher whereas the

[16:49] mayor, members of the council and the staff and citizens of the city of

[16:55] San Pablo, profoundly mourned the passing of our esteemed colleague,

[17:00] dedicated public servant, and dear friend Latanya Fisher, who passed away

[17:05] peacefully, surrounded by her loving family on August 14, 2026. And

[17:13] whereas Latanya dedicated her entire 28 year career to serving our

[17:18] community as an integral part of the city manager's office, demonstrating unparalleled commitment,

[17:24] professional integrity and service since joining the city of San Pablo on September 14, 1998

[17:31] as an administrative clerk to end, whereas throughout her nearly three decades of invaluable service,

[17:40] Latanya advanced through positions of increasing responsibility, serving as administrative secretary, senior as administrative secretary, executive assistant and management analyst onto her retirement on August 12th, 2026.

[17:59] And whereas Latanya was widely recognized as an exceptional, intelligent, reliable, versatile professional who contributed

[18:08] it to city operations provided excellent customer service and who would skillfully accomplish

[18:15] just about anything she put her mind to and whereas she poured her heart into planning

[18:21] city recognitions and celebrations, making others feel valued, honored and special while

[18:28] her kindness, mentorship and unwavering spirit, such countless lives throughout San Pablo.

[18:37] And whereas while our hearts are having the loss of a true friend and leader, we choose

[18:44] to celebrate a legacy of 28 years well spent in service, integrity, and love for this community.

[18:51] Now, therefore be proclaimed that

[19:00] I mayor Elizabeth Pabón Albrado and the entire San Pablo City Council,

[19:06] So hereby extend our deepest condolences and heartfelt sympathy to the family, friends

[19:14] and loved ones of Latanya Fischer during this hour of bereavement and be it further proclaimed.

[19:24] That we pray that peace, comfort and proud memory of Latanya's incredible life.

[19:32] Sorry.

[19:32] In 28 year legacy sustained her family in the days ahead and be it finally proclaimed that

[19:43] this proclamation be officially read and honored on this day of September 8, 2026, standing

[19:51] for ever as a lasting testament to Latanya Fisher's unwavering commitment to public

[20:00] And her unblemished integrity and generous human spirit. Her peaceful rest is well deserved, and her profound service to our city will always be remembered.

[20:19] I request a moment of silence.

[20:21] Mayor

[22:19] at this time, if you would like to take a five minute recess, that would be appropriate.

[22:32] Councilmember Cruz,

[22:35] Councilmember Ponce, here.

[22:37] Councilmember Pineda, here.

[22:42] Thank you.

[22:44] Vice Mayor Xavier, here.

[22:47] Mayor Pabón Alvarado, here.

[22:50] Councilmember Ponce and Pineda,

[22:51] Vice-Mail Xavier and Mayor Pabón Alvarado are all present in Consul Chambers. Consul

[22:59] Member Cruz is absent.

[23:03] Next item.

[23:04] City Manager remarks.

[23:08] So I'm going to go ahead and pass on remarks today so we

[23:12] can get through to the next agenda. Thank you.

[23:19] Next item.

[23:21] Consent calendar. The consent calendar includes routine items that are being

[23:25] enacted by one motion, there will be no separate discussion of these items.

[23:30] If discussion is requested, the item will be removed from the consent calendar and

[23:36] considered separately.

[23:38] Mayor, would you or any council members like to pull any items for discussion?

[23:44] I'll ask my peers.

[23:47] Council Member Ponce, no thank you.

[23:50] Council Member Pineda, would you like to pull any item?

[23:53] No, thank you.

[23:57] I don't have any items to pull okay can I get a motion a motion to improve the consent calendar second and just to confirm you may have mentioned it but no public comment no public comments.

[24:12] Council Member Ponce, aye.

[24:16] Council Member Pineda, aye.

[24:19] Vice Mayor Xavier, aye.

[24:21] Mayor Pabón Alvarado, aye.

[24:23] Motion passes.

[24:29] Next item, please.

[24:31] Next item.

[24:34] Public hearing.

[24:36] Item number 22, file ID 26-434.

[24:44] Consider adopting resolution of the City Council

[24:47] of the City of San Pablo, amending the police services and code enforcement section of the

[24:53] city master fee schedule. To establish fees associated with police department and

[25:00] Administration of its concealed carry weapon, CCW permit program, city manager? Thank you, ma'am clerk. Mayor

[25:09] members of the city council tonight is a scheduled public hearing to consider amending your master fee

[25:15] schedule to accommodate the city's new carry and concealed weapon permit program to be administered by our

[25:22] San Pablo Police Department, which is being transitioned from the county to local police department.

[25:28] So under state law and

[25:30] apical regulations tonight, we are moving forward with presenting a fee schedule to be associated with that permit program.

[25:39] Much of the details regarding the concealed carry weapons program was presented to our public safety

[25:46] Staying committee back on July 22nd and both Mayor Pobono Vorado and Vice Mayor Xavier

[25:51] recommended a formal recommendation to the City Council to proceed as scheduled.

[25:56] With them, I'm going to go ahead and turn over our formal presentation to Captain laughter

[26:01] for the balance of the council.

[26:03] Thank you, City Manager and good evening, City Council.

[26:53] My apologies for the technical difficulties.

[27:10] There we go.

[27:11] So under California federal law, it authorizes qualified individuals to obtain a license to

[27:17] carry a concealed firearm here in California in through out of the nation.

[27:21] So currently, Sam Pablo Residence applying for a CCW license completes this process

[27:28] through the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office.

[27:31] This process includes the application review, the applicant interview, the company has a background

[27:38] on investigation, firearms qualification,

[27:41] and then the issuance of the CCW license.

[27:44] Over the last two to three years,

[27:46] the sheriff's office has been transitioning

[27:48] these duties back to the individual cities

[27:50] here in Contra Costa County,

[27:52] and we here in San Pablo are the last agency

[27:54] to make this transition.

[27:59] So what does that mean for your police department

[28:01] and your community?

[28:03] When it comes to the internal process,

[28:05] there's a lot of moving parts involved

[28:08] with the Carrier Concealed Weapons Permit process.

[28:11] We spent the last almost three months training with the Sheriff's Office and other local agencies that have this program in effect.

[28:21] And so we have come up with our own internal workflow process when we receive applications from our community members.

[28:29] Having a policy, having an established policy in place is a must and we have worked with our city attorney and

[28:36] And we are going to adopt a policy that is very stringent when it comes to CCWs.

[28:44] And then the master fee schedule, amending our current master fee schedule to

[28:51] add the

[28:53] monetary costs involved.

[28:55] So as you can see by the master fee schedule on your screens, there's four categories,

[29:00] and then there's five subcategories.

[29:02] The standard two-year is the most common, this is the application fee for any community

[29:10] member within San Pablo proper to apply, and as you can see by the subcategory 250 is

[29:17] the initial fee.

[29:19] Then it goes down to the issue and the renewal fee, and the renewal fee is in reference to.

[29:25] Once they're CCW is close to expiring and they want to renew that, that will be the fee that

[29:31] will be charged by the city. The modification fee, that fee is if they want to add a firearm to

[29:41] their current CCW permit and they have the qualification done by a third-party vendor, we can add that

[29:48] for a small cost. Judicial is exactly what it is. Judges here that live in

[29:57] San Pablo that wish to apply for CCW.

[30:00] They will apply under the judicial three-year custodial and reserve, custodial is more for county custodial workers and state prison workers that live here in San Pablo. And then the reserve four-year is for reserve police officers who are normally volunteers of the police department or live within our city can apply for a CCW. One thing I like to point out is the gun safety training. This is something that no other agency

[30:29] in the county is offering and we hear, understand the great resource that we have next door when it comes to our range.

[30:38] So what we want to do is offer four times a year to any San Pablo resident that has a CCW permit

[30:46] an option to come and train when it comes to gun safety qualifications and so forth with our staff.

[30:53] And we'll offer that four times a year and that would be optional.

[30:56] So

[31:00] with that, I'm going to hand this over to our city attorney, Brian Hickey.

[31:03] Yeah, just to set the rest of the item up.

[31:06] So because this is an amendment to the city's master fee schedule by imposing a new fee,

[31:13] it is a public hearing.

[31:14] So as with our typical public hearing process, you can ask questions now, get some clarifying

[31:20] information.

[31:22] At some point you need to open a public hearing, take public comment, and then when you close

[31:26] that hearing the staff recommendation is to adopt the attached resolution, which establishes

[31:32] the new fee.

[31:40] So you can either ask some questions now, but if there aren't any clarifying questions

[31:45] from the staff presentation, you can go directly to opening the public hearing.

[31:50] I do have some clarifying questions, but I'm going to go around the diocese and see if they

[31:54] have any questions first. Councilmember Ponce, no, I do not think. Okay, Councilmember Pineda.

[32:00] Just for a point of clarification, so the county had this responsibility previously in terms of the County Sheriff's Office, and now it's going on to cities.

[32:10] What just had a curiosity when it was being administered or currently asked to be administered by the county.

[32:18] I'm assuming those monies that get generated stay within the county in this situation, it would also stay within the city.

[32:24] That's correct.

[32:25] Okay.

[32:27] And

[32:30] let's see if I slide first.

[32:32] That's on one of your slides.

[32:39] And I heard you say about the modification fee.

[32:42] So that's if they wanted to add an additional firearm.

[32:45] That's correct.

[32:46] If they want to add a firearm or they can have up to three firearms on one of the license.

[32:51] So a majority of the CCW applicants that we will see or that we will approve will usually

[32:57] only have one firearm, but they do have the options of adding two more.

[33:02] Got it.

[33:03] And I asked this question just out of curiosity.

[33:06] I wonder if any other agencies, when they're considering this, if they have the opportunity

[33:11] for a gun safety training, I know like for example, just this is an example, like let's say

[33:18] you're trying to get the M1 license, the sheriff's office also offer a motorcycle class and

[33:23] they give you a discount on your insurance and stuff like that because you participated

[33:26] in that training.

[33:29] I know that we have that fee here, are we offering or is there any thoughts about maybe in the future offering an opportunity for like a discount for like a renewal or something like that if they participated in the trainings.

[33:40] I like that option. Sorry.

[33:42] I'm sorry, can you?

[33:43] Yeah, so like, so I know like for like less than when I was younger, I wanted to get my M1 license and I did participate in the motorcycle training course with CHP.

[33:54] and they're like a because you participated in the program you do get a

[33:58] discount when you're trying to get your registration everything like that or was

[34:02] it for the insurance or which one it was excuse me and so I'm wondering in this

[34:08] situation if somebody they've applied they have gotten approved and less say they

[34:13] wanted to participate in the gun safety program what they in the future and

[34:18] again if it's not for this maybe it might be fruitful for a future conversation like

[34:22] maybe offering a discount on the renewal or something like that because you

[34:26] participate in this training and you know we saw with our own eyes that you

[34:29] know you're a responsible gun handler. Sure. Now that's a great question and

[34:34] it's something that is not on our radar right now and there's several reasons

[34:38] for that. This training, this optional training that we're offering, this is us

[34:42] moving into our new facility, something that no one in this county offers to

[34:48] any of their their community members. So now we want to bring forward and see how it

[34:52] goes up, but there's a cost associated with that as well when it comes to staff time, when

[34:57] it comes to a range time, when it comes to equipment and ammunition.

[35:00] And so forth. It's a pretty large expense. So when we looked at the fee study and doing our

[35:06] comprehensive study within the county of how much should we recommend our fees be, we're

[35:14] definitely not the highest, but we're not the lowest. But I looked at as cost recovery

[35:18] as well, because it's very labor intensive when we do the process. But that's something we

[35:22] can look at, but when it comes to qualifications and range safety, every member that applies

[35:30] still has to go through a third-party vendor, a DOJ certified third-party vendor to do

[35:36] the 16-hour course, and what we're offering is more of a four to six-hour, more of a refresher,

[35:42] but it's something that we can definitely keep on our radar.

[35:44] No, I get it. Again, I just mentioned that because it's like a good incentive for people to, you know, it's

[35:52] responsible handling, you know what I mean? And I feel like everyone could always benefit from a refresher. Hence why even like long

[35:59] enforcement, they go through their regular training as well. I just see it as like

[36:05] It's not a it's not a terrible program. It's a good program, and I think it's worth encouraging and that might be something to look at for the future, but

[36:11] But I understand that we're the remaining city to adopt something like this and I understand

[36:17] we have a duty here to make sure that we can do this responsibly well and effectively.

[36:22] So just to clarify, sorry, this specific fee is attached to the specific process of individuals

[36:30] pursuing a CCW and feedback from the county is, that's about two applications per month

[36:37] On average, coming from San Pablo Proper, which you're referring to, we also have thought about.

[36:46] So, gun safety training to our community is going to be made available through our community programs,

[36:53] community police academy, neighborhood watch groups, business watch.

[36:57] So, we'll be doing perpetual community gun safety trainings and offering that to the community outside of this process with individuals pursuing a specific.

[37:08] CCW license.

[37:09] Yeah, because I could see that, like an education part,

[37:11] it's like a store, a firearm in your home.

[37:14] You know what I mean?

[37:15] If you do have an air home.

[37:15] Yeah, we want that information out there.

[37:17] Yeah, that's the same.

[37:18] And we're going to be using the training facility to get that,

[37:21] to get that specific training out to our community.

[37:23] No.

[37:24] I understand.

[37:24] But thank you for the information and the presentation.

[37:26] That's all for me.

[37:28] Thank you.

[37:31] Vice Mayor Xavier.

[37:32] I don't have any questions.

[37:33] Thank you.

[37:34] Thank you.

[37:34] I have a couple of questions. Thank you for the presentation.

[37:41] For

[37:44] this CCW, is this for anyone? You don't have to live here in San Pablo too.

[37:51] You do. You have to live in San Pablo in order to...

[37:54] Is the San Pablo Police Department?

[37:55] Yes. You have to be a San Pablo resident?

[37:59] Yes.

[37:59] So, part of the process is we verify the address and if the address is outside of our actual city limit,

[38:05] We will refer to the other to Richmond or to the other counties or the other cities.

[38:11] Okay.

[38:11] All right.

[38:13] So in order to receive a permit, don't they have to take the gun safety training anyway?

[38:19] So this is in addition to what they have already had.

[38:22] Exactly.

[38:23] That's right.

[38:24] I'm going to have to complete a 16-hour DOJ-certified training course that includes a qualification.

[38:29] Well, we're offering here is additional training four times a year for CCW permit holders here in San Pablo and eventually branched that out to offering firearms safety training to to all community members eventually.

[38:48] But we're still going to be giving for free gun safety training.

[38:55] Yes.

[38:55] And the avenues that you have just.

[38:58] Yes.

[38:59] So currently we do not have the, we don't have the certification to offer the 16-hour

[39:06] course to our community.

[39:08] This gun safety is an option if they wanted to receive additional training as a part

[39:14] of the CCW process.

[39:15] It is not mandatory.

[39:17] The mandatory 16-hour component is separate and it is offered through third-party vendors.

[39:23] So every other city is sending their applicants to the third party vendors.

[39:29] Is there a future where that is something that we could offer and build in, potentially,

[39:35] and that's something that we were exploring?

[39:37] We just don't currently have that training, the mandatory 16 hour training available right now.

[39:43] Right, right, right, right.

[39:43] But for our training, 46 hour training would this be also an option for those outside.

[39:51] of the people who don't live in South Padua.

[39:55] So we don't offer, we don't currently offer.

[40:00] Commercial availability for residents to come in, unless you're part of any of our community police academy programs, or

[40:10] private watch groups. Right, but in general, most cities are not offering this gun safety training, this additional class.

[40:20] Yes. Have you considered maybe offering it outside?

[40:27] If we get enough feedback and interest, the thing about,

[40:33] and we're learning as we go, the thing about operating a regional training center with a range is there's a lot of liability.

[40:44] So the more untrained individuals you bring into your space, the more liability.

[40:49] that is something that we would accept, but as we initially open our doors and we're starting to train and learning what goes into it and all the workflow, that is something that we want to put a pin-in, and if it makes sense and we can safely do it in consideration with all the liability, then that's something that we would consider as well.

[41:11] We do want to get as much of this information out to the public as possible for anyone

[41:16] who would be interested.

[41:18] We're going to prioritize our C&Pablo residents, people in our programming, or if they're

[41:23] a resident and pursuing CCW through our office.

[41:27] Right.

[41:28] Right.

[41:28] And this, like you said, it might be an option later on, but for very much of it.

[41:32] Right.

[41:32] Now we're going to keep it contained, make sure that we have all the ducts in the role.

[41:36] Right.

[41:37] And make sure that the liability doesn't, the liability, the cost of liability insurance

[41:44] because that really does increase tremendously for that one more question.

[41:50] These fees will go back into the police department general fund or will it come to the general

[41:57] fund of the city?

[42:00] These fees will come back to the city's general funds.

[42:03] To the city, general fund?

[42:04] Right.

[42:05] So, all fees have to do that, but in the future as we grow this program and as the chief

[42:11] and his team continues to implement, and we make modification as we go, again, we have

[42:18] to balance the liability risk with the program that we're offering, so obviously, if there's

[42:23] a way to look at these fees and see how much revenue we're generating, then we can revisit

[42:29] how we're programming that into PD programs or any other type of O&M for the facility, because

[42:34] of facility is being considered here as well so okay okay that's it I don't have any further

[42:41] questions so I

[42:47] opened this up at 6.53 for public comment no public comment no so then we

[42:54] will close this 6.53 do we have any any more questions anyone okay so

[43:05] I'll move to a

[43:07] from this item.

[43:08] Thank you.

[43:10] On second.

[43:14] Adopt the resolution.

[43:15] There you go.

[43:16] Okay.

[43:17] I lost my thing.

[43:19] Council member Ponce.

[43:22] Aye.

[43:23] Council member Pineda.

[43:25] Aye.

[43:26] Council member Vice Mayor Xavier.

[43:30] Aye.

[43:31] Mayor Pabón Alvarado.

[43:33] Aye.

[43:33] Motion passes.

[43:35] Thank you.

[43:36] I lost my name.

[43:38] Okay, next item.

[43:40] Next item.

[43:42] All right.

[43:46] Ordinances.

[43:48] Item number 23.

[43:50] Valid 26-344.

[43:54] Consider adopting an ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Pablo.

[44:00] at in chapter 9.60 to the San Pablo Municipal Code establishing the city of

[44:08] San Pablo's review program effective January 1, 2027. I do have one speaker

[44:17] city manager. Thank you ma'am clerk may our members of the city council as you

[44:22] know for the past two years we have been looking on implementing a comprehensive

[44:28] of coordinate effort to strengthen the city's

[44:31] tent support and housing sustainability framework.

[44:34] Tonight we are bringing forward a new rent review program

[44:38] ordinance for your formal consideration.

[44:41] This involves another tier of the rental protections

[44:45] that the council originally had directed back on your

[44:49] special city council meeting on July 1, 2025.

[44:52] In addition, we have several other tenant protections programs

[44:56] and services that we have been implementing with Council.

[45:00] Approval throughout calendar year 2026. And Curing Slaughter Economic Development and Housing Manager will review this with the council on our track record and our continued focus on providing a meaningful, low cost rental tenant protection services to our community. So with that, I'm going to go ahead and turn this over to Karen for formal introduction and overview of our new rent review program. Thank you very much, Matt. Good evening, mayor.

[45:29] and council, the item before you tonight, as Matt mentioned, is expanded tenant protection

[45:34] specifically the proposed rental review ordinance and program. So, all of you have been

[45:40] made aware of this program, but for the benefit of the public and just to walk you through

[45:45] the details, I'd like to present the slide deck this evening. And so, as Matt mentioned,

[45:52] this is really an ongoing implementation of our tenant support and assistance package. As

[45:59] As you can see there, we've taken a multi-pronged approach to providing meaningful tenant support

[46:04] and the council has done so with the actions you see that before you, with the mobile

[46:09] home grant assistance program, providing rental housing, counseling and mediation, in addition

[46:15] to our just calls for eviction and anti-harassment ordinances.

[46:20] And before you this evening is the final step of this robust program, which is over into review

[46:25] program.

[46:27] And so the purpose of this program is to provide a transparent public process for review of significant rent increases.

[46:37] We believe that this will provide safe guards for tenants that typically face sometimes excessive rent burdens without any other recourse.

[46:46] It also provides housing stability and promotes housing stability and not going to some more details of how that's the case.

[46:52] And

[46:56] the goals of this program and this ordinance are similar to the goals that we've found in other cities where this program has been implemented for numerous years.

[47:05] And so it's modeled after those cities.

[47:07] And also it's seen seeks to incorporate best practices and clear thresholds in addition to public accessible hearings if it comes to that point.

[47:17] It also follows sort of, you know, what we've been promoting is seeking positive dialogue,

[47:25] mediation and partnership between housing providers and tenants, and by doing so it balances

[47:30] the tenant protections with housing provider rights.

[47:37] And so, just want to really cover what's included and what's exempt under our proposed ordinance.

[47:43] units, and so units that are covered under the rent review ordinance would be all rental

[47:48] or lease units, including duplexes, triplexes, forplexes, multi-family buildings, in addition

[47:55] to rented condominiums, also ADUs, or accessibility dwelling units, mobile homes, and mobile home

[48:03] space units, and single-family homes that are owned by a real estate investment trust

[48:07] corporation or limited liability company. On the other side you see those units

[48:14] that are exempt from this ordinance and these are this is consistent with with

[48:19] best practices in terms of recommendations from council legal council. You'll

[48:25] see here that you know units that are single-family homes units with light

[48:30] tech or other affordability regulations government-owned or operating units

[48:35] It's also temporary institutional housing, like nonprofits, hospitals, religious or charitable

[48:41] purposes.

[48:43] And so, I want to clearly define for the council as well as the public what's included

[48:48] in the ordinance and what is not included in the ordinance.

[48:55] And so in terms of what the process would look like, if adopted and when implemented, the

[49:04] The process would basically take place when a rent increase is over 7% within a 12 month

[49:11] period.

[49:12] A tenant may request a review or hearing before the neutral board that the council would

[49:17] appoint, and it provides an opportunity for both parties to present documentation, support

[49:23] and testimony for why either the rent is proposed to be exceeded or why the tenant feels

[49:30] like that's not justified.

[49:32] And

[49:36] in terms of how we'll work is we would have an intake process where the requests

[49:42] would be received and staff would do a review to see if it's eligible.

[49:48] And then we would have a conciliation meeting basically where parties would come together

[49:54] and discuss the application and the request.

[50:00] If that resolves the issue, then basically it's, it's finished, it's done. However, if there is no agreement reached at conciliation, it will move to mediation. And once again, that provides another opportunity for discussion and collaboration to see if some sort of resolution can be, can occur between the two parties. And if that doesn't occur, then there's a public hearing held in front of the rent review board, which would be appointed by the city council.

[50:30] and that would be a publicly accessible hearing where both parties are invited to participate

[50:36] and given the opportunity to basically explain their case.

[50:43] And so these are sort of the timelines that we would be recommending, you know, tenant

[50:48] files of hearing requests within 30 days, city schedules, the public review process, and then

[50:53] the board issues the advisory recommendation after review if conciliation and mediation aren't

[51:00] successful.

[51:03] In terms of the board composition the board we see the best approach

[51:08] would be to make it a neutral balance board, tenants, homeowners, as well as a

[51:13] homeowner that doesn't own rental property in the city of San Pablo, and all of

[51:18] those individuals will be appointed by the city council, similar to how you

[51:21] appoint your planning commission and other committees and commissions. And so it

[51:26] be a brown act regulated board and once again if it be publicly accessible and

[51:31] transparent. However, one key aspect of this program and this ordinance is that if either

[51:39] party doesn't participate in good faith, then they basically lose the opportunity

[51:43] to seek the result that they're advocating for. So, if the property owner bails on the

[51:49] median, it doesn't show up, then the tenant basically has the opportunity to have that

[51:55] rent increase voided. On the flip side, if there's a proposed rental increase, and the

[52:00] The tenant doesn't appear and doesn't participate in the process, then that rent increase is valid.

[52:06] So it really compels both parties to participate in good faith.

[52:10] Now obviously if there's something unique that happens and

[52:13] something out of the control of either party, staff can take that into consideration, but

[52:17] it does require both of them to really participate and come to the table to have the program work.

[52:23] And that's based on what we've seen in other cities and other best practices where this ordinance is already in place.

[52:29] And

[52:32] so just to summarize in terms of the benefits to the city and to the overall community,

[52:38] it provides protection from significant rent hikes for tenants.

[52:41] It provides housing providers a clear, transparent guideline and a fair and impartial process for

[52:47] the city.

[52:47] It continues to promote housing stability and reduces the opportunity for displacement.

[52:53] And for the public, it allows the support of ongoing investments to existing and new housing

[52:58] stock.

[52:59] that are also in compliance with our goals for reigning numbers.

[53:06] And so just wanted briefly, you know, just highlight how it interacts with existing

[53:10] state rent control, and that's already in place, it's been in place for some time.

[53:15] Basically, AB 1482 set statewide caps and just cause rules for

[53:20] some rental units, and then laws like this or ordinances like this can impose additional

[53:25] restrictions or additional protections that are not covered for state law.

[53:29] And I mentioned how this would add a rent review over 7% without caps.

[53:34] But it works in concert and in works consistent with AB 1482.

[53:43] It's also, as I mentioned, very consistent with your council priority work plan to expand

[53:48] housing options and consistent with your policy 310 rental protections to explore the feasibility

[53:54] to enhance senate protection provided by the city to include a rent review program.

[53:58] and staff has been doing that work diligently and has brought this forward and for you all to consider.

[54:04] And just once again for the public because there may be some confusion over rent review,

[54:09] rent control or stabilization just in terms of how it's compared with the voter initiated rent control ballot measure.

[54:15] The program provides a review process, not a price-fixed heart rent cap.

[54:20] The City Council can modify the program as needed if we need to make some tweaks or adjustments.

[54:25] residents. Once again, it's a, you know, citizens that are appointed on the board by the

[54:31] council. And it's a significant cost and resource savings for the city to minister,

[54:36] which is why staff is recommending this approach and have been working on it for some time.

[54:43] And so staff's recommendation is to contact the public hearing, wave the first reading and

[54:48] introduce the ordinance. The second reading would occur on September 21st. And that adoption

[54:54] of the ordinance would amend the San Pablo Municipal Code and introduce chapter 9.6.

[55:02] And so, that concludes my presentation. We did receive some late correspondence from an

[55:09] organization from the public. We haven't had time to go through that in depth, but just

[55:13] on a quick reading, we feel like our ordinance is consistent and still doesn't run a foul

[55:18] of any of the recommendations. And some of those recommendations could be implemented through

[55:23] the administrative procedures once the ordinance and the program is underway. And I'll let

[55:28] if Ryan wants to chime in on that, I'll let him do so, but I did a quick scan of the letter

[55:34] that we received late this afternoon, and I feel good that our ordinance is in a good place right now.

[55:44] Yeah, and I do want to clarify one aspect of the staff presentation. The way the ordinance is

[55:52] currently drafted with respect to the composition of the rent review board. The two members who are

[55:59] housing providers, as currently drafted, those would be providers who own residential

[56:07] properties in San Pablo and that reside in San Pablo.

[56:11] Correct.

[56:12] Yes.

[56:14] Yes, because we would have a board and they would need to participate in board meetings and

[56:19] so we need them to be here and accessible and available like

[56:25] other board members are.

[56:28] So then oh, I see yeah, yeah, the board member, the board members, yeah, yeah, yeah, sorry.

[56:36] I'm going to ask just a clarifying question before I open it up to the public for a public

[56:42] comment.

[56:45] Can you have any clarifying questions, can you remind me how many board members?

[56:55] we're looking for. So we were looking we were looking for five with the potential of an alternate

[57:01] just so that we can always make quorum. And then this is adopted and it's going to be

[57:06] implemented January 1st. When is that committee going to be established? Yeah so that would be the

[57:15] next step. We are also monitoring what's going on with the election to see how much time and

[57:20] effort and resources we put forward. You know some of this may be notified but we are

[57:26] you want to be in a position so that we can move forward and have this up and running by January

[57:30] 1st 2027 if that ballot measure fails and so then we will come back to council and go through

[57:36] the normal process and those board members would be appointed on a staggered term so some will be

[57:40] two years, some will be forward so that everyone doesn't you know sense that out of their seat at

[57:47] the same time. Yeah. Okay, that was my only question. Thank you. Okay.

[57:55] Councillor Neill of Pineda.

[57:59] Thank you for the information, the presentation.

[58:03] I

[58:07] have a one question that comes to my mind. What if, let's say, the board meets, there was a

[58:13] dispute, a resolution was declared, but then ultimately, the action felt to happen. What happens at

[58:22] at that point?

[58:23] Or what would occur at that step?

[58:25] That's a good question.

[58:26] So if there's an agreement that both parties agree to,

[58:31] they would have to basically sign that they agreed on.

[58:33] So it's basically a binding resolution

[58:36] that they both agree to and they sign.

[58:39] I believe we'll probably get it notarized, Brian.

[58:42] Is that right?

[58:43] And then they would be held to account

[58:46] to hold it there into the bargain basically.

[58:48] And so just like any other sort of agreement,

[58:50] a bit, or a bit more random understanding or contract.

[58:56] And then I did see the comment about they have 30 days upon reaching the 7% or going

[59:02] above further to bring the claim.

[59:08] I'm just wondering if, when if they like the average tenant, you know, like I know I got

[59:14] charged this amount and everything like that and I'm just wondering, actually

[59:24] never mind.

[59:24] I'll just say this.

[59:25] I mean for me this is not a bad idea. I'm not opposed to it. Everyone on this council

[59:32] knows I would like to see some different things beyond this but I understand what we're

[59:41] at.

[59:45] I do believe again that something like this is important and you know has a potential

[59:50] to make a difference. Of course, the limits is what I iffy but I will support this.

[1:00:08] I am just hopeful

[1:00:12] that ask this program comes to be whether it be through a ballot measure or through our city program, that we're continuing to keep in mind just what this means for our residents. You know what I mean? The people that live here, the people that work here, the people that serve here.

[1:00:46] Actually, that's it. I'm just leaving without that. Thank you for the information. Thank you for the presentation.

[1:00:53] I appreciate, you know, that thought that was gone into this, that's it for me.

[1:00:58] Thank you.

[1:00:59] Appreciate it.

[1:00:59] And just to respond, a council member, you know, our intent was to cover as many units as possible,

[1:01:05] including the, you know, the units that would not be counted, that would not be covered under other proposals.

[1:01:10] And that aren't covered under 1482.

[1:01:12] And so that's our proposal and we heard from the community that we implemented, you know, as much as we could.

[1:01:19] And we feel really good about it, thank you.

[1:01:22] Thank you.

[1:01:24] I have no questions, thank you.

[1:01:29] I do have a question because I'm reading through this, and I'm going, but what happens

[1:01:34] when an apartment or home is in substandard conditions, not necessarily that they're raising the rent over 7%.

[1:01:47] But how can we, you know, how can we, how do we protect that and why wouldn't that be

[1:01:54] part of this tenant protection?

[1:01:58] That's a great question, Mayor, and I appreciate the question, and so we have several other

[1:02:05] programs that cover the health and safety of our rental spaces, specifically our rental

[1:02:11] inspection program, and that's the program that we lean on to make sure that our rental

[1:02:16] units are in healthy, safe, good working order.

[1:02:19] We also have the just cause for eviction ordinance that was recently adopted and anti-harassment.

[1:02:26] And so that's why we took like a multi-pronged approach to make sure that we were covering

[1:02:30] all.

[1:02:31] Yes, because when folks came up to talk a lot of times what they spoke about was substandard

[1:02:36] living conditions or harassment in our ordinance, that's you all pass, address that.

[1:02:41] And so that wouldn't necessarily be addressed here, but we do feel confident that our real

[1:02:45] inspection program handles that. So actually this is

[1:02:51] in addition to all the other protections

[1:02:54] that we have. That's that's what this is. Exactly. So yes. All right. Do we?

[1:03:06] Okay. After

[1:03:08] after public comment. Okay. All right. Well I'll leave it at that and and open up public comment.

[1:03:15] Okay.

[1:03:20] One speaker.

[1:03:21] 713.

[1:03:23] Jennifer Rizzo.

[1:03:35] Good evening mayor and council members.

[1:03:37] My name is Jennifer Rizzo with the California Apartment Association.

[1:03:41] CAA appreciates the city's efforts to develop a written review program that's fair, balanced,

[1:03:48] and responsive to the community while continuing to support housing operations and investment.

[1:03:54] We ask the council to consider a few minor recommendations to the proposal.

[1:04:00] First, the ordinance should clearly state what the rent attendant is required to pay while

[1:04:06] the rent review is pending, including whether a portion of the disputed increase must be paid

[1:04:12] or deposited during this process, and if so, how much.

[1:04:17] Second, we ask that the requirement for housing providers to provide this notice to tenants

[1:04:23] and two languages. Just go into effect only after the city has published the notice in two languages.

[1:04:33] Third, participation in our opinion, she remains consistent throughout the program,

[1:04:39] conciliation, and mediation involve the tenant and housing provider. But at the hearing stage,

[1:04:45] it says that the economic development manager or rent review board may include, quote,

[1:04:51] other persons deemed necessary and we believe this language is a little is too

[1:04:57] broad and recommend that particular

[1:05:00] Recipation remain consistent with the earlier stages of the process, notably just with the Housing Provider Internet. We also appreciate the board composition of the Rent Review Board. However, please consider allowing housing providers with property in San Pablo to also serve on the board, even if they do not currently reside in the city. The city should clarify the anticipated cost of the program.

[1:05:28] And perhaps establish a fair and more balanced approach to how these costs are shared.

[1:05:37] And six, the Council recently repealed the rental registry in favor of pursuing this

[1:05:43] rent review program, yet the proposal states that the city quote may require housing providers

[1:05:50] to register units.

[1:05:51] So we just recommend removing that language and requiring any future rental registry proposal

[1:05:57] to return to the council for approval before it's implemented.

[1:06:02] And finally, the city code RE provides for anti-retaliation protections for the tenants.

[1:06:09] And there is a section 9.60.80B that states that a housing provider carries the burden of

[1:06:18] proof that an adverse action was not in retaliation.

[1:06:23] And that provision generally conflicts with the California law governing presumption and burdened up proof so that Fisher versus City of Berkeley.

[1:06:32] So those were just our feedback further.

[1:06:35] Thank you.

[1:06:36] Perfect.

[1:06:37] Thank you.

[1:06:42] Did she send the feedback to the, yeah, you have that.

[1:06:47] So, I think there's a couple of really important points there to consider, especially that last one.

[1:06:55] That is just to be clear, that's feedback that I am hearing for the first time.

[1:07:01] So, if those are items the council is interested in exploring, that would need to be done prior to bringing the ordinance back.

[1:07:14] I'm not hearing anything specifically that I would say absolutely needs to be incorporated

[1:07:20] into the draft ordinance, but again, that's at the council's discretion, but for full

[1:07:27] disclosure, those are proposed changes that are that I'm hearing for the first time.

[1:07:32] Okay.

[1:07:32] Those are not part of the current ordinance.

[1:07:34] Okay.

[1:07:34] We'll take a look at it.

[1:07:36] Read it and see if, if, you know, if they're required.

[1:07:39] Right.

[1:07:39] And so I guess one option would be the ordinances proposed to be introduced this evening.

[1:07:45] The City Council could introduce that ordinance still this evening.

[1:07:49] We could take a look at those requests.

[1:07:52] If there was something that upon review in my opinion absolutely should be incorporated,

[1:07:59] then I could bring that to the Council's attention and that could be reintroduced at the next meeting instead of adopted.

[1:08:06] So, if the Council still has a discretion to introduce the ordinance tonight and we can either come back at the next meeting with the proposed adoption or alternatively if there were comments that upon reflection we felt needed to be incorporated into the ordinance then we can do that bring it back at the next meeting for reintroduction and it would ultimately be adopted at the meeting after that.

[1:08:30] So that that would be up to the City Council, but that would be my recommended path is to go ahead and still introduce the ordinance and

[1:08:38] provide the ability for it to be adopted at the next meeting based on our own administrative review.

[1:08:46] Okay, that sounds good.

[1:08:47] Do we have to vote on that?

[1:08:53] Well, I think you'll vote, you'll de facto vote by

[1:08:56] I'm introducing the ordinance tonight.

[1:08:59] So if you introduce it tonight,

[1:09:01] then it'll be reviewed in the interim

[1:09:04] and staff will either bring it back for adoption

[1:09:06] or come back with some additional suggested edits.

[1:09:10] Okay.

[1:09:12] Okay.

[1:09:14] I do have my question.

[1:09:15] So, yes.

[1:09:16] I guess I'm in the policy.

[1:09:19] I said, no, no, don't run.

[1:09:21] Because public comment is now closed.

[1:09:24] was this of the 19, now I will further ask.

[1:09:28] No question.

[1:09:29] I'll say you have any further questions.

[1:09:30] Councilmember Pineda.

[1:09:32] Yeah,

[1:09:34] I do have a question.

[1:09:36] Also relates to like, if this were to move forward

[1:09:39] and pass this, how, when, or where would people find out

[1:09:44] what this program is, what it does, you know,

[1:09:48] what it intends to achieve?

[1:09:50] Thank you for the question.

[1:09:51] And we would continue to broadcast loud and clear

[1:09:55] through various channels that this program is adopted, it would be...

[1:10:00] Broadcast to our newsletter, through social media, through other channels that we've been exploring with some of our consultants, and so we make it loud and clear to both tenants and housing providers, because housing providers have some responsibility. If this ordinance is passed, they have to provide the notice, as mentioned, to tenants in two languages. Also, we'll be coming back in a future date to explore potential amendment to the fee schedule, because there will be some administrative

[1:10:30] some fees that will have to be borne by providers and or tenants.

[1:10:34] We've seen some ordinances where there's no fee for the tenant unless they request a hearing.

[1:10:40] Just like a planning commission meeting, there's no fee unless you want to use permit.

[1:10:43] And so that's one option we've seen it where the fee is shared between both and

[1:10:48] the property owner can pass it on to the lease, like 15 or 20 bucks.

[1:10:53] but so those are just items that would come back in terms of just the after

[1:10:59] reducing analysis in terms of what we feel like the appropriate amount would

[1:11:03] be. So some of those questions that were raised here have been thought

[1:11:07] through and addressed as I mentioned also the question about the board

[1:11:11] composition. We feel it's appropriate that they be residents of San

[1:11:14] Pablo that way it's consistent with your other commission requirements and like

[1:11:20] I said, we can continue to look at some of the other ones

[1:11:23] to see if there's anything significant,

[1:11:24] but we didn't see anything significant at this point,

[1:11:27] but we just got it to.

[1:11:28] Yeah, now that's just canceling, it's like,

[1:11:29] well, if something like this would be available,

[1:11:32] what would be the size where the residents will be informed

[1:11:35] that there is a process, or there could be a process

[1:11:37] if they choose to want to go down that path.

[1:11:40] Yeah, we would hold significant outreach and workshops

[1:11:43] and walk people through the process of how it works.

[1:11:46] We could consider creating videos and using graphics

[1:11:49] like we've been doing, but through our other outreach programs about our tenant support assistance package.

[1:11:55] All right, thank you.

[1:11:56] I did want to add kind of following on my prior comments as well.

[1:12:02] So as the council will note, the ordinance, you know, even though it's being introduced tonight and potentially adopted at the next meeting,

[1:12:11] it's not scheduled to take effect until January 1st between the ordinance being adopted.

[1:12:18] there's a lot of administrative work that will go into actually putting the

[1:12:23] program together ahead of January 1st. So what I would also say is if the

[1:12:28] ordinance is introduced tonight and adopted at the next meeting if there are

[1:12:32] changes as staff kind of moves and implements that with an eye toward January

[1:12:38] 1st, if there are things that we notice and we say hey this doesn't work or this

[1:12:43] isn't going to work, we can bring back the ordinance later in the year and a

[1:12:48] amended, even though it's already been adopted prior to it going into effect and really being used in 2027.

[1:12:56] So I just want to make that clear as well.

[1:12:58] So there'll be a little bit of learning by doing as this program is put together.

[1:13:03] And there's room for amendment prior to January 1st as well.

[1:13:09] Okay, that's good news.

[1:13:12] Vice mayor.

[1:13:12] And I support the city attorney's latest recommendation on that.

[1:13:18] vice mayor. Do you have any? No, I have nothing. I just have one, one question in your

[1:13:26] information campaign. If there's room to add the other protections that, that the

[1:13:34] city provides, I know that, you know, but, but I think that would enhance this. Like, we're

[1:13:40] not only doing this, but we're also, we also have this other thing because you might have

[1:13:46] landlord that is not going to raise the rent because he knows better but he's not going

[1:13:49] to fix your molded bathroom or that ceiling that just crumbled and my experience is that

[1:13:59] sometimes people are just afraid and to say anything or they just don't know that there

[1:14:04] is a program and they won't get in trouble and you know it's a lot.

[1:14:10] And we will also, Mayor and Council, be cognizant that our residential health and safety program is about protecting existing housing stock and housing stability.

[1:14:21] So we'll work in concert with community development on making sure that our community knows about that program and that they don't have to be afraid not to contact the city for those inspections, because it's just about bringing things up to code and dealing with nuisances sometimes.

[1:14:38] But that's when they are afraid that there's harassment.

[1:14:41] And a lot of people will not.

[1:14:43] Right, and that's in conjunction with our existing just

[1:14:46] cause of addiction and antiviruses,

[1:14:48] that you just adopted this spring.

[1:14:50] I appreciate that.

[1:14:52] We're going out and we're giving people the whole picture

[1:14:56] rather than just rent protection.

[1:14:58] But we're also going to protect.

[1:15:05] Okay.

[1:15:08] And I don't have any further questions. What is the pleasure of the council? I think this is where we're going next.

[1:15:30] Thank you very much.

[1:15:35] Thank you.

[1:15:36] So thank you, Madam Clerk, and to clarify, so we waved first reading.

[1:15:40] We introduced the ordinance.

[1:15:41] We'll come back at your next meeting for adoption with the caveat that between now and January

[1:15:48] First, if we learn things as the programs put together that require further amendments to the ordinance, then staff would bring those back and potentially amend it prior to implementing.

[1:16:00] Okay, that sounds good to me next item on the agenda.

[1:16:06] Next item item number 24, file ID 26-423.

[1:16:12] three. Consider authorization to proceed with a proposed ordinance amending chapter 2.40

[1:16:21] of the San Pablo Municipal Code to increase the annual salaries of city council members

[1:16:27] for the next elected term of office in December 2026. We're suing to California Government

[1:16:35] Amendment Code Section 36516A, City Manager.

[1:16:40] Thank you, Madam Clerk.

[1:16:42] Tonight, Mayor and Council, you have a policy discussion before you to provide formal

[1:16:46] direction to staff on considering whether to adjust your existing salary for the next

[1:16:53] elective term of office beginning December of 2026.

[1:16:58] So this is not an adoption of an ordinance tonight.

[1:17:00] this is providing majority vote direction so that a potential ordinance could be developed

[1:17:07] if you direct it at your next regular counseling. So tonight, we'll go over the two options

[1:17:14] and let's before you. And this is already contained in your adopted City Council Party work plan

[1:17:20] to be addressed as a policy consideration every two years prior to the election cycle. Next slide,

[1:17:28] please.

[1:17:30] So the decision point again is to provide policy direction via minute

[1:17:34] order tonight and you'll be looking at two policy directions. One is option one

[1:17:39] is to take no action. Your current salaries remain at 1,422 per month. No

[1:17:46] ordinance is prepared and we do not amend the existing chapter of the San

[1:17:51] Pablo Municipal Code referring to salaries and there's no added general fund

[1:17:55] costs for this fiscal year or next fiscal year. The next opportunity to adjust your salary

[1:18:00] would be the December 28 elective term of office before the election cycle in November

[1:18:07] of 2028. Option two is to adjust up to 5% per calendar year by state statute. There's

[1:18:15] also a CPI increase alternative that general law cities can also consider. But currently the

[1:18:23] The 5% exceeds that current CPI adjustment.

[1:18:28] So tonight you would direct staff to draft an ordinance amending chapter 2.40 of the

[1:18:33] San Paul municipal code amending your salary to a maximum of plus 10% for the last two

[1:18:40] calendar years and that would adjust your salary to 1,565 per month.

[1:18:47] This would become effective if the ordinance is adopted on your next elective term of office

[1:18:53] in December of 2026. All five council members, the annual cost total for this adjustment would

[1:19:01] be about 90,297 annually, which is a net budget increase of about just under $5,000 for fiscal year

[1:19:09] 2627. So not too significant, but there is a budget impact. And just to add, the elected city clerk

[1:19:17] in elected city treasurer were already granted salary adjustments last October 2024 and that

[1:19:24] does not take effect which is a 30% salary adjustment until December of 2026 as was adopted

[1:19:31] through ordinance 2024-004 in October of 2024. Next slide. So just some background on the

[1:19:40] legal and policy framework for general law cities. Charter cities are not included in this analysis

[1:19:46] We're just referring to general velocities because general velocities must abide by the government code section.

[1:19:52] So as mentioned before, there is a state statute which requires you to not increase your salary by 5%.

[1:20:09] Senate bill 329, this came up, this was a bill passed back in 2024, which reflects the current practice under the government code, and that has already been incorporated into this policy discussion for tonight.

[1:20:27] Again, the under state statute, if you adjust your salary, it does not become immediate.

[1:20:33] It becomes reflective at your next elective term of office following the certification of

[1:20:41] election results.

[1:20:42] And that will be in December of 2026.

[1:20:45] And then in our own municipal code, chapter 2.40, it talks about councilmember compensation,

[1:20:51] which is currently $1,422 per month.

[1:20:55] and that COLA's are not permitted by state law.

[1:20:58] So future adjustments must be adopted via ordinance

[1:21:02] before the next elective term of office.

[1:21:05] And as mentioned earlier, this policy 1-1-8

[1:21:08] is already contained in your adopted 25-27

[1:21:12] council party work plan to review

[1:21:15] every two-year election cycle.

[1:21:17] Next slide.

[1:21:19] So currently, as I mentioned,

[1:21:21] Your salary is 1,000, 422 per month per council member.

[1:21:27] That's about 17,066 per year per council member.

[1:21:32] And per year, we budget about $85,313 for

[1:21:38] those salaries on an annual basis contained in your adopted budget.

[1:21:43] The last adjustment as indicated was October of 2024.

[1:21:48] and that became effective with the elective

[1:21:51] term of office starting in December of 2024,

[1:21:54] and that was a 30% increase.

[1:21:57] We have passed two calendar years,

[1:22:01] 25 and 26 since the last salary adjustment in 2024,

[1:22:06] and currently in our current adopted general

[1:22:08] from budget for fiscal year 20s, it's 27.

[1:22:11] There's a total of about 85,000 and some change

[1:22:14] for all council salaries

[1:22:16] with necessary budget adjustments to be processed during the mid-year budget cycle if warranted if the council decides to move forward with adjusting salaries for this cycle.

[1:22:27] Next slide.

[1:22:29] The elected city clerk and city treasurer as mentioned already had a 30% salary adjustment so their current monthly salary is $240 per month.

[1:22:37] The new salary is $312 effective December 2026 per ordinance adopted 2024-005 and again

[1:22:47] this is 30% and there is a shortfall in the budget which will be covered at the end

[1:22:54] of the year or at the manure budget cycle we're not too concerned about that adjustment.

[1:22:59] So we will be making sure that adjustment goes forward for our elected city clerk and elected

[1:23:04] treasurer.

[1:23:05] Next slide.

[1:23:07] Here is the history and timeline of the salary adjustments that have been adopted by Council

[1:23:13] going back to 2011 through 2024, so I don't need to go over this but you can see every

[1:23:20] single time the Council has adjusted their salary with the last one being a 30% in 2024,

[1:23:27] the Council has historically addressed this issue and done so by ordinance and following

[1:23:33] the state statute.

[1:23:34] Next slide. A labor market analysis was compiled. There's a more detailed labor market survey

[1:23:43] in your agenda packet as an attachment. The median monthly salary is $950 per month

[1:23:51] or $11,400 and that's currently where Pannolan Pleasant Hale stand. So right now your current salary

[1:23:59] is 49.7% above the survey medium and we rank fourth of the 16 general law

[1:24:06] cities in Contra Costa County. So the cities of Richmond, El Sardón, San

[1:24:11] Ramón are charter cities that abide by charter provisions adopted by their local

[1:24:17] electorate. We must comply with state statutes because we're a general law

[1:24:21] city. So that's where we stand in terms of your market analysis, with Richmond

[1:24:27] for any act on concrete, sort of at the top and somehow on the 4th place.

[1:24:34] Next slide.

[1:24:36] So again, option 1 for consideration is do not adjust city council member salaries,

[1:24:41] so I don't need to go over that.

[1:24:43] Option 2, next slide, if you should provide direction by majority votes, that would increase

[1:24:50] it by 5% per year for a 10% maximum adjusted, that would go to 1,565 per month.

[1:24:57] and that would be about 143.

[1:25:03] $18,880 per year per member, culminating in a $90,000, $297 fiscal impact, which is a net increase of just under $5,000. So that would only apply starting December 26th through the end of fiscal year 26th, 27, which ends on June 30th, 20th, 27. So moving forward, here's the two fiscal comparisons. You can see.

[1:25:29] see what is current and what would be moving forward with your adjustment tonight if you

[1:25:36] decide to do that at a maximum of 10 percent and those are the two comparisons.

[1:25:43] Next slide.

[1:25:46] So to summarize, the requested action tonight would be to one slept option one with no adjustment

[1:25:53] or proceed with selecting option two which means drafting an ordinance with a maximum 10 percent

[1:25:58] salary adjustment by minute order. Staff will prepare the ordinance if option two is selected

[1:26:05] and bring that forward to have it introduced with first ring and introduction at your scheduled

[1:26:11] regular meeting on September 21st. If it goes forward, there will be a second reading and adoption

[1:26:17] on October 5th, 2026 and in accordance with state statutes and that will become effective in

[1:26:25] In December of 2026 following certification of November 3rd, 2026 election results, which

[1:26:32] will likely be certified at your December 7th council meeting.

[1:26:37] That concludes staff's presentation.

[1:26:40] Okay.

[1:26:41] Thank you.

[1:26:42] Thank you, Matt.

[1:26:43] So, I will first go around the dice, see if anyone has any question.

[1:26:49] Councilmember Ponce, do you have any questions?

[1:26:51] No questions.

[1:26:52] Thank you.

[1:26:53] Councilmember Pineda, do you have any questions?

[1:26:58] I do have one.

[1:27:00] So this would be pretty much saying it would cost us an additional $5,000 total per year.

[1:27:09] Let us end it quickly.

[1:27:10] Correct.

[1:27:10] And that budget increase.

[1:27:11] Got it.

[1:27:12] And then my other question is, because I remember previously, I feel like it had gone a while

[1:27:18] before any adjustment.

[1:27:20] I think it was like 2018 if that was taken.

[1:27:22] So if we go back to the slide that shows the timeline, keep going.

[1:27:35] So the last time we adjusted was 2024.

[1:27:37] Previous to that was 2018.

[1:27:40] So in 2024, the council did pass the ordinance 24-505, which was a 30% increase.

[1:27:47] Got it.

[1:27:48] I'm only wondering too, just because I don't, I know I was on council on during both the signs.

[1:27:54] but I don't recall how even came back to us, but I remember this conversation was happening

[1:28:00] across many communities, across the state. I'm just wondering if we were in a position

[1:28:05] where we did take no action. If and when will this ever come back to us?

[1:28:09] Well, I remember in 2024, right before this was enacted, one of the things that I had asked

[1:28:18] and I requested and I had the City Council agree that every two years that we would have

[1:28:23] the option to vote this on or not and that we will not ever go allow any council member

[1:28:30] to sit seven years in that country and even at least give the option or the opportunity

[1:28:36] to to to say yay on me and I appreciate it. Yeah, I just want to remember.

[1:28:42] Yeah, so it's an adopted policy in your work plan. Okay, that's my questions. Thank you.

[1:28:49] Vice Mayor Xavier. Any questions? I don't have any questions. Okay. I don't have any questions for now, so I will go ahead and open up to a public hearing.

[1:29:00] The time now is 7.39 p.m. Here are no speakers. 7.39 p.m. is closed.

[1:29:08] Right.

[1:29:09] It is.

[1:29:15] According to it.

[1:29:15] It is.

[1:29:16] Yeah.

[1:29:17] No public hearing requirement, but we just take potential public comment.

[1:29:23] Isn't this an ordinance though?

[1:29:25] No.

[1:29:26] It's an ordinance.

[1:29:27] It would be its direction, its direction to staff, whether or not to draft an ordinance.

[1:29:32] But that ordinance in and of itself even when it comes back would not be, it would be subject

[1:29:37] to the Brown Act and public comment would not be subject to a public hearing because it's

[1:29:41] not a zoning amendment or it's not a technically a city fee so it doesn't fall under the categories

[1:29:49] where you have a legal public hearing requirement but obviously it's still subject to the Brown Act

[1:29:54] and subject to public review and comment.

[1:29:56] Okay, all right, I hear.

[1:30:00] I see ordinance, and that's it for me. And it's always better to be safe than sorry. So, okay.

[1:30:10] So, do we have any, any question, any other questions? No, I don't, I don't have any questions. What is the pleasure of the council then? I'm going to move to select option one.

[1:30:26] Second. No adjustment. No judgment.

[1:30:33] I can give my reasoning, so can I, but I would like to, I would like to, I know they have

[1:30:45] been, there's already a motion out there, so I'd like to propose another motion. Do I

[1:30:55] I have to say, to see what the pleasure of the council is,

[1:30:59] give me that process again, because I don't agree with option one.

[1:31:06] So I don't know, I don't know.

[1:31:07] There's a motion in the second on the day is for option one.

[1:31:13] So there's opportunity to discuss that motion, but

[1:31:17] that motion would be acted on prior to another motion.

[1:31:21] The council can vote on this motion, but subject to first discussion among the council.

[1:31:27] So, if

[1:31:32] you have points that you want to bring up.

[1:31:34] Well, I just think the cost of living is, you know,

[1:31:38] it's definitely a real deal here in the state of California, especially.

[1:31:44] In the city, hopefully we would be passing a sales tax as well.

[1:31:51] That's more money out of out working dollars, right?

[1:31:55] And it's if we don't, let's say we don't get elected, I don't see the reason why we would not have

[1:32:12] that.

[1:32:13] I mean people don't come here to make money for sure, right?

[1:32:17] You can't really live off of $15 a month, but when you do have to live off of that, I don't think that we should say no to it.

[1:32:28] because you may not need it, but somebody else that will come in our place will definitely need it.

[1:32:35] So when I think about this, I'm not thinking about, I don't want it for me, but for someone else that will need it,

[1:32:44] because their retirement, California, is one of the highest states to live in, as a matter of fact, when you're retired,

[1:32:50] This is one of the highest states that for people who are retired, 60% more likely to become homeless.

[1:33:03] So any little funding that we can help people with more money, I say yes.

[1:33:12] And this isn't significant, this isn't anything that is going to bankrupt the city, for sure $5,000 a year is peanuts in the big picture.

[1:33:26] And on time, that attend whenever there's money left, which has always been money left from the unordered funds, it's been a lot more than $5,000.

[1:33:38] and it's always been on reserve, reserve, reserve.

[1:33:42] I just say for the people who are coming after us,

[1:33:45] we need to give them a little bit of reprieve

[1:33:49] and that's why I can't agree to this.

[1:33:53] And I do wanna clarify, just from a procedural standpoint,

[1:33:57] the mayor does have the option

[1:33:59] to make an alternative motion.

[1:34:01] Again, there's a motion already on the day

[1:34:03] as that's been made and seconded.

[1:34:06] The mayor could make an alternative motion

[1:34:08] and it would be up to the council whether there was a second to that motion.

[1:34:13] Okay, so I will, I will do that.

[1:34:15] I'll send it in motion.

[1:34:18] And select option number two.

[1:34:22] I think I'm in seconded, but also I just want to go back to kind of even remember a first

[1:34:27] conversation when this came back to us in 28. Well, yeah, it's 24. Excuse me.

[1:34:36] The reason why is, I remember what I had said then,

[1:34:40] I still strongly believe that today is that their individuals that may not be feeling

[1:34:47] encouraged to even want to run for their city council, I'm thinking about single parent

[1:34:52] households, I'm thinking about, you know, also younger individuals who also, you know,

[1:34:57] So maybe you have seen that this position is to...

[1:35:03] We're going to be able to give back in this capacity and in this role.

[1:35:11] The problem here is timing,

[1:35:19] but I do agree. I do agree that 5,000 in the grand scheme of things, we've worked with a lot, a lot,

[1:35:36] to a city for individual families or against somebody and again it may not even be us and I think

[1:35:42] this has to go to the conversation it's like not about us but really it's again who we hope to have

[1:35:49] or you know kind of the accessibility to a position like this. I've said this in the past and I'll

[1:35:59] say it I mean I'm maybe not everybody will agree is that you know typically these positions are

[1:36:04] or help by people that are pretty well off

[1:36:07] or retired or that have just time freedom, right?

[1:36:12] But there are other individuals who quite literally

[1:36:14] cannot afford to do a role like this.

[1:36:17] Even for me, I could only do this job

[1:36:19] because I also have another job

[1:36:20] that technically pays my bills.

[1:36:23] I can tell you that, you know,

[1:36:25] and I know that's not even design

[1:36:26] for this to be able to cover our expenses,

[1:36:28] but I do appreciate it, that's help, you know,

[1:36:31] in this own way.

[1:36:32] But also again, I'm thinking about other households who may not have the same level of privilege

[1:36:36] and I think that's a conversation with having as well.

[1:36:41] So actually,

[1:36:44] I'm also hopeful for the future of San Pablo.

[1:36:49] I know a lot of times, you know, we as a council or as a community may see kind of what's

[1:36:55] happening in the community be concerned seeing like, oh, will we have the dollars to fund

[1:36:58] this?

[1:36:58] Will we have the dollars to fund that?

[1:37:00] We also have a lot of new revenue generating streams that are coming underway and some of

[1:37:07] them are currently in process so we should be able to see some money generated in a very

[1:37:13] near future going back to our city and along with other measures that are being considered

[1:37:18] in this upcoming election cycle. So for me actually thinking about it now, yeah I will

[1:37:26] a second, the mayor's position on this.

[1:37:30] Thank you.

[1:37:32] All right, so from a process standpoint, we had an initial motion in the second, and

[1:37:38] then now we have an alternate motion for option number two that was made by the mayor, and

[1:37:44] seconded by Councilmember Pineda from a procedural standpoint.

[1:37:49] My recommendation would be, and what you would typically do at this point is to act on the alternate

[1:37:55] motion first. So if the council is going to, if there's no more discussion and there may be discussion,

[1:38:00] but if there, there is not any more discussion, then the council would vote on the alternate

[1:38:07] motion, which is option number two, which direct staff to prepare an ordinance and bring it back at

[1:38:14] the next meeting. Okay. I do have a question. So shall we? I think there's more public, or there's

[1:38:24] more discussion that it is. That's my

[1:38:27] exhibition has a really are asking

[1:38:29] residents to support the city with

[1:38:33] more funds. I see those tax. He is

[1:38:39] not a good look to give ourselves a

[1:38:42] race. And this graph shows and

[1:38:48] bubbles up near the top. So that's why I gave a second to the first motion plus

[1:39:01] the fact other than my city council income my income is nine hundred dollars a

[1:39:13] month social security. Yet I'm now looking to get more money as a council member.

[1:39:22] That's my reasoning.

[1:39:24] Plus, I'm not sure if everybody spends a huge amount of time doing City Council work.

[1:39:36] I will not be in the future.

[1:39:39] Thanks.

[1:39:43] May I.

[1:39:43] I would agree with Ms. Vayer.

[1:39:47] Exceed here.

[1:39:48] We already are out of medium.

[1:39:51] According to this chart.

[1:39:53] Historically, we have.

[1:39:55] of we went from 2018 to 2024.

[1:40:00] I would say every four years, it's probably better to review this than every two years. And I would rather have this salary increase going to one of our programs, such as our youth, programs, scholarships, etc. So at this moment, I don't think we're at the right time to get an increase.

[1:40:28] However, this $5,000 a year is not an increase.

[1:40:33] I mean, it's not taken away from any program, right?

[1:40:36] I mean, right, not, and it's not potentially going

[1:40:39] to take away from any program.

[1:40:41] We're not, we're not, it's not something

[1:40:45] that this raise will do.

[1:40:48] It really will not have a significant impact

[1:40:51] at any of the programs, right?

[1:40:55] So, it's pretty good points.

[1:41:00] Can I just, I just, two things to discuss,

[1:41:04] That's why I'm just, again, taking a step back,

[1:41:08] reading the room and also just thinking about this.

[1:41:13] I do, I actually think those are very good points as well.

[1:41:19] I feel like we have two choices here.

[1:41:21] I think right now we're literally in a position

[1:41:24] where we may not reach any agreement.

[1:41:27] We might be split, but I will also say,

[1:41:31] this is actually what I love about public policy

[1:41:33] and you get to see how the sausage is made

[1:41:35] and I feel like I'm getting convinced here actually to maybe go on the other side here so I

[1:41:43] feel like

[1:41:44] again option one I feel like maybe we could continue this conversation when that is here because

[1:41:48] we do have the fifth member that would be a tie breaker for ever came down to a tie and on the other

[1:41:55] side I think Vice Mayor Xavier comes from Rapunzel you guys do bring very good points I don't disagree

[1:42:03] with them. I still stand by what I said, though, about kind of like access for other individuals

[1:42:11] that may or may not consider a position like this. I do also hear the comments made by

[1:42:17] the mayor, and I think that's very valid, very true. Even for me, on our personal, you

[1:42:23] know, I've always thought that, you know, GOP even in the state of California could be something

[1:42:27] that should be considered an approach because like, say, minimum wage in Fresno,

[1:42:33] Bicelia, doesn't have the same effect as minimum wage here in the San Francisco Bay Area.

[1:42:40] And I will say this, actually, if you guys want to move forward with the initial recommendation

[1:42:49] made by Councilmember Ponce and vice mayor, say, that's supported right now.

[1:42:54] If you guys want to continue this conversation for when Arturo comes, I'm also in support

[1:42:58] about as well. I'm happy to go either way with it.

[1:43:05] Okay. So just one more point is that this is not

[1:43:10] about us. That's where I'm at, right? And this is about if a retired person who's only living on

[1:43:20] social security of $900 a month and they don't have any other, you know, they pay rent, the rent goes

[1:43:26] up no matter what maybe if you were already on your home and you paid it off that $900 is good

[1:43:31] for you but this is a renter who is retired I just don't see why we would not open the doors for

[1:43:43] the retired person who really wants to serve the city that we just can cut that off again it's not

[1:43:51] about us. It's about those that come after us. So, I will be okay with moving this item

[1:44:06] for when I do those here. But I certainly do not want to, I will say no unoption

[1:44:12] one.

[1:44:14] So not the, not the muddy the waters further, but one option for the council is a third

[1:44:22] motion in lieu of the first two, which would basically be just direction to staff to

[1:44:28] bring this back again at the next meeting.

[1:44:31] Yeah.

[1:44:31] And you can make that motion instead of the first two and vote on that.

[1:44:34] I like to make the motion to move this item for when we have the full council on the

[1:44:44] And I guess I would just clarify that in sort of a request.

[1:44:48] I would just direct us to bring it back at the next meeting with the assumption we'll have the full council instead of wondering if we do or not.

[1:44:56] So I just, yes.

[1:45:00] The motion be just direct staff to bring this back at the next meeting. Okay. Oh, so he has another question.

[1:45:10] Is there a possible way for those that do not want that raise to forego that raise, but for those who want that raise would say yes. I mean, that's an option to do that. I know, I know that sounds. It's statutorily imposed. So once you, once you adopt the ordinance, then you're granting equal raise

[1:45:32] is to all council members now you know theoretically can the council member then turn around and you

[1:45:37] know donate that to charity do different things of course but um statutorily you're granting a

[1:45:43] raise for the audience for each member of the party so call for the question there's a third motion

[1:45:50] made by the mayor to continue this time to 921 when the full council is seated is there a second

[1:45:57] I'm

[1:46:05] not hearing a second to continue this at the next meeting, which then, if I'm hearing correctly, no seconds.

[1:46:13] So that brings us back to the last substitute motion that was on the table, which was by Mayor Pabón Alvarado

[1:46:22] and Council Member Pineda.

[1:46:25] And that's a motion to direct staff to bring an ordinance back at the next meeting for the full council's consideration.

[1:46:31] option two. So that's option two and again there's already a motion in the second on

[1:46:38] the day. So if the at the council's pleasure you can vote on that.

[1:46:44] This would be to bring

[1:46:45] the ordinance option two. So and again from you know you know this but obviously bringing

[1:46:53] the ordinance back still means you would consider the ordinance at the next meeting. The ordinance

[1:46:59] It's could be voted up or down at the next meeting as well.

[1:47:03] So this is just direction to prepare the ordinance and bring it back to the City Council.

[1:47:08] And then we could bring it back for discussion.

[1:47:11] Well, you would necessarily discuss it.

[1:47:14] If you direct us to prepare the ordinance, then that would be on the next agenda.

[1:47:20] And by, you know, by definition, you would discuss it and you would have to take a vote on

[1:47:26] on whether to introduce that ordinance at the next meeting.

[1:47:29] So this is just directing staff to prepare an ordinance implementing the pay increase.

[1:47:36] Option two.

[1:47:37] Option two.

[1:47:38] Okay.

[1:47:39] And again, the motion by the mayor, seconded by Councilmember Pineda.

[1:47:58] So you would draw on your second on that, okay.

[1:48:01] So now we're reverted back to the original motion, which was basically to take no action

[1:48:07] and to not bring an ordinance back.

[1:48:09] Option one.

[1:48:10] And this was the motion that was made by Councilmember Ponce

[1:48:14] and seconded by Councilmember Xavier.

[1:48:17] Now, that does not eliminate the fact

[1:48:20] that in two years this will come back

[1:48:23] for another consideration.

[1:48:25] That's correct, that's correct.

[1:48:26] Yes.

[1:48:29] What's the pleasure of the council?

[1:48:33] Yeah, you can pull council.

[1:48:35] Yes.

[1:48:37] On number one.

[1:48:38] Yes, correct.

[1:48:39] Okay.

[1:48:40] Council Member Ponce, aye.

[1:48:44] Council Member Pineda, aye.

[1:48:47] Vice Mayor Xavier, aye.

[1:48:50] Mayor Pavón Alvarado, no, three to one motion passes.

[1:49:01] Next item is any.

[1:49:12] Vice, I'm sorry.

[1:49:14] City Council assignment report.

[1:49:20] Council Member Ponce, do you have any none for me?

[1:49:23] Thank you.

[1:49:24] Council Member Pineda.

[1:49:25] Not for me at the moment.

[1:49:26] Vice Mayor Xavier.

[1:49:28] Actually, I do, because it goes back away to what I asked me the next August 4th was

[1:49:37] National Night Out, which we all went to.

[1:49:41] On the 6th was the Mayor's Conference, and Oakley on the 7th, I met with Dan Nemeth, Executive

[1:49:51] Director of Wicked Act on the 13th was the Wisconsiniform La Suada was hearing the

[1:49:59] Mom.

[1:50:00] There's State Reservoir. August 20th with dad meeting. Tim Hale, executive director of CZTA,

[1:50:12] did a long presentation of a transportation expenditure plan which CZTA plans to bring in 28. August 26th for CZTA.

[1:50:27] meeting. So those of us who are now on last transit boards for full rider boards. My

[1:50:38] August 27th was Recycle More meeting, not meeting, but meeting with the Executive

[1:50:45] Director, Chris Feldman, meeting just between the two of us. And September 3rd was the

[1:50:56] The CCJ planning committee meeting and CCJ is really busy right now.

[1:51:08] Okay.

[1:51:08] Councilmember Ponce, I have something.

[1:51:10] Yeah.

[1:51:10] I just wanted to take this moment to invite everybody to Hispanic Heritage Parade on Saturday

[1:51:16] the 12th.

[1:51:17] The parade starts at 10 a.m. from Richmond Auditorium and it ends on some parallel and market

[1:51:23] followed by a festival inside of the St. Paul's Church parking lot.

[1:51:30] everybody is welcome to come and participate at this annual Hispanic Heritage Parade.

[1:51:36] Thank you.

[1:51:43] Okay, so I will adjourn at 802 to the regular City Council session scheduled

[1:51:51] for September 21st, 2026. This adjournment is dedicated to the heartfelt and respectful

[1:51:57] memory of Latanya Fisher, who served as human resources management analyst for the City

[1:52:03] of San Pablo over the course of 28 years.

[1:52:06] Latanya made exemplary contribution in various administrative roles within the city

[1:52:13] manager's office, leaving a lasting legacy of distinction and dedication to the community

[1:52:20] and city organization.

[1:52:22] Thank you everyone.

[1:52:24] It is 802.

[1:52:26] We are adjourned.

[1:52:27] Thank you, Councillor.

[1:52:28] Thank you, staff.

[1:52:28] .

City Council on 2026-09-08 6:00 PM - Sep 8th, 2026

Transcript